[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:37] We're going to have a forum and it's time to start.
[1:05] We
[1:14] don't have four, we don't have our feet in the body of the tree.
[1:22] All right, so we want to look down here today and we'd like to start out.
[1:27] So Tom will be calling in and he's up the way very celebration.
[1:33] So we'd like to start out
[1:38] by standing down and John do it.
[1:40] I'll enthrone that, and I'll take the majority of this, but we talked a handful of months ago about
[1:47] the desire of some areas and questions, some minor tweets and changes over the last couple
[1:54] months, every Board of Commission has had that opportunity to look. The majority of the changes
[2:00] of C are kind of broad, thoughtful, all-commissioned off, and then you'll see some unique changes
[2:07] that have been made to maybe specifically the library because of the kind of change and focus
[2:13] of what they, strictly from now to all kinds of the two,
[2:21] but John did our assistance
[2:22] in the city.
[2:27] Stephen said there's going to be some general changes, as well
[2:33] as we've already, I believe,
[2:42] more
[2:42] flexible and lastly, some people are just taking out some unnecessary,
[2:52] almost all of the
[2:53] We set our kind of mission order of the judgements.
[3:03] These are all the ones that it will apply to
[3:26] currently, in practice, what we're dealing with.
[3:30] But when the members replace, instead of finishing out the firm, we're going to start a new term.
[3:35] And that's just a correctness, and that seems to be a lot easier to deal with.
[3:40] Also, we're going to be removing the term limits.
[3:44] And the past we've had just a few individuals that were glad to apply to generally
[3:51] though most commissions and wars are sad when members
[3:54] terms are up. And so we thought instead of the exception
[3:58] become the rule, we should instead remove
[4:01] the term limits to if there's specific instances in which
[4:04] someone is a good fit, then we can make that individual
[4:08] judgment call instead of answering all the
[4:11] boards and commissions.
[4:14] And obviously this gives the flexibility
[4:15] if we have a commission where there's a lot of people
[4:18] wanting to get on, you don't have to continue to
[4:22] the issue is that we can't find people for them. There's somebody that's turning out and
[4:27] they would love to stay on. We would love to keep them on and we don't have somebody else in the
[4:31] links waiting for the filters.
[4:34] This last one is just an applicable as of now. Initially when some
[4:40] of these commissions started, we staggered the curtains three or two years. That's no longer a
[4:44] difficulty.
[4:49] Also, and if all of these commissions, if a member of Mrs. One of the 25 percent,
[4:54] They're just kicked off. No, no, no, but that's nothing for him.
[5:01] And more flexible and set it autonomatically in the name and so.
[5:08] Also, another flexible, you know, defines
[5:12] the court, is the majority of the appointed members because sometimes there's less members that are appointed
[5:19] and are sometimes specific to the code, so that allows for more flexibility and the court's
[5:25] would be adjusted accordingly.
[5:26] So what is the smallest item?
[5:33] and have that on these three there to do that.
[5:35] But sometimes the issues can have sounded on the books.
[5:38] A car was defined by five.
[5:40] We don't have five of a point in it.
[5:42] So 100% of the people at point
[5:43] didn't have to show up that meeting.
[5:45] Or in this case, we would not say the majority
[5:47] of now wants to point out which would be so.
[5:48] That is a point in the point.
[5:53] At last in the early 90s,
[5:57] we
[6:25] were reducing
[6:26] the term length 40
[6:31] to be having questions about.
[6:34] The education we're reducing the number of members
[6:36] from 97 to
[6:41] 75,
[6:46] increasing the term length
[6:47] from two years to three.
[6:51] Heritage, using the members from 75,
[7:00] as well as changing
[7:01] from meeting monthly to period plays.
[7:10] Me, taking out the book selection
[7:12] costs replacing it with material selection,
[7:20] changing
[7:20] frequency from meeting monthly to quarterly,
[7:26] reducing members from 97, as well as adding
[7:30] due to responsibilities, things that are already doing,
[7:33] adding some very parts of the clean.
[7:35] So, tell me about that.
[7:36] How has attendance been, I'm only years you've seen seven mostly there, but yeah, maybe.
[7:46] So Chris is, Chris,
[7:50] from what I understand, we kind of up to tonight, we took on this
[7:55] broadband, and we had a couple of people appointed for that specific purpose.
[7:59] They went through that bed in the situation.
[8:00] Oh, now I'm bringing back to some.
[8:03] And that's where I remember.
[8:05] On the natural resource,
[8:16] how we definitely, did that come from?
[8:21] because of the Minister of Meditation.
[8:23] To maybe Jason, you'd end up like this
[8:28] in temporary entities.
[8:30] I almost feel like sometimes they feel like they don't.
[8:36] Which in all of these says quarterly or as
[8:42] seat more often,
[8:43] they
[8:46] can come to allow them to meet.
[8:49] And that's a good point because every one of these
[8:52] that says quarterly or whatever it says, or more often
[8:54] is determined by the chair.
[8:56] And so I think for us, it was about the flexibility
[8:58] so that we're not stuck to them.
[9:01] They can meet monthly, but they're making them a time
[9:03] where they say, you know what?
[9:04] This is just more often than we need for the next six months than they should have really
[9:09] answered.
[9:10] It's about the flexibility.
[9:11] Yeah, we did.
[9:11] There were times where, like, we're in the summer months where they were just canceled
[9:14] meeting because, you know, there were too many around a town.
[9:19] So when I tell you, yeah, summer fest is going to be a word that's going to be a word
[9:21] that's going to be a quarterly or more often as needed.
[9:23] We do need a more often, especially January and June, but not the
[9:40] radiation from
[9:42] 97.
[9:42] and also increasing the term like from before years,
[9:51] from 97 members.
[9:54] Some of us last year, we, I created a set committee,
[9:59] but it was something.
[10:04] This just allows the creation of subcommittees to assist in their various duties,
[10:26] boards that are currently unnecessary as different reasons.
[10:31] So we would recommend striking,
[10:36] planned advisory commission. It's currently responsibility of the state council and no one actually needs on that or separately.
[10:46] I don't know if any of you know, I think it's been years since it was actually functioning if it did.
[10:54] relations advisory commission, the police has the formal meetings with different various
[11:00] groups and they actually recommend it not having it formalized. They'd like be the informal
[11:05] nature of it, being able to pull
[11:09] to that.
[11:15] The recycling advisory commission is currently
[11:18] under the stewardship committee and they also don't mean so it's just an up also in the head.
[11:27] And then lastly, this sister city advisory committee
[11:34] met in over
[11:37] a day.
[11:38] So one thing I might mention on the Sister City situation, we've had two cities since I've
[11:43] been mayor request to
[11:48] be on in South America and one in China, but the expense and the cost and
[11:55] the time,
[12:02] the great value, and it seems like it's way too expensive. So I have never agreed to
[12:20] move
[12:20] You
[12:27] know, obviously the next step of people,
[12:40] do there any questions or do you have a summary slider?
[12:43] Could you go back to the, so that I was trying to take notes?
[12:53] The general kind
[13:02] of general changes.
[13:04] So I got a beautification and historical preservation.
[13:06] Oh, I missed the ones.
[13:07] Yeah, right.
[13:19] It's a good recommendation for the things.
[13:21] Time to take a month.
[13:28] It's a good recommendation.
[13:29] So on the, in terms of the intent that we take, you know,
[13:34] if you have somebody that's, let's say, that we're gracious for issues,
[13:37] people have been on there for four, four, five years and somebody wants on.
[13:41] what's the process, we want to keep them so they will get on the new people on the new
[13:45] housing work.
[13:46] There's always still going to be an element of judgment, too.
[13:48] I mean, in any scenario, so in this case it would be, yeah, we have people make waiting
[13:53] in the wains and then it would be a discussion with Carl and the council member, probably
[13:58] the representatives or whoever, to say, hey, we have somebody that really wants to, this
[14:02] person's been on for a while, and probably a conversation with the person that would be
[14:06] So we always have that flexibility to not really point.
[14:10] The issue we've run into is no flexibility to re-appoint when we need to try it on the ground.
[14:17] One perfect example is that we all know is Kay Bradford for our seniors.
[14:20] She's turned out, but she is passionate and there aren't a lot of people sitting there waiting to take that spot.
[14:26] We don't want somebody like that to not be able to get to it.
[14:29] So I'll ask all of us.
[14:30] Yeah.
[14:32] Yeah.
[14:32] So the individual we come.
[14:47] And I think they're naturally well, we see regularly where somebody has done one, they want to move on to another one, so I think that will probably still be the generally what happens.
[15:05] Yes, as John mentioned, in October, we'll bring this forward. We probably won't go through all these changes again. This will be on a consent agenda for you to approve.
[15:21] Thanks John.
[15:24] So our next discussion is on rental properties and
[15:30] some rentals.
[15:40] Every night.
[15:41] I know.
[15:42] They usually do better when I get to see the right before I present.
[15:46] They're my wife.
[15:47] I remember my wife to why I'm doing this.
[15:50] These like this.
[15:52] We've been talking about neighborhoods,
[15:55] one of your areas of focus this year.
[15:57] One of the things we've been talking about.
[15:59] Let me just say, we have representatives from, there's a lot of people that would come into play if we get into a res, we get into a better licensing.
[16:07] IT, police department, some analysts, planning zoning, Steve, we're all just been advising us legally, at least these areas.
[16:17] And then utility building of course has been a big part of this.
[16:21] As we thought about this neighborhood and how we can improve neighborhoods, one of the challenges in any college town,
[16:27] So that might be Tom or you here,
[16:35] any community that's currently, especially in a college scenario, especially
[16:40] ones with aging neighborhoods is the number of homes that are turning its rental properties,
[16:45] which we're not here to say people can't invest in rental properties, what we're saying is,
[16:50] if you're going to do that, there's rules and good neighbor type of things that you need to be
[16:59] and increasing the accountability for landlords
[17:03] and reducing the city's costs associated with the rentals.
[17:06] We'll go into those in detail,
[17:08] but we feel like this is an opportunity
[17:11] to allow us to do things that will help
[17:13] for the neighborhoods more quickly
[17:14] and we'll go through the details.
[17:16] There's a handful of, what we would say are
[17:19] our desire now comes, please stop me anywhere along the way.
[17:24] First, and our subject?
[17:26] So, the very first sentence there, gathering contact information, do we have contact information
[17:34] on most of the property for the tenants, usually throw it through your utility building?
[17:41] So, in the case where it's in the name of the landlord, that's necessarily the landlord.
[17:46] Yeah, and Surgeon Almore had to speak to this, as he would pull up, we have a code force
[17:50] and issue on the rental property, generally maybe step through what that takes sometimes
[17:55] to get the contact information of the owner.
[18:06] How much do we have with that?
[18:09] We'll get to that 2400 single family homes.
[18:12] That's what we don't love.
[18:13] I mean, how much information not have many rentals,
[18:17] but how much information on landlords.
[18:23] But we don't have that on, but we don't have in our system.
[18:31] So that's what I'm saying.
[18:32] We don't have in our system.
[18:43] So that's
[18:48] what I'm saying.
[18:48] So they
[18:52] can sure address the problem. I'm just curious that as far as our database
[18:57] You know very hard or how much we have and basically what you're saying is very well very little especially on the single
[19:04] Family homes. Yeah, you mentioned the LLCs don't think you have
[19:10] I'll see pops up and they have the manager
[19:13] Information which is
[19:22] you can't go if that additional information you have to pay for it
[19:26] to that to find out
[19:27] like the registered agent, all the times that's all you'll have is registered agent.
[19:32] Sometimes it gives some of the principles that you typically won't have a phone number,
[19:36] or an address for the principles that just have to address
[19:39] or the registered agent.
[19:41] And that again oftentimes is not even the person that you get in contact with.
[19:45] And it's an all.
[19:46] Seven of these LLCs are in Utah.
[19:49] But some of them are out of state.
[19:50] or they're owned by banks and that is a whole different layer.
[20:01] So that's the process that you do within the House. I think a great question, and you teed it up for us.
[20:13] I think we're just going to say, I think we're disraining a problem for you this week's, this week's, just the challenge it is for our, you know, our code enforcement teams.
[20:22] They want to, they want to be responsive, they want to get these properties, they want to solve them.
[20:26] But we need to find a way to bring the landlord into a quickly so that it becomes a problem that they have to help solve as well.
[20:32] not just the 10 and 2 may or may not solve, they may be able to, there may not have a long term invested in that property.
[20:40] So that's number one. This will allow us to notify them about issues, citations, correlations, water leaks, whatever those issues might be.
[20:48] We'll talk about this a little bit with two utilities. One of the challenges is, for single family homes, a lot of times the utilities.
[20:56] In almost all cases, they're in the name of the 10th, not the landlord.
[21:01] There's a water leak.
[21:03] We took the Kathy of in here in a minute.
[21:05] She can speak this.
[21:06] There's a water leak.
[21:07] The landlord won't fix it.
[21:08] It's not their responsibility.
[21:10] And it's not their bill.
[21:11] And the 10th is saying, I can't get this fixed either.
[21:13] I'm coming in and paying these hundreds of, you know,
[21:15] those are some of the issues that we're trying to solve that we can be able to
[21:19] proactively reach out to unless we're about.
[21:22] And I should say, we define landlord as the owner of the property
[21:25] the property management company that they have in it and it's going to agree with it, take care of it.
[21:30] Second, our management company is going to work with.
[21:35] No,
[21:40] they are in multiple steps and they can be able to be such
[21:45] a hot attack or a property.
[21:47] They are a burden to you.
[21:56] This is your ship when they have it.
[22:08] Seconds that have a team to prevent landlords that are going to attend to their problems from continuing business issues.
[22:14] You'll see, for most of these systems, they have a rental licensing program and the ability to suspend the license.
[22:18] if they continue to have these issues and they're not giving us all.
[22:22] Some of those details, we still have to work out and we would bring this back to you,
[22:25] but that's, again, one of the desired outcomes.
[22:28] Third, on the utility side, preventing the city from having to absorb
[22:32] and collect utility bills on rental properties.
[22:36] The ones in there, so is a general rule of thumb,
[22:39] and it's a multi-family apartment due-plex four-plex.
[22:42] There's one meter, multiple units.
[22:44] Our code requires those to be in the name of the landlord.
[22:47] This is what you experience on your properties.
[22:50] If it's a single family home, it can be in the name of the landlord or it can be in the name of the tenant.
[22:57] So the ones that are in the name of the tenant annually be suspended.
[23:00] We sent about $80,000 worth of uncollected bills to collections.
[23:05] We collect about $30,000 worth.
[23:08] So about 50,000 every year is going unpaid because the tenants have a paint.
[23:13] Those that oftentimes are at the left-hand, they're not able to get a hold of them.
[23:16] not really anxious to help the data.
[23:23] Fourth, reduce disproportionate amount of time that we spend dealing
[23:27] with federal properties and so think of a federal property
[23:30] changing over 10 at ZGR or every other year.
[23:33] Every time that happens, we're changing names,
[23:35] we're going through, obviously, the collections issues,
[23:39] we're very, very, very, very busy agreements.
[23:40] I've been on an unbound path, I think.
[23:42] I think I was going to take a long time to last week.
[23:45] It's going to collections on one name.
[23:47] All of a sudden, it comes in to get it on the other hand.
[23:49] You have to go through leads to make sure,
[23:51] which sometimes is the case that it's not the spouse
[23:54] that I'm trying to get it in their name.
[23:56] We've got to make sure that it's, you know,
[23:58] is that the same family that's just moving into different names
[24:01] to avoid having to pay.
[24:03] I was testing that to make sure you could log in.
[24:07] So, what's that
[24:16] card?
[24:16] And that's okay, you hear us?
[24:25] He probably just had a chance to log in.
[24:28] It's all right there.
[24:32] It's all right there.
[24:39] It just kind of serves in all the warms area.
[24:41] But we want to have the ability to notify landlords when citations are issued on properties.
[24:46] We go out to a call, a party of 3 a.m., we go out to a call of abandoned vehicles on a property.
[24:52] Whatever that is, we want the employees to make sure the landlords brought it to the loop to know what's going on.
[24:57] Tom Phelps, that our IT, what we're trying to do.
[25:00] Members, as the ability to program, when we would have a licensing place, email addresses information
[25:07] tying to the properties, this could become an automatic thing. We issue a citation.
[25:13] Potentially, weekly, landlords are being notified of the citations that have happened on their property,
[25:18] and they're being brought into the loop so that they know, in a case where maybe they live in California,
[25:23] and there's somebody out in my property in 3am this week dealing with this property, dealing with an issue.
[25:28] Our hope is to, again, make landlords part of helping us solve these issues, not just us in attendance.
[25:35] Second, allowing our neighbor preservation officers to just have this quick access to contact information for landlords.
[25:41] This is what all more of us can do about as well. Currently, the process of getting this contact information is cumbersome.
[25:48] It takes a long time. Even if it's not a negative thing, we're trying to reach them about we want to be able to contact them quickly.
[25:54] And then third, obviously there's always the ongoing concern about illegal rentals, having a licensing program allows us to make a quick determination that there's a license or not a license and it allows us to move on something more quickly.
[26:08] That's those are kind of the things that the way how we would sum up the benefit of this on the code enforcement side.
[26:15] Can these join us?
[26:17] She can speak to the obviously a lot of the utility building.
[26:19] We have any questions here.
[26:21] Well, we're proposing is to require all rental properties to have their utilities in the
[26:25] name of the landlord or in some cases the property management company if that's how they
[26:30] have entered into the arrangement but no longer in the name of the tenants.
[26:34] We would reduce the amount of time we deal with collections and the number of work orders on
[26:38] rental properties.
[26:39] I'll show some data on that in future slide.
[26:43] The limit, the amount of work, our employees spend doing shut-offs, reading meters, reviewing
[26:47] lease agreements, and dealing with the various challenges of rental properties.
[26:56] So this is data on the percentage of accounts that we send to collections these year.
[27:01] We're only talking rental properties.
[27:03] Blue is your multi-family.
[27:06] Orange is your single-family, again just rentals.
[27:09] Here's the top of your interest, and here's the total number of
[27:12] And I shouldn't say units accounts, 1300 multi-family accounts, 2400 single-family accounts that are rental properties.
[27:24] Of that, in a multi-family situation, again, this is a brand summit. This is where the landlord actually has kept it in their name.
[27:32] We're sending 0.3 to 0.5% of those account seats to collections.
[27:35] and a single family rental or sending between eight and nine percent of all of all of those accounts
[27:41] to collections each year.
[27:44] And so, obviously, as those utilities stand in the name of the tenant, it becomes challenging
[27:50] in the utility bill of the world.
[27:53] As it relates to collections.
[27:58] Then we talk work orders, and these are all those other scenarios of reading leaders
[28:01] and going to turn off and turn on all those things.
[28:06] When it is in the name of the landlord, we do work over here on about 11 to 12% of the accounts.
[28:16] When it's in the name of the tenant, we do it on about 55% of the accounts each year.
[28:23] Obviously, the amount of time we spend in a work court, this is just utility billing thing.
[28:28] This is where we're sending our water and crews out to do the track offs to read the meters.
[28:31] Each time somebody's moving out, again, many of those things go wrong.
[28:36] way in a situation where it's in the name of the landlord.
[28:43] Are there any questions about any of the things we've presented so far?
[28:51] If, for a single family home, how do you get down if I come in,
[28:56] set with the water and mining, how do you identify and know the property?
[29:01] Yeah.
[29:02] So that's not enough, isn't it?
[29:04] Then we would have the ability to look up to see the world's properties
[29:09] maybe somebody comes in and put it in their name as the land as the property order, just that I'm the tenant, but I'm putting it in the mining anyway, how do you verify I'm the tenant of the property?
[29:20] Right now, it's not required any people to work.
[29:27] And that's what offers
[29:30] right now any one can sign up.
[29:33] Except if they're not tied to this performance,
[29:38] they will need a real advantage.
[29:40] But they only need to look at the current records.
[29:43] That's what we do.
[29:52] Maybe they're already struggling to be able to just collect rent.
[30:03] If they leave the water running all day long, all the lights on and all that kind of stuff, and I have these good bills, I have to sort of, so we started those conversations with,
[30:17] like, you know, before we called them, we wanted to make sure that you're a company with the direction we're going first. But we would have a ramp up period to educate, to bring people kind of, we have talked to select landlords, you know, in a one-off situation, we haven't done anything
[30:34] by these things. I think we're approaching the conversation also from the perspective of,
[30:39] This is not a typical single-family residential situation.
[30:45] This is an individual or an LLs operating business.
[30:49] So this is a business really.
[30:53] As a result.
[31:29] When they have to go business license then?
[31:32] Yeah, that's the neck.
[31:32] We'll talk about that.
[31:33] Yeah, there'll be a licensing feature.
[31:37] And most of the cities don't have to talk about this license.
[31:40] She said, oh, no, yes, this one.
[31:42] We call selling different license.
[31:44] Yeah, rental license.
[31:53] I think currently a lot of way.
[32:02] We don't know when the property has been sold, so we don't do it.
[32:07] But they don't have to return up there.
[32:08] We don't really do the waste of transfers from there.
[32:12] Yeah, all they do to come in.
[32:14] How many of you read on this?
[32:25] I mean, is that common?
[32:26] Yes.
[32:27] That's the moment.
[32:28] Let's say about, we've got about 300 orders.
[32:33] And so we do 100 of them.
[32:35] What do you do to the board?
[32:36] Which is thing to do this call.
[32:37] I think I'm going to transfer back to the board.
[32:41] So two-thirds of them are not.
[32:45] I'm not.
[32:49] My thought being is it's pretty common for many landlords to say they don't pay and come back.
[33:00] But the violence goes in the back to the ground.
[33:03] Turn it out.
[33:03] And then you move out.
[33:05] If they can't help violence in the police, they're tempted to.
[33:09] And so, those sort of ones over time,
[33:10] are hard to believe in collections.
[33:13] Yeah.
[33:13] But there's no landlords coming.
[33:16] Do we have a way for the landlord to cover that?
[33:18] It's part of that.
[33:20] That's not true.
[33:21] That's true.
[33:21] It's true.
[33:22] Yeah.
[33:22] Work, worst case.
[33:23] I mean, we see a lot of opportunities keeping it in their name.
[33:26] The landlord doesn't have to pay that.
[33:28] But ten of those in your mind will forever.
[33:31] Yes, it is.
[33:31] Yeah.
[33:32] I think under any scenario, we would, if we would recommend making a change to say, we're
[33:36] released.
[33:37] It's going to send that to the landlord and make them pay that plan.
[33:39] They'll not absorb it in the city.
[33:42] So we would at least go that far.
[33:44] But there's challenges that way too.
[33:46] So then the landlord doesn't know that the ten of the three months we have
[33:48] But now I was always late fees that have been accrued, and now they're on the hook for the late fees plus the bills
[33:53] So come to challenge that with two nail fleets
[33:56] I think what you might be referring to is this quite stark ass does
[33:59] Where you sign a land where agreement and where you agree that when they move out that sage and money is a landboard and in that case
[34:09] That bill is forward to the landboard to cover if the renter skips out because we don't
[34:16] typically they also have deposits that they can use.
[34:22] But the owner of the property should be responsible for it.
[34:25] Even if the 10 of those out needs a gas field, the land works so much.
[34:30] If it's been turned off, then we'll have to turn that back on.
[34:33] Well, if you go to sign that land, we'll have to believe it.
[34:36] It goes into their name.
[34:38] Yeah, the land works.
[34:39] Or what?
[34:40] Bill the 10 of that, eight, it's done responsible.
[34:43] If you have a sign that necessarily really meant to get it turned back on,
[34:46] We'll have to take that.
[34:48] I mean, that's my experience.
[34:52] But my son, if it didn't lose out, knows $50.
[34:56] And you're the one we're trying to correct.
[35:00] That's true, but actually it's not the use of operating the fault site. On our side, he's in, he's, so the place, there's that day, it comes in my name and then I take it off from there, but that 50 bucks, I'm not responsible for it.
[35:15] If it's been turned off, to get it turned off, they have, they can roll over in your name.
[35:21] And
[35:24] we have no security positive, Jamie says that people who sign up.
[35:27] It's not an issue.
[35:29] But we do do.
[35:30] They've gone to collections a couple of times.
[35:32] Or I don't even know it's a couple of times.
[35:33] Maybe once.
[35:34] Or if you haven't shot off notice.
[35:37] If they've been in collections, would we need to find the way to be in a collection amount?
[35:42] Then if it's being more than once, it's going to be the first thing.
[35:46] But they put it.
[35:49] Okay.
[35:49] Is that common enough?
[35:50] Yeah.
[35:51] It's the last.
[35:53] Yeah.
[35:53] There were a chance.
[35:54] and then you weren't that bad for me.
[35:59] Yep, yep.
[36:00] I feel like there are other cities that do deposits for sure.
[36:03] Obviously, sometimes the challenge is just
[36:04] tracking all the deposits that do has them
[36:06] and getting them bad, I'm going to be a seat.
[36:08] That doesn't become challenging.
[36:10] In the scenario, we're putting out.
[36:12] We would give them a such, given that the landlord's going
[36:14] to clutch his 0.3, 0.5% of the time,
[36:17] I don't think we're even talking about doing collections.
[36:20] All right, the landlord wouldn't have to come up with the deposit.
[36:22] We just have to put it in their name.
[36:23] So, take us out of the deposit business, too, which we'll see when we see them.
[36:29] What does the work order mean?
[36:32] Yeah, if you want to speak to that, can we order them?
[36:34] We're daily either.
[36:35] Yeah, the work order is anything that is required to attention to that property.
[36:41] A simple meter read when a tenant moves out.
[36:45] We have to go read it to know exactly how to build it.
[36:48] Anything that may need to check, whether it's a turn-off and a turn-off and a
[36:56] media work order.
[37:02] Let me tell, there's, as we've been talking about this, this is one, this is an individual property, this is an actual example, that it's a single family home and it's been the name of records.
[37:14] We understand it's generally been singles that have been living there, so the names can go around.
[37:17] So this is an uncommon where you'll have a few singles they'll say, I'll take it.
[37:22] But if I go to collections, I just got to move it in the year name, and then we get the water turned back on by this kind of bill.
[37:26] So we have one property that between 2010 and 2004, it went to collections four times, and four years, and it changed in eighty six times.
[37:35] And the property that that single family home in the time it's been a rental has the police have gone out on average every other month for 15 years.
[37:44] And so these are the scenarios that we feel like this allows us to help address of, okay, we continue to have police calls out there.
[37:51] landlord, this is your responsibility too, not just the tenants responsibility, and then the
[37:56] collections four or five times that goes away, that's these in the name of the
[38:04] intern
[38:04] water off in the cold
[38:27] one, some of the thirty-three.
[38:31] Any other questions on just some of that?
[38:33] And what we'll get into, kind of, it's interesting, you have,
[38:41] yeah. And you know, as we thought about that,
[38:43] you know, you think of a single family, it turns over every other year, then you'll kind of get
[38:47] You know, about that, I'll be about right.
[38:50] Now, some of these, of course, have more than one,
[38:52] but this is the average.
[38:53] These are just at the single family homes that are rented.
[38:56] No, no, I don't, I don't.
[38:58] Yep, that's what I'm saying.
[39:03] So, next we'll just talk about the licensing itself,
[39:06] what the licensing might look like.
[39:07] I'll represent them.
[39:08] We don't have numbers yet.
[39:09] Part of what state law has required is,
[39:11] for us to charge some of these fees,
[39:13] you have to have a study done, to show the disproportionate cost
[39:16] from round properties than a single family situation.
[39:19] So, what we're looking at though, and I'll just show you
[39:22] West Jordan's future structures, and I have plenty of
[39:25] others examples too, is a base v to v to v to v to v to v to v to v to v to v to v to v to v.
[39:28] So, this would be your equivalent of a business license, but to
[39:31] Brandon's differentiates, it's not around a business, it's a rental license.
[39:34] Is it yearly or once?
[39:35] Yearly.
[39:36] Yearly.
[39:36] Similar to a business license.
[39:38] This again, this is just West Jordan's adopted fee, and then a per unit charge.
[39:44] And so, what the study would show is, hey, for every unit you have,
[39:49] This is the disproportionate cost that please call those fire calls utility issues that come with the real property that may not come with a single family.
[39:57] We would use real data to do that.
[40:00] For you to charge. What the study would show is the cap. This is the most you can charge based on the data. We don't have to go that high, but that's that would set the cap and the state law of sin law has put that out. If we didn't have a study, then all we can charge is just kind of that basement license fee. We couldn't. We couldn't differentiate anybody because we don't have data showing that that land that landlord, because he has 10 properties, is more expensive for us than this landlord, who she has.
[40:30] one property. We can't differentiate until we have to study that. So, our recommendation would be to have
[40:36] some type of a base fee. It covers all the paperwork, all the licensing, all of that, and then a per unit charge.
[40:44] The charge itself depends depending on the amount of code of code businesses they're operating.
[40:52] Any questions on that? Please don't want you to do the $25. That's for paperwork.
[40:59] That's what that's what they have in life.
[41:00] It's like a business license.
[41:03] So if you do that every year or just when they're wrong,
[41:07] they change every year.
[41:08] It'd be like a business license.
[41:11] And I'm just going to do a spending in how long will it take?
[41:14] So there's a couple companies that do it.
[41:16] We talk to one of them to get an idea.
[41:18] They thought it would take a couple months.
[41:19] They're going to be getting us a scope and a cost here in the next day or so.
[41:23] So Lewis and Young and Science Bank both do these studies.
[41:26] We'll get we'll get quotes from both.
[41:32] and you're studying the entire city?
[41:38] I don't know the methodology completely,
[41:39] but I would imagine they would probably pull everything
[41:42] that we have listed as a rental and calls,
[41:45] and then you're collectibles, all that.
[41:49] Yeah, we talked through all that.
[41:50] We talked through some of this specific.
[41:56] We're talking about two is,
[41:58] and I can't remember what my bill is at this later,
[42:04] we're talking about two is having,
[42:07] so the state-wide at a top of this good landlord program,
[42:09] and what that is generally is,
[42:11] you have to take some classes and sit through
[42:13] and you're watching that videos and you become a good landlord.
[42:17] But we're not looking at a program like that.
[42:20] But we've defined things that we feel like
[42:22] what really make you a good landlord in the city.
[42:24] One is giving this utility thing figured out,
[42:27] too, is having a property that's free of citations,
[42:30] or when citations come, they're being resolved.
[42:32] One of the things we're considering is having a fee like this,
[42:35] but if somebody were to, the year comes up
[42:40] and they have 10 outstanding,
[42:41] And I'm just 10 out of the expectations on their property.
[42:45] Then we wouldn't classify that as a good landlord
[42:47] to give them a discount on their feet.
[42:49] They'd have to pay a higher fee to continue to operate.
[42:51] So we're looking at some of those types of things.
[42:54] And that's what the study would be.
[42:56] So how many cities do you know this?
[42:58] And how many don't?
[42:59] I don't know all of the numbers.
[43:02] Whereas we went to a recent conference that
[43:05] talked up some about this.
[43:07] But in a college town, it's very, very common,
[43:09] because of the number of rents.
[43:12] Provo does the St. George doesn't
[43:13] opt in the Salt Lake Clearfield, Taylorville, West Jordan,
[43:16] West Valley, and Rollaway all do it as well.
[43:19] These are some of the state ones that we came up with.
[43:21] Can you help me?
[43:22] Can you help me?
[43:22] So if you have an individual unit, which is one unit,
[43:26] you're writing that you pay $20 a year.
[43:28] If you have multiple units, no matter how many,
[43:31] if you have more than one, then you pay $60 a year.
[43:36] If you have more than one, my guess is they probably haven't done a study to show the
[43:42] different issues.
[43:42] They can't get it to the purview chart.
[43:47] That's so, yeah.
[43:48] It goes as high as Salt Lake does 150 base fee and a $20 per unit.
[43:53] That's good.
[43:54] Dr. Promenade.
[43:54] I mean, have they had success with this?
[43:57] Yeah.
[43:57] In fact, go to our three one.
[43:58] Our helps and our ages lead us from there.
[44:00] Yeah.
[44:01] She said it'll be a good day.
[44:03] And we do that.
[44:05] American Forks City is one of the other ones we know.
[44:07] I think requires the utility system to stay in the name of the landlord.
[44:12] They've had challenges with landlords not loving it,
[44:15] but all the benefits they hope to see, they see.
[44:19] Do the building's savings go to the house or to the land.
[44:23] We've been to the other of the utility's name.
[44:26] That would be the address here.
[44:27] Now we have a quick pace.
[44:29] So recently we've we've created a system with our utility building called Quick Pay
[44:34] We're all you need is an account in a web pin and you don't have to log him in the account
[44:37] You just see the one once bill when you pay it
[44:40] So there would be a way for a landlord to say to the tenant that you go on and pay this bill
[44:44] Here's the pin in the number you don't have to have my account. You don't have to have log into my account to do it
[44:50] So but we would be sending them to the
[44:53] Like we do in a multi-family case today, Brett gives the bills for one city.
[45:00] Any charge in the grant?
[45:05] Good question. Any other?
[45:07] That's please, so are you like most of the way for your presentation here?
[45:11] Yeah, I have a couple slides. Okay. So, subletting, if somebody is subletting a place, would they also,
[45:18] like would you require a license from the owner and from the subletter, or would it just be?
[45:28] We do, there's going to be some kind of call. I think it's only, it's going to be the owner still.
[45:32] Okay. That's what we want you to do.
[45:33] That's what we want you to do.
[45:34] problem. Okay, so I don't think we can focus on it.
[45:39] Accessory apartments is a different, if somebody is just, you know, they, they're
[45:43] own-rockified living in the main house, but they
[45:49] have this calendar or it. Yeah. So, in fact, one of the things that's
[45:52] studied we'll look at is the difference, the difference, the difference is there. Chief jobs and all of our people speak to this.
[46:00] Generally, other than somebody calling, just saying we think it's an illegal basis in a apartment, we don't run into many other issues
[46:05] could be older on site all the time. So it'll look a little
[46:08] think that in the point, do it may be that a basic part has a
[46:11] different price because the cost of the city are just
[46:14] significantly less than it would have already not lived in
[46:18] on site. And then
[46:24] would they be lumped in with
[46:25] everybody else or could we have like a higher fee or difference?
[46:40] I think something is doing a story not less than what
[46:42] compared to. So they're renting, I mean that's a rental just like anything else they would be
[46:45] like the base residential rental license.
[46:50] I think what you're talking about is who we charge them
[46:52] just for the, that's a start of it.
[46:55] I think a lot of it speaks to kind of like MU type issues.
[47:01] Like I've last year I've got a few calls from people
[47:03] that they have an Airbnb in the neighborhood,
[47:07] and people run it out as kind of like a party house kind of thing.
[47:10] And so then they'll have, you know,
[47:12] quite a residential neighborhood,
[47:17] but this gives us
[47:19] just a kind of the base or would that give us the key?
[47:26] What would it be?
[47:31] Do you know your property is being used to the park house?
[47:34] You know what
[47:38] I mean?
[47:39] I'm interested in that.
[47:39] I mean, I'm interested in all the issues.
[47:42] You know, there's a lot of cities have a separate warden's dealing with Airbnb type rentals.
[47:49] And that's something we can certainly consider as well.
[47:52] But that's not part of me.
[47:57] Not Mr.
[48:03] This is
[48:25] really new about like this was a section of our city code.
[48:28] If we just had having a subsection that addressed the accessory department,
[48:35] we're still kind of being consistent with the overarching objectives, but
[48:44] In short, they'd at least plant the devices.
[48:47] Kind of.
[48:48] But the type of that, it couldn't be though that
[49:07] if the challenge in order would be supplying in the data of where the short-term panels are,
[49:11] because we don't have any kind of database to say, here's the short-term panels, look at the calls for service on those versus
[49:18] That may be somewhat the challenge, but I think you're logic is right on this. There's a lot of, I would say we get a lot more, we get a lot of calls on Airbnb's, a lot of issues, a lot of reporting.
[49:28] Well we could just go on Airbnb and find out where a lot of them are.
[49:31] Is he right then?
[49:32] But state laws specifically doesn't allow that.
[49:34] Yeah, does.
[49:35] We just know that.
[49:36] Yeah, we don't know where they are.
[49:38] We're just not allowed to prosecute.
[49:40] No, okay.
[49:41] Hopefully.
[49:42] They're going to.
[49:43] Sorry.
[49:44] Plus the neighbor.
[49:46] Yeah, that's already in many situations, but the home or the property of her is living in
[49:53] the home and renting part of his home or her home out as he short-term rentals.
[49:58] So these issues associated with...
[50:00] The utilities are not really in play because the property on her is paying utility bill to some degree as a different path.
[50:08] That's just doing complaints.
[50:10] Correct.
[50:11] I mean, really, one of the things we're trying to do with, and I really applaud Stephen and his put this together, is we're kind of expecting a lot from the MPU,
[50:24] expecting them to enforce these issues associated with rentals and
[50:30] and challenging as
[50:34] a result we need to give them a tool essentially do their job.
[50:41] Right now I think some of the tools we have are helpful.
[50:48] This is what Steve and if
[50:53] I do is,
[51:09] I mean is that, you know,
[51:15] we've done it the next slide that we will talk you say it goes to Steve.
[51:46] We have quite
[51:51] a few of those, we only go do boxes.
[51:57] How do we get them to register?
[52:01] Because I really believe that we
[52:25] are using property owner.
[52:27] No, we are using the property owner.
[52:29] Yes.
[52:30] Okay.
[52:31] We'll then provide documentation in fact.
[52:33] You know, so we're already a step ahead of where we currently are because right now, you know, we don't know.
[52:41] I'm about as three years ago, we asked for this coming developed in services.
[52:46] So then we worked with the building building.
[52:48] We had a lot of new plants that are needed.
[52:52] And then when someone has to move away and change that we are needed.
[52:56] It has to be a building.
[52:57] And the owner calls and then they get upset because we don't know now where they are.
[53:05] They're interested somehow.
[53:06] So there's always that fight.
[53:09] I think we might do a little bit of something with that.
[53:14] And I think, yeah, one of the things that I think...
[53:18] Remembrance of good question.
[53:20] The question brings up is the challenge we already have today.
[53:22] We're already struggling with that.
[53:24] We're already struggling with illegal basement rentals.
[53:26] So, already starting with too many people in a hall, all those issues will still be issues.
[53:31] We just feel like this is one more tool that helps us address them more quickly.
[53:35] So, now, somebody says, I think there's something in the rental.
[53:37] We can just pull up a license and say, do they have a license or don't they have a license?
[53:40] We can move on that pretty quickly.
[53:42] So, just one question on a bill legal rentals.
[53:45] Is that increasing every year?
[53:49] And this is to the announcement that we've moved here.
[53:53] So, we have on the majority in one part of our city or than we do in other part of the office.
[54:00] It's not specific, we haven't in the office.
[54:06] Is there a team that they don't pay this?
[54:09] I mean, what's the enforcement side of this?
[54:11] Yeah, I mean, there's still some mechanics we work out,
[54:15] but the, I mean, the team has the ability to spend the license,
[54:18] and I would imagine having to find associated with operating in the middle without it.
[54:23] So, then we would use our administrative law judge process.
[54:25] Let's start.
[54:29] Let's have a round of the question.
[54:31] What does this look?
[54:33] Licensing rentals would be handled through the Orm help center, like our business licensing
[54:37] is.
[54:38] The additional employee hydrants program would be mainly in code enforcement, talking with
[54:43] our NPU staff.
[54:44] This might be on the civilian team.
[54:46] This is the need to send letters, make phone calls, do the follow-up, do all of those things
[54:51] that don't require a sworn officer.
[54:55] And then we would have some health and health centers in this to the program answers you thought there's
[54:59] something to question the couple.
[55:01] So that's, I mean, that's what the money goes. If you have 136 units and single family, 2461, $75, $75, you're talking, $3, $4, $5, yeah, we didn't model this a little bit. We don't have the exact number, but one of the things they want doesn't allow us to do is if I own five properties, I still can only be charged on $75 fee. So, a lot of these rentals,
[55:31] For example, you have 1,300, both that family units, but 100 of them are going to be in one complex, one fee.
[55:38] Then the per unit charge.
[55:41] So, we don't have the exact numbers of what it means.
[55:44] They're like the staff of the couple.
[55:45] They're still good to have enough money and a higher two code enforcement.
[55:49] Yeah.
[55:51] Yeah.
[55:51] So if somebody has 10 properties through five different LLCs, do they need a license for each LLC?
[56:01] They probably need more prejellos, CDIs, this one per unit, so it's a different honor they have to have to have to have.
[56:09] Maybe I just third by one thing, I mean the general rule is that any fees you've
[56:14] Collect from this type of a rental license can only go towards administering the license program.
[56:21] Licensing programs, people who are taking to pay for work and working with people on sort of work.
[56:26] Unless you do the disproportionate services study, it's Stephen's talking about.
[56:30] And then if you find that these different rental units are a creative disproportionate for services,
[56:36] then you can charge more to basically help for more NPU officers, whatever else, other employees,
[56:44] water, whatever you are dealing with the additional need for services that they are creating.
[56:49] So the actual base E is probably going to be relative to the low, I would guess less than $75.
[56:55] Because you only can charge them out that you need to actually minister the licensing program.
[57:01] So the study, the study, the study, the study, the study will show that.
[57:03] So the study, that's what you can potentially try and
[57:06] are charging more into, to pay really a disproportionate services.
[57:11] Does that make sense?
[57:13] So the NSSB can't be used for needing you.
[57:16] If we haven't done the study, if we've done, you know,
[57:18] disproportionate services, then we cannot.
[57:20] It only made for the licensing program.
[57:23] So we've done this.
[57:24] Yeah.
[57:25] Then you could use that to eventually date brand view and
[57:29] We would show that we're spending, giving them more time on our properties and our code enforcement.
[57:34] Therefore,
[57:38] pricing it out after this study.
[57:40] If we can also demonstrate that this will save money in, like the word calls and things like that,
[57:47] do we have to subtract?
[57:52] Is that just what we want to say?
[57:53] I'm sure.
[57:54] Well, you know, we did the impact.
[57:58] So, credits in there.
[58:01] So,
[58:10] fine.
[58:10] Interesting.
[58:11] We looked at the different fees.
[58:13] So, again, a lot of cities have this land.
[58:14] good landlord program what if you're a good landlord you do these different things here's the lower feet if you're not here's the true cost of your unit
[58:24] In like in West Jordan it's $7 if you're a good landlord if you're not you're paying the full cost
[58:30] It's $200 per unit
[58:34] So what usually comes back is that hey the real cost of these rentals to a city is really really high
[58:41] So we'll just obviously have
[59:09] one thing to have a legal part
[59:35] and they have no problems of saying another six
[59:40] and then they have no responsibility to be able to get a lot
[59:44] Yep,
[59:50] it would not only just be in the bill, also be in the need to do
[1:00:00] At least we'll be thought of in concept of this idea. Okay, so we recognize that we find this problem. We notify the landlord and notations made on their license. They come from renewal and we still have this outstanding issue. Then the fees become significantly more next year.
[1:00:15] While we're still trying to fight through this problem, right? But again, what we're struggling with now is we have that issue and we're trying to now just, who do we talk to? Who do we talk to?
[1:00:25] is this instead of all more say, hey, three of you, you know, draw straws and three of
[1:00:30] you are in the three of you are out.
[1:00:32] We want to be able to get to the person and actually take care of that at least and educate
[1:00:36] them.
[1:00:36] And I think, you know, sir is not going to have a good point that while it's frustrating
[1:00:41] is that it is for us and those of us that know this business well enough, know what legal
[1:00:46] know it's not legal, a lot of them really don't, they don't understand maybe that they
[1:00:51] couldn't afford and they don't understand that they couldn't take their house and turn
[1:00:54] been to a duplex, we have the ability now to proactively mail things to all registered
[1:01:00] license orders to say, here's the rules that you ought to be playing by, and a lot
[1:01:04] of them don't know by choice.
[1:01:06] But I think there's a variety of really or something that don't understand.
[1:01:10] So you know, this also was going to be a great opportunity to educate the director, you know,
[1:01:16] we can go take a massive off the wall, and if they're in a situation where it's not a
[1:01:22] fear, the insiduation or whatever, just could be a mechanism to help educate them so that they
[1:01:29] can come to the city and say, hey, we've got this problem for them. Or maybe they, maybe
[1:01:36] they at least know the law of that, so they can approach the land on this hay, or you can
[1:01:41] know the law you're supposed to do this, and they're not doing it on the house. So,
[1:01:56] if
[1:02:19] you
[1:02:19] I like the idea of using that
[1:02:24] address that the overall frequency
[1:02:28] here is that there's a landlord that looks at it just from a dollar and cents ten
[1:02:36] point of this year
[1:02:40] there's three more people rent for the economics still they might just get
[1:02:53] to staying enough.
[1:03:17] There's that part of it but there's the.
[1:03:32] But if they're not addressing them, we charge to hire a fee and continue to go after the issue if they really are jailed.
[1:03:39] Yeah, yeah.
[1:03:42] The reason I asked that there's a daycare that it doesn't
[1:04:00] matter.
[1:04:00] Yeah, yeah.
[1:04:05] One of the things that I think that
[1:04:09] all police, one of the challenges that comes with illegal rentals,
[1:04:12] and we're sensitive to it, you are, there's two parties here involved.
[1:04:16] One is the landlord who knows, potentially knows.
[1:04:19] And in some cases, it doesn't.
[1:04:20] I agree a lot of times though that they're operating something illegal then there's the tenants who I think we could speak
[1:04:27] Confucius they don't they didn't know they got in the KSL
[1:04:30] Hey, I should look up to see if that's illegal based on carbon or not before
[1:04:34] But those are those are the people that
[1:04:37] That it's challenging to try to figure out how to exactly handle that in a you know
[1:04:41] Quick way, but not take this young family or whoever might be living there
[1:04:46] put it out of the streets. As we deal through the mechanics of this, I think one of the things
[1:04:50] we'll be sensitive to is the timing. And how much time do we give somebody to one company
[1:04:55] compliant to make their basement legal into the basement issue?
[1:05:00] We want to make sure that we're not in November, taking a young couple who's in a basement that thought they're on a good place and putting them out.
[1:05:09] So we're still working through the mechanics of how can we enforce what we need to, but be human and what we're doing as well.
[1:05:16] And ultimately get to compliance, which is what we want. And if compliance takes six months for them to finish out their lease and then they know they can't lease.
[1:05:23] What those are just things we're just looking at to try to be a human and what we're doing
[1:05:27] and not put, you know, all more than a team in a really difficult spot is there standing there with the
[1:05:33] young couple who had no clue and telling them that they've got to find a new place by, you know, this day.
[1:05:38] Wait, don't be simmering myself. The same thing we'll shut up in the water.
[1:05:43] So,
[1:05:47] I think the other aspect,
[1:05:50] I think when we said that,
[1:06:02] man, do a
[1:06:09] 70 information,
[1:07:16] you know, we did it.
[1:07:43] the LJ system that we added in part,
[1:07:46] based off of that inflexible.
[1:08:03] And this is a conversation we've had with the NPU.
[1:08:09] If this is looked at as, oh, great, this is,
[1:08:11] we not have a penalty for not perenni legal.
[1:08:17] Let's have our NPU drive around
[1:08:18] and just try to find legal rentals all day,
[1:08:21] because now we have something that we can penalize before.
[1:08:23] Now, this doesn't work, and this is,
[1:08:25] this isn't to change the prioritization of their calls.
[1:08:27] They're still going to say the drug house is priority one.
[1:08:31] They're still going to say those things are,
[1:08:33] this is a tool to help them address those issues more quickly.
[1:08:38] This also allows us to address illegal rentals or some of those other issues,
[1:08:41] but this is going to change a prioritization of calls.
[1:08:43] This is going to allow us to take care of those high-trivial calls
[1:08:46] in a more efficient way.
[1:08:47] That's our feeling.
[1:08:49] And the $50,000 a year that we're walking away from
[1:08:52] and utility panels.
[1:08:53] Correct. Correct.
[1:08:54] are essentially left behind with the other.
[1:09:00] I think that's more reasons why the money is
[1:09:07] the process from the other.
[1:09:08] We think that's what the study will show.
[1:09:10] We just have a study.
[1:09:16] Let me just go over next step so you kind of know what we're at.
[1:09:19] The next step would be to complete the study to research the disproportionate cost of rental properties
[1:09:24] as I mentioned, this will send the cap.
[1:09:26] It's what we can charge in, show where the disproportionate cost are.
[1:09:29] To refine and work out the mechanics of administering the program, the application,
[1:09:33] And on my floor, I'm software programming procedures,
[1:09:36] notify owners, all that.
[1:09:39] What we're considering is that how we bring owners
[1:09:41] into compliance, considering giving landlords
[1:09:44] a discount of first year, they'll come to compliance
[1:09:46] during the ramp up period.
[1:09:49] Namely, putting the utilities in their name
[1:09:51] and registering the rental properties.
[1:09:53] It'd be free, and this is, again,
[1:09:56] we'll work considering we'll look at all this,
[1:09:58] but I mean, the first year,
[1:09:59] Okay.
[1:10:00] They come in first three months, a ramping is out of the game of free first year for not making us have to go after them and try to get them registered, a fifth percent discount they do up between a month, three and six. After six months, when we're looking at it as like a July 2020 and a fiscal year, everything is fully and swing and full price to pay for anybody to come since we realized it.
[1:10:20] So we're hoping by January to kind of have all this map down as they have a look and
[1:10:26] be able to start the education process and get people to bring in and come to compliance
[1:10:31] on the administrative details.
[1:10:34] That's kind of the time.
[1:10:35] That's what we can.
[1:10:38] At what point will we do the public outreach and maybe that's part of the initial study that
[1:10:43] like science or, you know, we do, but are we going to have, like, open houses or something
[1:10:48] we're both
[1:10:52] not necessarily.
[1:10:53] Yeah, I would definitely anticipate that.
[1:10:54] We did done that through our sewer-based rate charts where we reached out to landlords and had those opportunities to discuss.
[1:11:01] I see the same way.
[1:11:02] I think once we have the study in hand, because that's really then kind of the nexus for what we're doing to see justice.
[1:11:08] There's a reason we're doing this and it's because it's a cost that it can be provided.
[1:11:11] So what that's done, I think we go through that period and be during the ramp up period,
[1:11:16] but we may have some additional things to go out before the fall of this.
[1:11:23] Anybody else in the other thoughts?
[1:11:25] any concerns, any heartburn, any of this is given you that we can either address or look
[1:11:30] at further.
[1:11:32] What are you doing?
[1:11:33] What are you doing?
[1:11:33] What are you doing?
[1:11:34] So, the two big thing, help please.
[1:11:36] It's our one more question.
[1:11:37] It's artists, other cities that have done this, have there been any kind of legal battles,
[1:11:42] any, by the other words, it's how many try to sue the city because, hey, this is my problem.
[1:11:54] I was going to say the one thing I have seen is, as has been brought up, a lot more
[1:11:59] new plexus, building new plexus for people who just move out of their house and rent
[1:12:05] both the top and bottom and you know follow the day.
[1:12:09] And send me the for their address your question.
[1:12:11] State law actually gives us this
[1:12:15] parental license
[1:12:19] for maybe related issues that they're
[1:12:24] available.
[1:12:25] It's a basic program.
[1:12:26] I mean it's very, fairly long.
[1:12:29] So I can summarize the two action items that we're looking to do is one begin requiring
[1:12:35] the landlords keep the utilities in their names.
[1:12:37] And then to get rid of mice, it's most of the other thing we talked about in the benefits of that.
[1:12:42] But those are the two action items that we would be asking of landlords to come to compliance by July 2020.
[1:12:48] And obviously, all those things we talked about in the ramp up period, those are specifically those two.
[1:12:53] So in that realm, then the tenant would pay the landlord for the utility?
[1:12:58] Would be similar with the landlord, maybe, ultimate person responsible, like, allow the other person to?
[1:13:06] Yeah. In fact, Steven, you can recommend it.
[1:13:08] There's a state code that specifically says, we can't get involved in the payment of utilities
[1:13:12] between landlords and tenants.
[1:13:14] We would charge the landlord, how they want to build them is, we're not allowed to get involved.
[1:13:19] Because that's, you know, I'm not sure if you're quite fully interested in the question,
[1:13:22] but, yeah, we can't basically say the landlord is prohibited from charging the tenant before we utilities.
[1:13:29] That's the one thing to say what it says.
[1:13:31] I would just say, if you had the lesson board on, and I was a part of these conversations.
[1:13:37] But then the person renting had their name on there to pay the utility.
[1:13:42] And if they didn't, I wouldn't want that to be.
[1:13:44] I don't know if that's a lie.
[1:13:45] You could do it that way, if I wanted to.
[1:13:48] I think that's still the theme.
[1:13:50] That's a whole lot of the problems we're currently.
[1:13:51] It's good to see it in the square and then you have to go out and shut off the water and bring it back to it and have to do all those things.
[1:14:01] But you could do it that way.
[1:14:02] You could do it that way.
[1:14:05] You could do it that way.
[1:14:07] You could do it that way.
[1:14:08] Yeah.
[1:14:08] I don't think they're doing both.
[1:14:09] No, please.
[1:14:10] So you're saying like the landlord would still be the responsible party.
[1:14:13] But the payment itself would be delegated to 10 if there's nothing like that.
[1:14:17] Yeah.
[1:14:17] So,
[1:14:22] I don't know what I'm going to do, but I don't know what I'm going to do, but what I'm going to say is having it in the landlord's name.
[1:14:28] Yes, I need to fill two.
[1:14:30] Yes.
[1:14:32] Well, I mean, potentially the difficult one comes.
[1:14:33] We're still not turning this over every year.
[1:14:35] Yeah.
[1:14:36] I think that
[1:14:49] it's something we've attended.
[1:14:51] So, that's my question is, how would it actually come down to the finalizes?
[1:14:57] Is it straight, plan, or create it?
[1:15:00] That's how we see it. This is the same way of duplexing four plexiglass, but I want to get that.
[1:15:05] But there are on my health. The pressure can't hit. Correct. Money.
[1:15:10] I don't know. I understand. But I'm saying, are you going to have the renters name on there?
[1:15:16] And I say, the bill goes to the renter, but if he doesn't pay, the old town person in the land.
[1:15:40] So I'm not recommending one over the other. I'm just trying to ask you about what your plan is.
[1:15:45] So our plan is we build a landlord, the landlord or somebody pays it.
[1:15:50] That's the only person we deal with is between the landlord and the tenant to work out.
[1:15:55] Okay.
[1:15:55] Is our system set up for a week and that has a good opportunity.
[1:16:01] I think that would probably solve that.
[1:16:04] And we would accept payment from the renter in the landlords.
[1:16:09] Correct.
[1:16:11] We have generous council members that pay the utility bills of individuals.
[1:16:14] We don't care who pay.
[1:16:15] I know.
[1:16:15] I wish they'd do it for me.
[1:16:18] But ultimately, the individual responsible for his property in question is the landlord.
[1:16:25] So if we ever got into a situation where a need required, for example, collections, it would be
[1:16:36] simply sending a property
[1:16:41] that the property they property managed.
[1:16:44] Because there are people that are able to adapt to it. This does happen.
[1:16:48] And that property that property management company has a separate agreement with the property owners.
[1:16:53] And you have to make sure the landlords understand this, correct, because this isn't how it's happening right now.
[1:17:00] And this is a big change.
[1:17:02] No, we don't disagree on that.
[1:17:04] That's definitely for some of this guy.
[1:17:07] Yep, for operas.
[1:17:09] But at the same time, again, this is a business.
[1:17:13] This is not about a
[1:17:18] starting to manage their respect.
[1:17:33] And I think, you know, Counties, in her team, we've great stepping through a lot of this.
[1:17:37] I'm sure there's things we'll still have to figure out to go.
[1:17:41] We all recognize that in the short term,
[1:17:43] there's going to be a lot of work to do.
[1:17:45] And we just see the benefit of the long term scene
[1:17:47] because great is that it is financially and time-wise
[1:17:50] to the city that we want to take care of.
[1:17:53] We talk about this every bunch of season of
[1:17:56] hey, there's more demand for services in every area.
[1:17:59] And 3-1-1, and in place,
[1:18:02] there's two ways to address that higher and more people
[1:18:04] or reduce the amount of time we're spending on different things.
[1:18:07] We've talked about how many people we've done that.
[1:18:09] We also are trying to look at the other side of the coin to say,
[1:18:12] there's also things we do that we feel like we can do
[1:18:14] to reduce the amount of time we're spending in these areas.
[1:18:17] This is a way to reduce the amount of time.
[1:18:19] Rather than just, we can continue to address this problem
[1:18:22] as more and more rentals that I come on by saying,
[1:18:24] give us another zero of an agent, another one,
[1:18:26] and another one, we feel like this can kind of start
[1:18:28] for a first step training.
[1:18:30] the world of change.
[1:18:31] They have also reversed the trend on the money in your lives, and in the money world,
[1:18:34] and you're trying to create a contract.
[1:18:37] And then the contract doesn't get the ability to pay.
[1:18:40] We may lose money in late fees, because you know, all these ones don't have a collection
[1:18:45] that late fees that we don't establish to.
[1:18:47] That's a trade-off for the money.
[1:18:51] All right.
[1:18:52] Any questions?
[1:18:54] Appreciate your time.
[1:18:54] Thank you.
[1:18:55] Thank you.
[1:18:56] So the presentation.
[1:18:58] We'll now move on to a discussion of parking on.
[1:19:00] May I?
[1:19:01] May I?
[1:19:01] Before you move on, I just want you to know I've been on the phone the last hour and applaud the efforts of even in the team and support the directing you're heading.
[1:19:12] Good. Glad to have you on. Thanks Tom. I was the celebration for the victory.
[1:19:17] I'm just walking into it now so I'll rejoin your comp at Council meeting in about an hour.
[1:19:28] Oh, I'm sorry. I'll stay on to that.
[1:19:29] So we'll come back later because we wanted to do some coaches and stuff.
[1:19:32] but we'll work through the mechanics of the notification.
[1:19:35] We'll keep you the loop.
[1:19:36] We'll just start going down this road.
[1:19:38] So now we have a discussion on the state street
[1:19:42] and the district by adjacent bench.
[1:19:46] Thank you, Mayor.
[1:19:47] As you've just kind of a brief overview of what the parking
[1:19:51] centers is really important.
[1:19:53] As you know, we've adopted these districts.
[1:19:56] Back on October, at the final four, we did a lot of changes.
[1:20:00] We knew going in the Department of Standards as a little high. We basically never did on the mid-town village, when it was originally built.
[1:20:11] When Facebook came in at Facebook and it meant to have the ability to ask, actually, to reduce some of that part of the land for the original.
[1:20:18] But when we kept the original code knowing that these had some issues in the past with parking, it went through, as we looked at, we actually hired a consultant,
[1:20:30] We have a couple months ago, they actually came in a day report on the overall parking
[1:20:36] studies.
[1:20:38] With that in mind, with those developers that came in that evening, we have at least five
[1:20:44] different public family and developers that came in that city council discussion.
[1:20:49] We actually had it in our office to sit down with them to see what the standards they
[1:20:53] comfortable with, in addition to looking at the parking study, so we can kind of look forward
[1:20:59] with the proposal. It's currently required, it's 4,000 for any commercial and it's
[1:21:07] super-colding. This pertains only to the districts, and we're not talking about it,
[1:21:11] and other commercial zones, and some of those properties and other districts.
[1:21:16] Now right now we require for our mixed use, and the city center, for example, 20% of any development
[1:21:20] it has to be some type of commercial within that's office where you tell.
[1:21:24] And that's basically part of the quarter of a thousand.
[1:21:27] As part of that, they can use that to fly in that requirement by three.
[1:21:32] You get a baby with a colored base density.
[1:21:33] So that number of residential units.
[1:21:35] So the hundred parking stalls are required.
[1:21:37] A third of that is 33 stalls can be used for the residential component.
[1:21:43] And then the current, the standard for the residential part over that base is currently 2.25 stalls.
[1:21:50] or unit, and anything over three or more measures,
[1:21:55] as far as I did to stop.
[1:21:56] So it's pretty heavily loaded for the risk measure.
[1:21:59] So we don't have any parking issues.
[1:22:02] Of course, the risk is intervened.
[1:22:03] We can do some areas that are risk-only.
[1:22:06] It's a 2.5, and I'm trying not proposing to change
[1:22:09] that it offers to keep talking about those
[1:22:11] and that the ability to fix.
[1:22:15] I'm excuse to go.
[1:22:16] So the three takeaways in the afternoon parking study
[1:22:19] is the one that they recommended that we actually reduce the part
[1:22:21] in between the two and the three spaces of the balance
[1:22:24] and put the commercial.
[1:22:25] We're actually proposing that I know the three.
[1:22:29] They also recommended that we keep the mixed-use component
[1:22:32] on the outer base, so they can still use the shared component
[1:22:35] with the commercial versus a portion of that residential.
[1:22:38] As part of that, so we're proposing that we keep that as part
[1:22:41] of this part as well.
[1:22:44] And then the final one was that they actually recommended
[1:22:45] that we go to a 0.75 per bed bedroom or two per unit in terms of the last.
[1:22:54] So if we took those two developers, we actually
[1:22:56] come up purpose and we make some modifications, which basically keep
[1:23:01] the 300,000, but I go to the residential requirement, it looks like 75 per unit, regardless
[1:23:08] of the number of bedrooms.
[1:23:09] So make an average where you're seeing between single bedrooms, studios, majority of the units
[1:23:16] are usually at two bedrooms, you do have some of the three bedrooms, as you mentioned,
[1:23:21] the majority of the government, where you think of it, probably all the others are trying to
[1:23:23] correct it or wrong, but the majority of them do not build a lot of three bedrooms, which is not
[1:23:27] rental or rental, they do have some, but typically, you're not looking at really large families
[1:23:33] living in these units, they're usually looking at the first units to go over a huge amount of
[1:23:37] to better minutes.
[1:23:38] So in the majority of their thoughts.
[1:23:42] So Jason, how does this relate to student housing?
[1:23:46] So this has nothing to do with student housing.
[1:23:48] So we're not proposing to change any standards currently for student housing.
[1:23:52] We're still still be out of it about the point eight.
[1:23:56] This is simply the district's on stage.
[1:24:01] to start posting upon the recommendation in the, in the part of the city was, they had two stipulations.
[1:24:07] One, as we've done with the green on the University of White and Catholic,
[1:24:13] is that they don't charge additional part of the rent for the parking stall.
[1:24:17] So, it has to be included in the rent.
[1:24:20] So, they've thought that if we're going to go down to this lower standard,
[1:24:23] that that basically is stipulations.
[1:24:24] And if they're going to, they need to bundle the rent.
[1:24:26] They can't have a rent.
[1:24:28] And then they charge for additional part because people are not being out of that.
[1:24:31] I'm part of them in the Netherlands.
[1:24:32] So there's a window how many complexes actually do that?
[1:24:36] I mean, I'm a word problem now that's done in that.
[1:24:40] But I know that the green on campus drive was not doing that.
[1:24:48] They can't.
[1:24:48] Because we basically took this language out of the woods.
[1:24:50] They're closing in this language.
[1:24:53] We have, again, I told the Democratic Commission basically said they do want some of their products.
[1:24:57] Do you charge for that?
[1:24:58] Because of the performance difference.
[1:25:00] Financing issues, they do that, but they don't think it's possible for them to actually have that somehow in the report where they can actually bundle it and they get it still included rather than having that set for sure.
[1:25:12] But the potential, they start from part of the issue is that if they have potential getting out of a lot of chance, may choose not to pay for that argument.
[1:25:20] I think themselves on a public street, which is kind of the issue that we have with some of these parties.
[1:25:27] So they run through hyper-referts and end the mid-charge from cover-party and our response to that was what we needed was that without the mid-strep to not have a separate charge.
[1:25:38] So the way that we're in this reasoning required required, so they required the 150 dollars and they provide 200.
[1:25:44] It could charge, actually, if we mean over the level of the required.
[1:25:48] Any of things required for that mean, so 1.5 or 1.75 is required that you only cannot charge it.
[1:25:53] But if you're charging as part of rent, you can't then pull that out and say, all right, if you're not going to do it, if you're not parking, you don't have to pay that high rent, you can pay a lower rent.
[1:26:07] But what we're trying to do is to put the stock, if you want to clean it up, it's over
[1:26:15] and the problem is to try it and do it with the stock.
[1:26:20] So we did actually look at several projects.
[1:26:22] There's five projects.
[1:26:24] You're just wondering what's going on.
[1:26:25] I'm putting more of it.
[1:26:27] Is there anyone's best?
[1:26:28] What we did is we took the existing current code and proposed code.
[1:26:32] I looked at a pair of some of them we did.
[1:26:35] And there is one in the fourth, 14 people south of the project.
[1:26:39] And when he's got a sausage, that's where we're going to boil it in warm water.
[1:26:44] Based on the next step, we're going to boil it.
[1:26:46] So they have a lot of students with one bedroom versus a two bedroom next.
[1:26:49] So now we're going to boil it in the water.
[1:26:51] So the lower the ratio of the higher the parking action.
[1:26:54] The parking ratio is going to kind of hit the middle of a two bedroom unit.
[1:26:57] It's kind of the average of three.
[1:27:00] So the whole area is about to boil it in 75 when we're just going to boil it.
[1:27:05] But that's a crucial thing.
[1:27:07] So I was at your proposed dealing with that, where it's higher and lower and lower.
[1:27:13] If that was, how were they coming today?
[1:27:16] So they're not going back trying to enforce enough,
[1:27:19] because it's a new project, it's a new project.
[1:27:21] This is a form of comparison of how many,
[1:27:23] as standard of relate to existing projects that have.
[1:27:27] Hopefully, it would give a reduction of, like, say,
[1:27:30] 7.3.3.3.3.
[1:27:31] As we talked in the village, you know,
[1:27:33] But then, as you can see, the product is really, really important to have a style, this is kind of a meaning.
[1:27:39] The average of where we can work up a little bit.
[1:27:42] In the event, the beginning of the project, you can start to understand it doesn't work,
[1:27:45] and obviously we'll be back to discuss it.
[1:27:47] I mean, I think this is a point of view style.
[1:27:51] So, I mean, on the 19th, when you're north-state, I think there's a major problem,
[1:27:54] as you're part of the right now.
[1:27:56] So, now you're not even going to get another 10%.
[1:28:00] But it was very smart for me to be seen now.
[1:28:03] It was because they were starting to try to make it
[1:28:04] to try to be a first cultural structure.
[1:28:06] I mean, I go back there, it's still part of the industry.
[1:28:09] And I have seen that to you, that there's been a stalls
[1:28:11] on the side of it.
[1:28:12] And sometimes, it's, you can't really lay in your search.
[1:28:16] So sometimes, people will park on street
[1:28:18] because of course, they're here in a grocery store,
[1:28:20] and they're here in a grocery store.
[1:28:23] So that's a chance to be run into any apartment on
[1:28:31] this street.
[1:28:32] So we're going to have a majority of the developments,
[1:28:34] hopefully, within the district.
[1:28:35] mixed with a commercial. There are going to be so much on the edge that could have like a month
[1:28:39] fall, could spill over. And the point of having that part of the rent, where they can't
[1:28:46] split it up, like somebody can't opt out to pay for that part, and they have to have the
[1:28:50] group within also give them the ability to part on side to choose to, if somebody wants the
[1:28:55] part out of the tree, they could. And this would be a red line at all, they could create them for
[1:29:00] a new man. And there is some businesses across the street, in that case, love those,
[1:29:04] to do
[1:29:08] that as well, not necessarily all times.
[1:29:13] Do it at least to help keep them out of the way.
[1:29:23] Well, it's pretty strongly to ask the group.
[1:29:25] That's kind of one thing that
[1:29:28] we have the ability to have that argument they can opt out.
[1:29:31] And they will.
[1:29:34] Some other mechanisms.
[1:29:39] But a couple of weeks ago, they've given formal recommendations.
[1:29:43] This will come 41 in eighth.
[1:29:55] It's hard because every development is different depending on the mix.
[1:29:59] I'm going to read that.
[1:30:01] One better, and then how do you incorporate the tenet mix, which may have two people with cars in one unit?
[1:30:08] Somebody with one, somebody with three. So it's kind of where we found, we're trying to get a moving target.
[1:30:14] And with this, the first development will come in and we're going to find out through works.
[1:30:19] And if it does in the meeting, we need to tweak it. But it's kind of, there's no science behind it.
[1:30:26] It's a vast gas solution.
[1:30:27] It just depends on how many companies it comes in.
[1:30:30] It comes in as long as you walk in better units.
[1:30:32] So we're going to meet them back, Jesus.
[1:30:34] To go in your red line.
[1:30:38] It's the right, right there.
[1:30:38] So if you look here, it's 2.75 and that was 0.25.
[1:30:43] And that was 0.25.
[1:30:44] I was for visitor party.
[1:30:45] So now you've added from 0.75.
[1:30:48] 0.10.
[1:30:49] 0.5.
[1:30:50] It was a 10%.
[1:30:51] So if you have two people over there, you're already over your party.
[1:30:57] It's going to be screwed.
[1:30:59] It's going to be a mix of landlords managing, or the others managing.
[1:31:05] I don't know, I don't like takable apartments.
[1:31:06] So to give you an idea, seeing the bill is on,
[1:31:13] they think this is
[1:31:22] meant, and they have 60
[1:31:26] %.
[1:31:26] So we feel like we've kind of, because we have some developers telling this, telling us that this is important.
[1:31:33] We have other,
[1:31:35] we kind of feel like we haven't been all the way to do with the developers.
[1:31:38] Well, I'm an adult, run it.
[1:31:40] I can get down the parking, I can get more buildings, whatever.
[1:31:45] At very good point, at very good point, I co-low as it's going to us that they don't
[1:31:51] they won't build something that they can't park, that they feel they can't be.
[1:32:00] And this ratio is,
[1:32:07] we do have some big developments that
[1:32:13] decide if a monobrol on a
[1:32:16] more metal bowl is
[1:32:19] this wrong. It's not like we can experiment. Those are too big to get it wrong.
[1:32:25] Part of it, it makes it be a don't have, and
[1:32:30] when we take it kind of the basis of a
[1:32:32] the ability to really have
[1:32:35] that even times when the office is gone and will be still over
[1:32:38] the parking is provided by that mix, which is required. They have to do that 20%
[1:32:43] commercial. They're going to have that number of stallings that are going to be able to
[1:32:46] shift. When they leave in the morning, that's going to be open then for the
[1:32:49] commercial to use during the day. So there is going to be some sort of right now that the
[1:32:53] month-all and the other projects don't wrap up now. The only one we have is we can compare it
[1:32:57] with the mid-town village, but seems to be working well the way that it's designed because it
[1:33:00] that flexibility with that commercial. And that's what the people are holding is that because we're
[1:33:05] required of that commercial and that actually our needs will be shared and we'll be able to
[1:33:10] potentially mitigate that spillover in the
[1:33:17] end of your business development
[1:33:22] investment in our
[1:33:23] being as so extreme. So I've re-converged other cities.
[1:33:32] I've talked with Morgan with
[1:33:35] when you're in here, and they're in their way into art so they think this is-
[1:33:44] They went to the very role, they're kicking everybody out, but...
[1:33:49] The problem with that as well, they went to a kind of a low standard.
[1:33:52] They kind of adjust that background.
[1:33:54] Transitation tool, they're not going to have them.
[1:33:55] They're going to have them in the South of Canada.
[1:33:57] They're going to have to have a really good kind of conversational.
[1:34:00] How many developers do you complain?
[1:34:03] How many of them are all playing?
[1:34:04] How many of them are playing?
[1:34:04] What is their coming and looking at these vacant properties in the district?
[1:34:08] It's a pretty high standard and it means as far as the low we have now.
[1:34:12] So we could err on the side of having to which part of which staff agreed at the beginning that's err on the side of part of an adjusted court.
[1:34:20] Now we're having developers coming to say, you'll be lucky to develop it.
[1:34:23] It's just right on the edge.
[1:34:25] Too much parking.
[1:34:26] Therefore it's not really working.
[1:34:27] So let's get to a different, more reasonable stand.
[1:34:30] And I think it's staff.
[1:34:32] As part of the study shows and as developers.
[1:34:35] I agree, this is kind of the background.
[1:34:37] I think all agreed.
[1:34:39] The other basically is the mission.
[1:34:40] It's
[1:34:48] going to take obviously the council's agreement to be forward knowing that it's not a perfect science.
[1:34:54] It's not that we can't.
[1:34:55] We'll see if we should have laid them forward.
[1:35:00] And we worked together good as a team to come up with the solutions that we thought would work.
[1:35:06] Now, we may be kind of, we should be involved a little bit, but I think we're hearing on this side of still having a look at it.
[1:35:19] We've created a model where we can go on a minute to weigh on how many three bedrooms, two bedrooms and one bedroom room and a development.
[1:35:25] The development that's heavy on one bedroom, you actually, you run the single-class apartment.
[1:35:30] The development heavy on three bedrooms is where you can't be getting to trouble.
[1:35:35] But in the market right now, very few three bedrooms are even being built, so we're anticipating mostly one-two bedrooms.
[1:35:43] So we think that
[1:35:47] the key in the home, I think we all feel, is you can't charge it.
[1:35:52] If you do, down at the metal gold site, some of you are going to be part of the blocker
[1:35:57] two away and then you
[1:36:01] need to have that commercial component and
[1:36:07] extra trucks for
[1:36:14] probably the 10-year storm level or the 100-year storm level.
[1:36:19] It seems kind of like we're shifting a little more from the 100-year storm level, maybe closer
[1:36:25] to the 10-year, and as far as you think, if you have a shopping mall, for example, if you
[1:36:30] don't call you parking based off a flat Friday. That's like one or two days out of the year.
[1:36:44] And a Friday mile, if you will, because there's like people will still have cars.
[1:36:49] It just might not use them as much.
[1:36:51] They're trips per day, maybe lower, because they're in a walking distance to
[1:37:02] add analogy,
[1:37:03] because people are still going to have
[1:37:06] coffee.
[1:37:07] You found through the study is that
[1:37:13] not everybody's going to have two drivers.
[1:37:18] There's a certain ratio.
[1:37:19] But again, it's not an exact science, but it is one of those things where we meet so many comparisons,
[1:37:29] our area, where we are pretty comfortable.
[1:37:33] In the studies that you've seen, I'll tell you, they did it.
[1:37:56] But I think there is some reformal room where we're actually providing copy or requiring a low too much part.
[1:38:04] I'll tell you back to hopefully in the background where we can gather me in your project.
[1:38:08] It's going to stress me a little bit.
[1:38:09] I think the story is going to be on lower than having a part.
[1:38:17] Here comes the
[1:38:21] show of Jason.
[1:38:22] One would go to the second grant, do you want to do a sort of report on your responsibilities?
[1:38:34] You're top of commission.
[1:38:37] I've been to sign the Historic Preservation Commission, which is a working progress.
[1:38:45] We're going to take it that far more better.
[1:38:51] Yeah.
[1:38:51] That's down the moment.
[1:38:55] Also the youth council.
[1:38:58] And I really enjoyed
[1:39:03] getting to add something like this.
[1:39:04] And I was in high school, instead of the activities we did.
[1:39:16] I'm not afraid of that.
[1:39:17] But Steve and the great, they do a great job.
[1:39:22] Some people they teach in the city works out the government works.
[1:39:28] And I think that I think they have sessions with most of the department.
[1:39:33] It's sort of activities where they understand what they're doing.
[1:39:36] And of course, the major slave data and February,
[1:39:41] they participate in how pills are created and passed.
[1:39:46] One thing that I really enjoyed this last spring was the
[1:39:50] the mock court.
[1:39:54] Greg said that was just like the first year of law school assault.
[1:40:01] And we have a good opportunity to put on a mock court for the young people. It was a lot of fun.
[1:40:09] Right, were you the judge of what were you?
[1:40:11] Is that what?
[1:40:12] Were you the judge of what were you?
[1:40:13] No, if just the kids ate them.
[1:40:17] I just served for all of them.
[1:40:21] And as all of us know, it's open to the warm, tip of no, just amount of new and high school students,
[1:40:27] and we're starting that back up.
[1:40:33] Anyway, and how many students do you get involved in this coming out?
[1:40:37] Well, different months, you know, like the legislative session.
[1:40:42] We've only had all of us involved in them.
[1:40:45] The month for
[1:40:48] dinner.
[1:40:52] We didn't have this back inside up this year as we could last year.
[1:41:13] Anyway, it was a lot of fun for me as well, and I learned a lot.
[1:41:16] The other commission on over is the senior Citizens Advisory Commission and Kate
[1:41:27] Bradford today.
[1:41:28] She's chairman of that commission and she's a youth council.
[1:41:32] So, we should start with that.
[1:41:34] But I'm a little joy.
[1:41:37] They have good participation in that commission.
[1:41:40] I think they always have a corner of the pretty close to it.
[1:41:42] Carl's always there.
[1:41:45] Yeah, it's a sport work.
[1:41:52] They have, I think, over thirty-four hundred members, is that right?
[1:41:56] Senior, a similar number there.
[1:42:00] And are we one of the bigger ones?
[1:42:02] I think we are the biggest one there.
[1:42:04] We are.
[1:42:06] So they're doing a great job over there.
[1:42:10] Do they have anything with the center?
[1:42:13] Are they in a doctor care?
[1:42:16] I'm proud of the way they're there.
[1:42:17] They're handling it very well.
[1:42:20] The sticking point right now is we're using the
[1:42:22] the ballroom for
[1:42:26] me to hot or
[1:42:33] not to fight that happy meat.
[1:42:35] Keep them on the shelf.
[1:42:36] In that, so in the building, but everything else I think is for people.
[1:42:40] I have top of senior citizens and participants over there and, you know, there are a few
[1:42:46] rumbles, but I think it's for people who always work with you.
[1:42:50] I think it's for people who find, friends can't smooth it out by handing out one
[1:42:54] I think he can tour the link and squeeze it out of the link.
[1:42:59] In July, they served over 1,000 lunches,
[1:43:04] and in the winter, I don't think that goes up forward.
[1:43:11] And if anyone has not been to the Grammy Awards,
[1:43:13] please go to the Grammy Awards,
[1:43:17] and when has it?
[1:43:18] Frank Sinatra is in the MC's, the Sunday.
[1:43:25] If movies, watercolor groups,
[1:43:27] personal history, literature classes, and I've seen
[1:43:32] table there a couple of times in that belly dance class.
[1:43:38] I think it might even see that.
[1:43:40] I mean, Carla, you didn't really hold those up.
[1:43:43] I think that would be
[1:43:49] a great job over there.
[1:43:52] And it's full permission to be
[1:43:57] part of it.
[1:43:58] Any questions with your comments?
[1:44:04] What are your questions?
[1:44:08] That is a fun day.
[1:44:10] A few hours.
[1:44:10] A few hours.
[1:44:11] Yeah.
[1:44:13] Yeah.
[1:44:13] And Flamingo Day is good too.
[1:44:17] She was dressed up.
[1:44:18] I didn't even know how much she was for about an hour.
[1:44:28] Well, thank you for your service there.
[1:44:29] You're sure that.
[1:44:31] So why don't we go ahead and have a prayer with the food, and then we'll go over our agenda
[1:44:35] and also a prayer with the food.
[1:44:39] Our dear Heavenly Father, we thank the food that's provided at this time.
[1:44:45] I'd like to say that we serve in and to the residents, we look here, thankful for the good families that are here, thankful for our city and staff and good work that they do, pray that I might bless.
[1:45:00] Our efforts and city staff efforts and those who work police and fire and those who are residents to continue to build a better city and a great city and make it a great place to raise families.
[1:45:14] We say there's something in the name of Jesus Christ.
[1:51:32] I had to go to court and I was a little more busy than I thought.
[1:51:41] I had to get in the morning and set a raise when we were at the Senate, I was a little bit sadder than I did that.
[1:51:48] I had to get a lot of things under the water, so I went to the office.
[1:51:51] What are we doing? I was like, what are we doing?
[1:51:56] I did not want to see what was going on, actually.
[1:51:59] I don't know what you're saying.
[1:52:01] I don't know what you're saying.
[1:52:02] As a word, it's all the way.
[1:52:05] I don't have the word.
[1:52:07] I don't know what I'm saying.
[1:52:09] I've been to a lot of different places.
[1:52:12] I was in my house.
[1:52:14] I was in my house.
[1:52:17] I'm also having a mother.
[1:52:19] We go home.
[1:52:20] I wash it.
[1:52:21] I don't know what the name is.
[1:52:23] Yeah.
[1:52:24] To tell my name, we can do it.
[1:52:26] There was a similar one.
[1:54:39] But you know we can't do this.
[1:54:42] But we're not going to need a lot of things.
[1:54:44] We're going to need some information.
[1:54:47] We're going to need a full kick kick.
[1:54:49] Yeah, I don't hold it.
[1:54:50] I don't know if that's a special show.
[1:54:52] It won't be a good one.
[1:54:54] But we're going to have to worry on it, of course.
[1:54:56] It won't be a bad one.
[1:54:57] We can't pull over that.
[1:54:59] Action out of me.
[1:55:10] I'm a little bit more on the end. It's been a working project. So, you have one of us who is currently, who may have else who is here.
[1:55:19] I think that's a question that's not true.
[1:55:22] It's not true. It's not true.
[1:55:25] It's not true.
[1:55:27] Yeah. It's actually true. It's not true. It's not true.
[1:55:31] We don't check the screen.
[1:55:32] No, it's not true.
[1:55:34] It's not true. It's not true.
[1:55:36] It's not true. It's not true.
[1:55:42] It's not true.
[1:56:24] 730.
[1:56:26] Okay, my heart's really total.
[1:56:29] Oh, John, okay.
[1:56:30] I think we need it.
[1:56:31] You're correct.
[1:56:31] We want to take on it.
[1:56:33] I don't know.
[1:56:43] I won't take it.
[1:56:44] We'll take it.
[1:56:45] No, we'll take it.
[1:56:46] You know.
[1:56:46] I'm 100.
[1:56:48] I'm 100.
[1:56:49] I hate sports.
[1:56:50] I hate scenemy tricks.
[1:56:51] Well really?
[1:56:52] I need to read.
[1:56:53] I need to.
[1:56:54] I got a count.
[1:56:55] The weight.
[1:56:56] The weight.
[1:56:56] That's correct.
[1:56:57] I got a count.
[1:56:58] I got a count.
[1:57:29] I'm not saying anything.
[1:57:32] Yeah.
[1:57:32] What?
[1:57:32] No, I have my course.
[1:57:34] I'm getting a good talent.
[1:57:35] Where do you live?
[1:57:36] We don't call it.
[1:57:37] I just, yeah.
[1:57:38] I don't get a good answer.
[1:57:39] I don't get a good answer.
[1:57:40] If you live that way, I say, where that's what?
[1:57:42] It's not just better when you have to do something urgent.
[1:57:45] This is where do I say where do you live?
[1:57:47] That's what we live by.
[1:57:48] I don't think we can see what goes about.
[1:57:50] Is that what we have to do?
[1:57:51] 6th and 9th and 12th.
[1:57:53] Okay, but it's a week.
[1:57:54] We just did it in the road.
[1:57:57] So you come out and you can't see if we can go the hill.
[1:58:01] Looking at my studies, I think we want to see that.
[1:58:05] Yeah, it's probably not the hill.
[1:58:07] It's probably, it's kind of of a strife, it's a term market or not.
[1:58:11] Yeah, it looks, it's the wood.
[1:58:14] I saw a genesis.
[1:58:16] I'll look at it.
[1:58:18] I think it's a bit of a dangerous thing.
[1:58:20] I think I remember that.
[1:58:56] It's what we're going to do, and it's what we're going to do.
[1:59:00] It's what we're going to do, and it's what we're going to do.
[1:59:00] It doesn't yet, we're good.
[1:59:02] We need to read your 9-day and 1-day.
[1:59:04] 9-50 is going to work in case of you at the junior high.
[1:59:07] And we're wrapping up all of this, and it looks like that.
[1:59:09] That's what it says.
[1:59:12] It's like a little cider.
[1:59:13] It's like a baby.
[1:59:14] That's interesting.
[1:59:16] Can you keep your hot pot, though?
[1:59:18] It's almost all the way down, but it needs to be better.
[1:59:21] That's the making, rather, of his time.
[1:59:23] Yeah.
[1:59:23] We should just deep that through the school, okay.
[1:59:27] All right, I think we're on the spot.
[1:59:31] Close the door.
[1:59:32] Close the door.
[1:59:32] They got a job here.
[1:59:33] It's a great job.
[1:59:36] To take the issues.
[1:59:37] You're going to have to read the list.
[1:59:39] Are you sending in now?
[1:59:40] I will.
[1:59:40] The box.
[1:59:41] I have no idea.
[1:59:42] It's not so nice.
[1:59:44] Or not.
[1:59:44] But
[1:59:58] let it warm.
[1:59:59] Yeah.
[2:05:01] I'm Harvest in the Court. Prepared in the chair,
[2:05:07] hospital, HC. I'll go toe to the tent. We have a city warm. I'm put solve court, ribbon cutting and police picnic at Geneva Park and five days in the M. State. Do we know who's coming down? Is the lawyer coming for that? The lawyer will be there. Mary, who's kind of there. Overall, she's been a little over her, because she'll be there. There will be some players there. Okay.
[2:05:34] They're trying to arrange the house and you use the soccer teams to come.
[2:05:39] So we're going to get into coverage on Harold with some pictures.
[2:05:42] Yeah, yeah, I imagine so for sure.
[2:05:45] Right. So it should be exciting.
[2:05:47] It's going to be, it's going to be pretty good.
[2:05:49] You can even get on a GB channel without one.
[2:05:51] You might be able to log 13.
[2:05:52] I think I'll love that.
[2:05:54] You too will be there for sure.
[2:05:58] I don't know, really.
[2:06:01] You said you too is playing here too.
[2:06:04] So October the 12th of the City of War and Waste Manage of Intelligent Truck, 10 to 2 p.m. took
[2:06:10] another tie and I appreciate all of you sent back when you were able to help surface appreciate that.
[2:06:17] That's always a great thing.
[2:06:18] Look forward to cooking $200,000.
[2:06:23] October the 12th of Utah Valley University,
[2:06:25] The President of the Scholarship all 531, the U.C.C.U. Center in the business trip.
[2:06:39] We have the library giving us their missionary work, the same name.
[2:06:49] We're from the Senate.
[2:06:49] I don't know if we have approval of the City Meeting minutes, October 27th and September
[2:06:55] 30th.
[2:06:56] Council work sessions do those 19 city managers appointments,
[2:07:04] maybe you want to mention anything
[2:07:09] One of them is an appointment of a planning commissioner.
[2:07:15] Hey, some.
[2:07:16] What kind of spot does he take?
[2:07:18] Take a moment.
[2:07:20] Okay, so there are moments when I'm coming on the time.
[2:07:22] I'm going to set a year.
[2:07:24] And I know he was chairman.
[2:07:26] So he comes obviously well-recommended as well as a lot of experience.
[2:07:32] And obviously this is a son or a long stage recorder.
[2:07:35] So you can be a great fit for the commission.
[2:07:40] Board of Building and Fire Code appeals has met.
[2:07:45] Three times in twice in 27 years,
[2:07:50] but there is a requirement that we staff that board it.
[2:07:53] So this is in a point three appointment of Mr. Frisbee
[2:07:56] to serve as a member of that committee.
[2:08:02] Okay.
[2:08:02] I have five questions to begin.
[2:08:05] Okay.
[2:08:06] Then we have an ordinance and many city code to reflect with change from department of the administrative services to the finance departments, and then we have a new finance department director, Brian and Malcolm.
[2:08:22] Yes, so both of these items are essentially formalizing changes within the administrative services department to the finance department, as well as brands and Queen and as the financial director.
[2:08:36] And is everybody good with those appointments, not only Brandon, but also as some of them
[2:08:43] does.
[2:08:44] Okay.
[2:08:45] I don't know step a bit.
[2:08:48] But he's being disappointed every 27 years.
[2:08:51] He must have done a good job.
[2:08:55] He's getting better.
[2:08:55] He'll be called in a circle.
[2:08:57] He knows he doesn't feel a little bit.
[2:09:00] Okay.
[2:09:01] And just so we know the city reporter will administer the office.
[2:09:06] Correct.
[2:09:06] the brand and the right after
[2:09:16] we've done a big force.
[2:09:18] Exactly.
[2:09:19] Promise to available.
[2:09:22] You don't cook in the books.
[2:09:25] OK.
[2:09:26] On our schedule items, first one is a public hearing.
[2:09:28] It's an ordinance.
[2:09:29] And then they appendix you, the arm sitting code,
[2:09:32] by updating the tree requirements and all zombies.
[2:09:36] Jason, you're a presenter.
[2:09:38] Because a few minor adjustments to the things
[2:09:40] in the district, the tree selection requirements,
[2:09:42] are standing a couple of trees in each of these.
[2:09:46] As in the type of tree, or a type of tree,
[2:09:49] We found there were a couple that were difficult to find, and this region, which we actually worked with ours for the first three months.
[2:09:57] One of them, he particularly wanted to plant along the way.
[2:10:12] Section 226-10I, and standard land use, code 4832, for water storage tanks, and the pennants A of the orange city code, pertaining to water storage tanks.
[2:10:26] So there's just the ability for the city, or since we've done a lot of that, it has to be a
[2:10:31] publicly obtained to build below the current, the elevation that we have on water tanks on the
[2:10:36] field, and the lighter of the two water tanks that we make, or maybe on the bigger
[2:10:41] vehicle.
[2:10:42] So this is the key to the ability attack.
[2:10:44] What does that allow us to acquire with the landscape at the end of that?
[2:10:48] So Jamie, any update on the water search tank situation?
[2:10:53] Yes.
[2:10:54] And I will defer to a break on that.
[2:10:57] Since I've ran in crisis, I feel I have the working on this.
[2:11:02] That deal.
[2:11:04] I continue to meet with that school.
[2:11:06] This chain of arms work.
[2:11:12] And we actually met with a new one in this week.
[2:11:18] And to this point, you've been doing some more details.
[2:11:21] And the appraisals on the different properties that we like to do.
[2:11:26] This is an exceptionally swap or trade in order to, ultimately,
[2:11:36] over the, I guess, the
[2:11:38] optimal location from a cost of 42 individuals that gets us close to the main line
[2:11:47] or four south, where those, the west,
[2:11:53] the fields, or the west,
[2:12:01] and that's the location
[2:12:02] that we've been, most are trying to work with them off and I'm sorry, short, Shane
[2:12:09] said that based off of there, I'm sure this question is between him, a superintendent, San
[2:12:15] And this is
[2:12:27] the tennis scores on the board last portion of the board and on the whole portion of property that is passed through Centennial from this area.
[2:12:38] I'm actually
[2:12:42] going to include an acreage amount of V2 less softball fields, less of a long-home entry.
[2:12:51] Looks like we'll work for them.
[2:12:53] Would there change in terms of course then?
[2:12:56] Now, so, the next steps would be to such a kind of paper this, and revise our joint
[2:13:04] commitments and use agreement for me with them and essentially ensure that each of us
[2:13:11] will still get existing usage of this, and so, then, I'm a sample of those aspects of the
[2:13:19] test scores. So, we still need to interrupt the paperwork.
[2:13:24] And you're saying water storage tanks with a net, are we talking vinegar and water for an hour or two for an hour or two?
[2:13:35] That's okay, that was a lot of land, 10 million gallons of water.
[2:13:40] Water, water tank, 40 hours.
[2:13:42] And here it is, trying to work separately their own touch.
[2:13:46] So they're not going to join in with them.
[2:13:48] No, not for this.
[2:13:50] They're looking appropriate to the form of two price.
[2:13:53] And timing, when we're looking at timing, as far as the pressure
[2:14:00] is concerned, you're
[2:14:02] on a
[2:14:06] property swap, as a single control that we're able to jump.
[2:14:11] Now, we have one kind of final hurdle with the federal government in just making sure that,
[2:14:18] from a land and conservation grant perspective, remember we received, we rewarded money
[2:14:24] of the 70s for the construction of parks,
[2:14:28] community parks, one of those parks.
[2:14:31] You've got to get there blessing to
[2:14:35] leave and talk about
[2:14:37] accelerating construction of the project
[2:14:40] and obviously starting to get down to the grass tax.
[2:14:48] Could we could even begin the engineering
[2:14:50] about that, that take
[2:14:55] behind moving ahead,
[2:14:59] quicker with it?
[2:15:00] Well, we still have an outstanding deficiency with the state of Utah and the state of state engineers office.
[2:15:08] And so this would allow us to essentially correct that deficiency sooner rather than later,
[2:15:16] but it would require, obviously, us to figure out the financing of the projects since the revenues to build it.
[2:15:29] And so this is changing the land in the space of land in the ocean,
[2:15:38] the plan would be to build the tank.
[2:15:41] But I mean here it says we're demanding the land.
[2:15:43] Yes, this is cementing it to allow the tank to go on that side.
[2:15:47] That's how it is.
[2:15:51] Okay.
[2:15:52] Then some 10.3 is public hearing on an ordinance.
[2:15:56] The applicant, your guests, the city,
[2:15:58] reads on the property look at 3505 West University Parkway
[2:16:03] from the R8 zone to the PD5 zone.
[2:16:06] And then the PD5 zone to the standard land use
[2:16:10] codes, 53, 55, or 33 gasoline service station
[2:16:15] with that sport has a permitted use.
[2:16:18] This land is the Central Utah Water
[2:16:21] and students to district corporate offices that have been sold and the new order is wanting to change the cell.
[2:16:30] They want to change the P-5 cell. They want to keep the office building with staff support.
[2:16:35] They also want to have a gas station management on the corner.
[2:16:40] And we're obviously opposed to that planning commission segment in that as well.
[2:16:43] They also recommend to now on the P-5 cell until we get a concept plan that benefits that including the office.
[2:16:51] So, a question, if I don't have any idea how anybody's going to vote, but if this did not go through this evening, and they wanted to come back with a new plan that gathered in support,
[2:17:06] they're okay doing that, going back to the planning commission.
[2:17:09] What does the venue plan to mean within the PD5?
[2:17:12] It was then the existing as a monitoring.
[2:17:15] They did yet.
[2:17:16] They put back.
[2:17:17] Well, it's an array of stuff.
[2:17:18] So whatever is it.
[2:17:19] Click on the array of them, we're not going to require a planning issue.
[2:17:23] But if they did also want to change the zone, they just come back and for you.
[2:17:28] I'm planning the commission.
[2:17:30] And the one recommendation is if the council is covered with PD5 is to continue the
[2:17:34] Resilm parts.
[2:17:39] Approved them.
[2:17:39] There's multiple options you can do.
[2:17:41] Our recommendation, if the council likes to be defied, is to continue that as an option.
[2:17:46] Let them come back with a concept plan that fits this out.
[2:17:50] Just for the point of clarification,
[2:17:53] if you as a council were, for example, to deny the P-5 7 tonight in,
[2:18:00] yeah, we can have to wait a certain period before a year she could return.
[2:18:05] And what has it not created in P-5?
[2:18:07] It's all in there.
[2:18:07] We have to re-apply with a different concept.
[2:18:11] of duties and everything, so.
[2:18:13] So you're talking about the Azure okay with the PG5 zone.
[2:18:17] You just are not recommending that it's the amended
[2:18:20] for a gas and the service station.
[2:18:23] But the other idea is to get a concept plan that is that area.
[2:18:26] In fact, we got it.
[2:18:27] You right, you know, I know that you're just saying if the Council
[2:18:30] didn't deny, but wanted to move ahead with denial of gasoline,
[2:18:35] but move ahead with your five zone.
[2:18:38] You see that as an option to see.
[2:18:40] That is an option. I think that we continue into a lot of them to come back in the concept of it's within the zone.
[2:18:47] No, it's a way to reason it until the concept of it works.
[2:18:51] Mary, did we have speed rules?
[2:18:52] Sure, yes.
[2:18:53] So just to, if you were to deny the PD5 zone tonight, then if they wanted to basically re-implive the PD5 zone,
[2:19:00] then they'd have to work here.
[2:19:02] But if they wanted to say, if you applied for the C2 zone or a different PD zone, then they could do that without having to do it.
[2:19:09] And how does that play in with what you're seeing that they want to do with the better
[2:19:16] to improve the PD zone, five zones tonight?
[2:19:22] And then, you know, deny the amendment as far as the service station, and then they can come
[2:19:28] back with the new plan.
[2:19:31] I know, yeah.
[2:19:32] I speak from south to the perfect world.
[2:19:33] I think we continue the option for the reason.
[2:19:36] and have a lot of you cut back on the concept,
[2:19:38] and fit it in the zone.
[2:19:40] So continue to resolve towards the PD-5 zone, right?
[2:19:45] So, no, it's just going to start this.
[2:19:46] So, not tonight, or a man of anything,
[2:19:50] he just continuing to go in and we're not trying it.
[2:19:53] Okay, it gets the fact that we think it's a problem.
[2:19:55] Go to PD-5 zone,
[2:19:59] we don't want to go to the church.
[2:20:01] If we were looking towards that direction, maybe just continue the whole process. Well, two or later day.
[2:20:06] Tonight, the one part, that's the so-called pastoral part.
[2:20:10] But they continue the reason part of that.
[2:20:13] And back with the different costs.
[2:20:14] But the mayor might be jumping in, maybe it would be appropriate to talk to the applicant about that,
[2:20:18] because they are not interested in doing that.
[2:20:20] No, I'm just trying to go ahead.
[2:20:22] How do you deny the amendments when you're then continuing?
[2:20:30] Continuing with the concept of it.
[2:20:37] You would potentially encourage the applicant.
[2:20:40] You're curious the applicant.
[2:20:44] No, no, I have that part.
[2:20:45] I'm just wondering if we're not amendmenting the PD5 zone,
[2:20:50] and then we're saying we wanted to deny the service station,
[2:20:54] which is part of it.
[2:20:55] But I guess you've denied that on the land use code period.
[2:20:59] Right, I wanted to add that in the
[2:21:04] PD5.
[2:21:05] Continue the reason for it.
[2:21:06] I could have it as a two-step promotion, especially if you don't have the entire.
[2:21:16] I wasn't planning to mission because that's my assignment.
[2:21:18] They were not.
[2:21:19] The hotel was seen like it was pretty meanable to them.
[2:21:23] They were certainly worried about egress and ingress with the gas station.
[2:21:28] There was also a comment about beautiful view and looking at the valley.
[2:21:32] And they really wanted something that would be nicer.
[2:21:35] I don't know if it was that meant.
[2:21:36] machine now, down more toward the front end or they were not big on the gas.
[2:21:43] I didn't see a lot of pushback on the helicopter.
[2:21:46] So, yeah, if perspective, we feel that one of the prime locations in the entire city
[2:21:53] that's loved even, even, you carry one of the best locations in the city area.
[2:22:03] What we learned going through all these processes is that we need to hold out to get what we want,
[2:22:08] you don't need a cell. And so if we think there's an iron battery usage, you don't
[2:22:13] learn to take advantage of the UVX patient in college, the proximity of the freeway of
[2:22:17] the views, we should go back for that. That's a word of staff's coming from which is what
[2:22:21] what's done. We think of this as an ideal that it doesn't matter if it's on top of what's
[2:22:27] there right now. Let's get a hotel. Well, you can still have a hotel too. Parking is a challenge,
[2:22:33] but we've been offered a priority instead of gas station. So there you have an office complex
[2:22:39] there. And that would be to continue on with that. And instead of putting a
[2:22:45] Maverick on University of Parkway, the idea of putting either an office building,
[2:22:50] or maybe even a hotel on University of Parkway, and that may be putting
[2:22:54] apartments behind it. Or I think there's that we're not advertising for that. Okay,
[2:22:59] so I thought there's a discussion also of maybe doing a mixed use with the
[2:23:04] conversation underneath. Yeah, we would suppose we tell you we just feel. So we're talking
[2:23:10] city there. Are we talking in office space? Are we talking mixed use with the hotel? It could
[2:23:16] be mixed use with retail, I mean for office about it. Or anti-alpha? Or anti-alpha? Or anti-alpha?
[2:23:21] Or anti-alpha? Or anti-alpha? Or anti-alpha? And if they wanted to do some housing in the remainder
[2:23:28] important and that's up to the council we have and we're
[2:23:33] we can't even have to create a district.
[2:23:38] We have to create a district.
[2:23:40] We have to keep our men the people.
[2:23:44] Just put that in that.
[2:23:46] We have to keep our men the people.
[2:23:49] She mentioned that.
[2:23:50] Well, you have a student.
[2:23:51] That's all.
[2:23:51] It's all in the name of it.
[2:23:53] But yeah, I'm sure they're right to do it.
[2:23:55] We're sorry.
[2:24:00] It's all in the name of the city.
[2:24:01] I can't create a new pdf.
[2:24:14] If you couldn't
[2:24:18] create a new piece of it because it's currently on our eight,
[2:24:24] it's the best attention sign.
[2:24:29] With everything said, it always has to cancel out.
[2:24:32] And the applicant has told me that it doesn't cancel out to have a office space.
[2:24:37] That is,
[2:24:40] I might be wrong.
[2:24:49] Well, they're not discussing that.
[2:24:51] There's two parts to a problem.
[2:24:53] That part, I think everybody's that I remember on.
[2:24:55] It's the other parts of the website.
[2:24:57] That's part of the discussion.
[2:25:00] And the applicant's here. So, I don't know if you want to mention it.
[2:25:05] I think it took a bit.
[2:25:06] Sure.
[2:25:06] We would like to thank everybody.
[2:25:10] I'll make it really quick.
[2:25:14] We have a little bit.
[2:25:15] My name is Leslie Naskar. I'm a threat development group. I work so closely with your staff.
[2:25:20] And then I'll sort of reach out to you every council member and also the mayor.
[2:25:24] So, I'm just so grateful for all your feedback and I'm looking forward to the additional feedback that we'll receive tonight.
[2:25:30] This is a site that we're really excited about, and we want to do something special with the site.
[2:25:37] We're currently working with Maverick, and then we also want to build our own hotel.
[2:25:45] We will be working with either a Maria or a Hilton to locate at this particular location.
[2:25:52] And we've already started those conversations and we've purchased this property at a very high expense
[2:26:00] and it averages about $30 to $32 a squared.
[2:26:05] But typically with all the space, the most that you're going to pay for land only.
[2:26:11] It is 16, maybe up to $18 a squared squared maximum.
[2:26:16] And so since we're already into the property at such a high size, it makes it very difficult to
[2:26:24] build office space, and then something else to consider, it is that there really isn't any kind of
[2:26:30] a tenant that is waiting for us to build this office space.
[2:26:34] Right now we have tenants in place for the particular uses that we have on site.
[2:26:40] And so that's very important that we move forward with the concept that we have.
[2:26:45] But with that being said, we would love to hear all of the feedback that you have for
[2:26:49] it.
[2:26:50] But we would like to be forward with a project that is obviously unfeasible in the will work
[2:26:56] for us.
[2:26:57] It's something that is in the staff's presentation, the note is that there is a report that
[2:27:02] suggests to 200,000 square feet of classmate office space.
[2:27:06] And there are a few issues associated with that, and we're one of those that necessarily
[2:27:10] intended.
[2:27:11] I'm in place for that.
[2:27:12] We're already into the purchase prices, such a high rate, and then also parking becomes
[2:27:17] a very big issue.
[2:27:18] I believe the parking requirement for this particular zone is one parking solver 250 square feet.
[2:27:27] And so that would yield roughly 800 parking stalls.
[2:27:30] And so, the cost, as opposed to the parking, and then also the land values, it just makes a offset office based and feasible.
[2:27:39] And then, able to reach out to a few council members.
[2:27:43] Some of the things that we've discussed, the includes a few P.S.iders, may be our restaurant at the corner.
[2:27:51] Also, the hotel obviously our preferences to be informed with this site layout that we have.
[2:27:57] But as I mentioned earlier, we're open to hearing good solid suggestions as well.
[2:28:05] Okay.
[2:28:05] I think one of the additional concerns is access to the property, and per you access to
[2:28:13] that as part of what we need to come up with for it.
[2:28:17] So the cannot access to the person's property, which also is a concern.
[2:28:26] I think the changing of the light to the clients is that something's for the time or something.
[2:28:32] the timing of this idea. Is that something that, as we've done, that would be a
[2:28:38] poll question or a crisp question, or something.
[2:28:40] If you're not cellulating, you're just saying it.
[2:28:44] Now only, if you don't have an expensive studies with the white need of the
[2:28:48] part way, the addition of the UBS, the bus system, and they're not going to change the
[2:28:55] timing because of the American hotel.
[2:29:04] I appreciate the question we will also offer
[2:29:06] traffic into there at end of the meeting later.
[2:29:11] Any other questions?
[2:29:15] So, again, we'll talk
[2:29:20] to both of you.
[2:29:25] More than anything tonight.
[2:29:28] If you do think that decision,
[2:29:31] I would like you to express
[2:29:34] on one other options that you would like to see.
[2:29:37] Sure.
[2:29:39] I think it's important to know mayor
[2:29:41] that we can vary up from the developer from day one and this process of stuff is turning
[2:29:47] out for us to do better and better, and we can ensure so that the parkway was developed
[2:29:53] in a way, the community stores were not allowed to ensure that we had higher taxes in the
[2:30:00] So I'm fine with that. What do you see? I mean, if office space doesn't pencil, I actually want to do so.
[2:30:10] So they said that they thought the government had to have opportunities for office funds.
[2:30:19] So I guess we need the same bottom line as the price of the paying for the property with their financial model doesn't pencil.
[2:30:28] And I think it's a good thing.
[2:30:37] The venerance of the CS study, though, to show how it works with the off-site.
[2:30:43] Well, we do have a study designed to make it for the UTA Corps,
[2:30:46] or for the POV, and that's what the slide and the presentation talks about.
[2:30:50] How they see this in the location for
[2:30:55] two days.
[2:30:55] Yeah.
[2:30:56] Stay with.
[2:30:56] Just right with the existing building.
[2:31:00] A lot of job was not made clear in the study.
[2:31:18] You have to tell stories.
[2:31:34] To go about 10 11 12.
[2:31:40] He could do it for
[2:31:47] about her building the stairs,
[2:31:51] not the name is, the inventory, in order to purchase the one story of some of those things.
[2:32:11] Stay at Rasky.
[2:32:12] As I went through the proposal, there were about four in attendance at the neighborhood meeting and they really liked the proposal
[2:32:21] because the buildings are a little bit lower than what they're hoping to see.
[2:32:26] I believe in the ordinance in the lawsuit to 48 feet.
[2:32:30] But the fact that we have a four-story hotel we've offsetted from the closest residential property line about a hundred to a hundred and twenty feet, and so they really appreciate it that kind of end.
[2:32:44] Did you bring in the hospital and the apartments?
[2:32:47] No.
[2:32:48] Because that hasn't been our proposal.
[2:32:50] We've been working so closely with Maverick, and then we really want to provide a hotel at this location.
[2:32:56] we think it's ideal to help support UVVs, sporting events, also graduations, and it's
[2:33:03] so close to the BRT line, that if you can go all the way up to BYU and support those
[2:33:09] events as well, we also know that the convenience store is a fantastic supporting use to
[2:33:15] the hotel, just because it is open 24 hours, and those who are staying within the hotel
[2:33:22] If there are any kind of amenities that they have forgotten, they can easily go to the convenience store to pick up anything that they need.
[2:33:31] Now the convenience store is different than the gas station.
[2:33:35] Yes, so a convenience store is basically...
[2:33:38] Right, no, I know where it is.
[2:33:40] But you're looking at it without the gas station.
[2:33:43] No, our proposal is to include the gas pumps.
[2:33:47] What makes the difference, we can push the building up to University Parkway so that you do have that presence of a building and then push the dispensers towards the rear.
[2:34:00] On the end, we would love to install some type of a nice pumpkin part for the passengers riding the BRT line so that they can attain any fresh amenities on the disease for offers.
[2:34:15] and they don't have additional TV, including buy lives, those types of things.
[2:34:20] It's actually a great use for the VRT like this.
[2:34:23] So Ryan, looking at that as the most jealous on the University of Parkway and it is enough
[2:34:30] scale of a hotel that they put the convenience store at the bottom as a mixed use facility with
[2:34:36] pumps to the rear, what do you thought?
[2:34:39] When we get talk to them about doing a mixed use building on the corner with the convenience
[2:34:42] and the volume of the pumps to back and we're not opposed to that.
[2:34:47] And we think office goes better with that.
[2:34:49] I understand that I'm just good at it.
[2:34:52] But keeping in mind, one, two, up in that gas station,
[2:34:55] you're going to want it.
[2:34:56] I'm going to want one in the parking lot.
[2:34:59] Well, she's going to probably let me out.
[2:35:06] We have to open up the whole parkway if we want just one of those issues.
[2:35:12] I'm sure you're going to amend those part of the project.
[2:35:14] If you didn't, those are underutilized and apart from you.
[2:35:18] There's a bunch of different ones.
[2:35:20] So that could open up the real count of words.
[2:35:22] I mean, Annaburn is a bad side that was recently done.
[2:35:24] A quite a low-cosm impact side.
[2:35:26] There's a bunch of impact side side.
[2:35:28] They've built the gas station.
[2:35:29] Could easily go and ask for permission to cooperate.
[2:35:32] Do the same fact of the access on this approach.
[2:35:35] Or simply.
[2:35:39] The biggest hurdle for me, and we talked about this,
[2:35:42] It was just even just the objects that have a gas station right next to one of our
[2:35:47] random transit stops.
[2:35:49] I protected it at a workshop last week that you will see tea about transit oriented
[2:35:53] design and one of the things that we were discussing is that land immediately becomes
[2:36:04] wasting.
[2:36:08] It makes all the rest of it harder to deal with it.
[2:36:11] So if you had like a mixed use facility where you don't necessarily have to have as
[2:36:20] high
[2:36:20] Well,
[2:36:40] we realize how closely
[2:37:14] it is.
[2:37:15] That also matches
[2:37:18] the place of the convenience store, or initially we would love the convenience store.
[2:37:24] But I mean, I'm not, we're all saying convenience store is a gas station, and a convenience store.
[2:37:38] I've stated marriage before,
[2:37:41] and I guess it
[2:37:48] should be.
[2:37:49] I think it was Councilman Lens, and the best of my knowledge and effort doesn't have a convenience store.
[2:37:58] without the gas pumps, there's only one thing happening.
[2:38:01] You could go to somebody else.
[2:38:02] And that sounds totally, but that is their worst operating store.
[2:38:07] The effect is kind of a joke around.
[2:38:09] But I see the merits, for example, that have convenience stores,
[2:38:13] not related to America, but convenience store on the main level,
[2:38:18] and it works very well, very well in use.
[2:38:27] Any other comments?
[2:38:30] Let's move on then.
[2:38:31] Thank you.
[2:38:31] The next one is probably hearing the African request to city and men who go on to the general plan on approximately
[2:38:39] 16.72 acres of property located generally at 1577 South Geneva Road.
[2:38:47] The low density residential designation to the median density residential designation.
[2:38:55] And Jason, do you have a piece of around that?
[2:38:58] So we worked with Mr. McDowell, four or five months ago,
[2:39:03] and I asked him to bring the general plan forward
[2:39:05] without the PD zone, to see what the appetite is in California.
[2:39:09] Obviously, a staff based on the decisions that have made
[2:39:12] by the council in 2015, was annexed.
[2:39:15] The general plan for the place is a single family of density.
[2:39:19] On the east side and then the light and industrial on the west side.
[2:39:24] This is for you tonight to see what the question is.
[2:39:28] If it's doable, it's feasible.
[2:39:30] Our opinion is the panic question.
[2:39:31] I have a recommendation that stays in the way it is to the record.
[2:39:35] The other option, I guess we consider is looking at the APRD,
[2:39:40] which this is for both of
[2:39:42] the PD's owners proposed in 11.6, and I'm pretty sure that the council chooses to do this
[2:39:47] as me to dance.
[2:39:48] They will be back before you with this PD's own, quite a 11.6 year parade here.
[2:39:52] I don't know that we're necessarily opposed, but the way that this structure is done with them.
[2:39:58] Yeah, I have to pay, I have a P allows.
[2:40:00] In fact, fees and stuff, in our system was done at the time of the annexation of the resounds. The density was at 4.3 units per acre, and that's kind of the path that we've been going down.
[2:40:12] The design of the lift stations and all I were based on that density.
[2:40:15] So, for the council to change that direction, that's, I don't know if that's an issue.
[2:40:20] In fact, as we need to change this plan, it's going forward with the upsizing in a different design, you know, with capacity, the sewer, the capacity of the lift stations.
[2:40:31] That's the direction we use on that, because the design that we're going down is called this.
[2:40:37] So, when you say changing into a PRD zone, how many units per year around that?
[2:40:42] So, a PRD zone allows up to max 10 to 7.
[2:40:46] If they have homes on a property that they take out, they get a bonus of 3.
[2:40:51] So, a maximum of 8 units per year.
[2:40:53] Right now, PRDs are developing around 6 to less.
[2:40:55] And the medium density is how many units per acre?
[2:41:01] So the PRD and the medium density are pretty close, pretty close.
[2:41:06] We still recommend if the council chooses to go down the PRD realm
[2:41:09] as we look at the plants and different lift stations to see that.
[2:41:15] If we do this PRD, then I'm chances are other PRDs are going to come
[2:41:18] in that area to make sure that there's these.
[2:41:21] So that, of course, yeah, I was going to say how do you move forward or look at doing what that, if you don't even know what to be supported or not supported.
[2:41:31] And there are changing direction of what we, what we really started.
[2:41:35] Right, so if we don't have a show, if we take a little bit of a risk intervention, if we have a designated now and change that to a medium density.
[2:41:41] So A, that's right, perversus forward.
[2:41:43] And we look at our plans to see whether we need to increase that capacity.
[2:41:46] whether that's a redesign of lift stations,
[2:41:49] but that's a place like this.
[2:41:51] I think that that's what we look at before we go down.
[2:41:54] So this is essentially where Council,
[2:41:56] this decision tonight is essentially a tipping point.
[2:41:59] The decision, if, in fact, the decision,
[2:42:02] the city council was,
[2:42:06] or the NDR designation,
[2:42:09] and that would essentially
[2:42:17] utility,
[2:42:41] care of making it
[2:42:46] absurd is,
[2:42:53] and report NDR,
[2:42:54] and that's going to require us to revisit
[2:42:56] But
[2:43:01] that's what brings the question to me is
[2:43:06] how to play the change in this when we had no idea what the costs are
[2:43:09] have
[2:43:13] that information first on the forum we would consider.
[2:43:17] That's our point.
[2:43:18] If we want to go to that row, we continue to
[2:43:26] say, well, I think you have capacity, but he's saying,
[2:43:28] let's take it from the places, stick it in light of element and that's in the future.
[2:43:35] But I'm just saying personally, I'm not comfortable making any changes unless I know what the ramifications and costs are.
[2:43:42] So it seems to me like we want to have all that information first prior to
[2:43:47] Commander-in-Chief and Commander-in-Chief, and less-meared that there's
[2:43:55] that's a comfortable witness
[2:44:06] and that's true
[2:44:11] We want to make the change for all four and we can do that
[2:44:14] But it's going to take some time to go to that process because
[2:44:28] property there that's not in our
[2:44:37] Our shooter cells of the cookers are not looking forward
[2:44:41] Billet now, which is cheaper to build now than you build later. So that was my point one of the things we talked with the property
[2:44:52] of the future
[2:44:53] perspective.
[2:45:00] And we tried to take that into account, we tried to say, but we're not suggesting you have to develop, but if you ever want to be part of this into the future, it's probably a good idea that you get it on the ground floor.
[2:45:14] I mean, when they pass on, I mean, the kids probably have a cell, and yeah, we're on the two main property owners that we're referring to, basically, we're adamant that they didn't want any apartments.
[2:45:24] They're decision, you know, and we have to see, you know, what would the cost be if we upgraded whatever, so we could include that for future.
[2:45:32] What is the cost?
[2:45:33] But when I talk about it, I think that we went with a day should go plan, really, who's
[2:45:41] paying for that infrastructure, we would build now for those people who don't want to
[2:45:47] be in their cities.
[2:45:51] Every one of our residents would pay for infrastructure, but it's
[2:45:54] sitting there waiting for someone who didn't want to be in our city to come.
[2:46:02] And that's why
[2:46:02] I would assign it to an appointment the way we go on.
[2:46:06] So I'm kind of to keep one that maybe you guys are going to invest that out of there.
[2:46:08] There's two left stations in it, right by the part.
[2:46:13] And actually, the describing feeds, two of those left stations that live sent to them.
[2:46:18] Certain, those are under-designed right now.
[2:46:20] And it's based on how to capacity the 4.3 of that area.
[2:46:23] If we change that, now that's a design that hasn't been started,
[2:46:27] that now is the time to decide if those get upgraded beyond what they're doing.
[2:46:31] And any increase of that, see what was that, that was gone.
[2:46:35] And it's turned the air under the side
[2:46:39] of the air.
[2:46:39] One pass the air to the sea.
[2:46:40] So this is a pivotal point of changing.
[2:46:42] And that was the time to decide.
[2:46:44] Because once people don't have that road,
[2:46:45] a design is now, so we change it.
[2:46:47] It's kind of,
[2:46:49] because it's like, you know,
[2:46:50] we bought it in the Jordan Island, which ever
[2:46:52] is at night, to which
[2:46:56] it's not great.
[2:46:59] And I have a question about the men's self-romptory.
[2:47:01] What was the density on that one,
[2:47:04] and how many per acre?
[2:47:05] They're around six.
[2:47:11] So would be something like that,
[2:47:12] that we've already been there with that
[2:47:16] It is a PD, but it is a person
[2:47:21] restrictions if you recall in the PRD, they can have two stories or they can have a basement again at both.
[2:47:26] There are some restrictions in the PRD, but that's a crime.
[2:47:31] It wouldn't be able to build with a
[2:47:39] PRD would go.
[2:47:49] Yeah, another thing is the traffic issue.
[2:47:52] Looking at the density that he's
[2:47:58] waiting more than that, because they're not anywhere close.
[2:48:05] they have one axis,
[2:48:09] one their concept plan,
[2:48:10] a future road to the North.
[2:48:13] If those roads, for those properties take,
[2:48:19] take a line to develop, or we can't require public roads
[2:48:24] to go through, because they keep their existing zone,
[2:48:32] we have a development that can really
[2:48:34] can't reasonably be served by one axis.
[2:48:40] Other properties be zoned at the same time,
[2:48:43] so we can have a master, so we can have a grid network
[2:48:46] of roads.
[2:49:00] We had to throw it to the north, we knew it was going to connect in a respite all about a time.
[2:49:05] Throw it to the south, the same thing.
[2:49:07] Maybe we should say, okay, there's only a certain portion that you can develop until those rows go through.
[2:49:15] It did just go ahead and re-zone the property.
[2:49:37] It's always fine right now.
[2:49:38] All right.
[2:49:39] So yeah, I didn't be pretty small with
[2:49:47] that.
[2:50:02] And the developer has laid out the road network and how it would be for a grave. So I don't know how the units it would be unless we have submitted on the blending staff or the developer layout of what it already would look like.
[2:50:35] So that's an assuming they liked the PRR-A, that's a good use of government in the R-A, that would be a PR-A.
[2:50:44] So my question, if you much of PR-B, do we have all human, will we currently have?
[2:50:52] I mean, what you're saying to me, this might trigger everything.
[2:50:55] We don't want to look at it to see if we have that capacity.
[2:50:58] or although I need to do right now, that's when we designed it and we designed it as an
[2:51:02] harmony, so even if it's greater than that.
[2:51:05] I have a lot of planning that Sam said that it can accommodate this one area, we just can
[2:51:10] accommodate the rest of it.
[2:51:11] Maybe I'm this.
[2:51:11] Well, you could.
[2:51:12] Yeah.
[2:51:12] You want to decide when you're only going to do this, but that's kind of goes to that.
[2:51:16] That's not a fair necessity.
[2:51:18] If I'm the property owner of the South, and now I want to prepare the, well, you're already
[2:51:21] used your density throughout life.
[2:51:23] I think the judge was part of the argument that he came in at annexing time, and that's
[2:51:26] I was part of this thing, and so he was kind of there initially, so you can start even with being
[2:51:31] a person.
[2:51:32] I was there.
[2:51:33] I was there.
[2:51:35] So I don't know if the argument he's making is a five-first in line.
[2:51:40] I think it's.
[2:51:40] I get to take everybody else's stance.
[2:51:43] I'm going to try to think he's probably.
[2:51:44] So if he takes it, I'm going to take it.
[2:51:46] So even though you may be, you may be a third in line.
[2:51:50] So our point of view, we decided to do the same move down the purity route.
[2:51:53] that aren't in fairness and look at the whole area and make sure that we're okay with that
[2:51:57] dense and that we're not.
[2:51:59] And that's the question.
[2:52:01] A lot of the background of the world plans where we want to stay throughout the course of the
[2:52:04] arts for keeping the province.
[2:52:05] That doesn't look to happen.
[2:52:07] If we go down the PRD route and we need to give us time and do the course of the time.
[2:52:11] That's going to be kind of a sad amount of time.
[2:52:14] You need to review that.
[2:52:19] Just the impact key process along to adjusting back key.
[2:52:23] probably the five or six months, seven months, and it would come in a cost too.
[2:52:28] We could call it fewer than seven months, but we also lost a period of time.
[2:52:33] So I'll take a little next step.
[2:52:34] Let's direct any other direction of the count.
[2:52:38] You're good.
[2:52:39] We're plenty of energy content here, and this is a well, as I said, the union here, I'm going to
[2:52:42] expect to talk more about the big about this.
[2:52:45] This is a big piece of pot in South Westland, with 1,000, 200 big prices to do in the pot.
[2:52:52] And when you change the density, then you're giving that one property a figure piece of that fire to endure it.
[2:52:58] Whereas the others can, if they're trying to see the small pieces of the cost, as if the fire is in this certain size.
[2:53:05] And a chemical liquor, this do that I have to pay.
[2:53:08] You're making me hungry.
[2:53:09] I shouldn't coat it like you're buying.
[2:53:11] But I just went to that fire.
[2:53:13] We have a big, big fire here.
[2:53:15] We want to say that we're going to go down the aisle.
[2:53:17] And then we say, go up the mean piece of that piece.
[2:53:20] Then we're doing this.
[2:53:21] We'll give you some, maybe, not a fair understanding, perhaps a unfair understanding, but
[2:53:26] because it's a fair understanding.
[2:53:28] So, we will all have the opportunity to ask.
[2:53:30] General, you really can't have your time.
[2:53:33] You can't have your time.
[2:53:33] You can't have your time.
[2:53:35] All right.
[2:53:37] Thank you, Jane.
[2:53:38] You don't want anything to say?
[2:53:39] No, just want to recognize.
[2:53:41] We won't have another meeting.
[2:53:43] It's 30 minutes in the month.
[2:53:45] I can't speak for Spencer as birthday.
[2:53:48] So, we joined.
[2:53:48] We didn't buy to all the joint, but he doesn't even have access to accounts with Spencer.
[2:53:53] Well, I'd care it's a salary.
[2:53:55] And if you did, you did, you did a job in the size.
[2:53:58] He only has some of the people who have held accounts with me.
[2:54:01] No, no, no.
[2:54:02] So, all right, let's go ahead and have a look.
[2:54:05] We've overachered.
[2:54:06] You should have come to the end.
[2:54:08] I'll just go.
[2:54:09] I'll just go.
[2:54:10] I'll go.
[2:58:32] If we could have everyone come forward to start our meeting,
[2:59:32] tacky, do you want to let us know when you're ready?
[3:01:30] Yes, we are. We're waiting for a cannery issue, Tom.
[3:04:56] We're going to go to high school from 10 until 2.
[3:05:00] And on October the 12th also we have the Utah Valley University President's scholarship ball at the UCCU Center at 530 PM.
[3:05:15] We now would like to invite the Library Advisory Commission to come forward and provide to us an annual update of their activities.
[3:05:31] And, Charles, we've done in the past if we could have everybody introduce themselves.
[3:05:38] I might mention that Councilmember McDonald is not here with us in person, but he is on the speaker and is listening in and participating.
[3:05:50] Tom, can you hear us?
[3:05:55] Well, it's my understanding. He's there somewhere.
[3:06:03] Okay, glad to have you here.
[3:06:06] Charles, once you go ahead.
[3:06:13] Do you want to turn that on? I don't think that's on.
[3:06:19] Sorry about that.
[3:06:21] Susan Stratton is the chairperson of the Library Advisory Commission and she was not able to
[3:06:25] be here tonight, but Marcia Sernie is our vice chair and she is here.
[3:06:29] I will let them introduce themselves, but we also are missing tonight.
[3:06:33] Terry Potsmith, she's just finished her second term on the Library Advisory Commission and she is
[3:06:38] out of town and she's going to be retiring from the commission, but we appreciate her service.
[3:06:42] And we also just wanted to recognize Councilmember Seastrand.
[3:06:46] He's been our council liaison this year, and we'd appreciate it working with him, so I'll just let them go ahead.
[3:06:56] Okay, make sure it's on. There you go.
[3:06:58] I'm Marcia Sernie. I'm Courtney Burns.
[3:07:03] I'm James Jones.
[3:07:06] I want to turn that one on. I know.
[3:07:08] Ken Bonnie.
[3:07:10] Mary's still all Richards.
[3:07:12] Okay,
[3:07:16] so who wants to go first?
[3:07:20] First off, we're excited to be as members of the Library Advisory Commission to
[3:07:25] present.
[3:07:25] As we firmly believe that when libraries succeed, communities succeed, and we're proud
[3:07:31] to present some of the successes we've had this past year, if we could.
[3:07:41] And so I'd like to report on our Centennial Theme Summer Reading program.
[3:07:46] This year we had nearly 3,200 participants, and also 640 families comprised of that.
[3:07:54] We had 17 various activities, and on the next slide, we'll illustrate what some of those activities were,
[3:08:00] with 3300 over 3300 and total of then attendance. And we received a lot of positive feedback,
[3:08:08] 93.3%, and we're kind of convinced that the other 7% must have misunderstood the survey question.
[3:08:16] But we received a lot of very valuable feedback to make the next next year's summer reading
[3:08:21] program and even bigger success. And I'll say it's a show that when young there is that summer
[3:08:29] slump that when a student neglect reading during the summer there tends to be a fall off a drop off
[3:08:38] that has to be made up at the start of the year. So we're pleased with so many schools, 93 different
[3:08:44] schools participated in a summer reading program, and with Cascade Elementary leading the way.
[3:08:52] And on this next slide it just shows different events that we had, and again you can
[3:08:56] see that a lot of the community engagement came out of this, and a lot of fun, and it
[3:09:02] helped cement the armed public library as the community anchor of Oram.
[3:09:11] It's a nice segue into something that I'd like to speak to for just a second, and that
[3:09:16] is that one of the great things about our library here in Oram is that it serves so many different
[3:09:22] populations and ages.
[3:09:27] And one of those age groups are the offerings for teens. And
[3:09:33] just looking behind me, I noticed that we have at least one young person in the, well, not
[3:09:38] that anyone else is old, but there's one scout out there. And one of the great opportunities for
[3:09:45] young people in the community is to get involved with some of these teen offerings at the library.
[3:09:51] There's a very active teen library council that allows young people to develop leadership skills.
[3:10:00] And that, in addition to those opportunities, the collection itself geared to young people, the YA offerings, is vast and circulates a lot.
[3:10:20] Maybe I'll just, well, one of the things that I should mention is that I think that the
[3:10:26] library does a great job of collaborating with our partners in the community.
[3:10:30] I work at Orum High School and frequently we benefit from the outreach from the public
[3:10:37] library, the teen librarians, visit our different departments at the High School, publicizing
[3:10:45] the programming and the events that are being hosted,
[3:10:49] and like Ken mentioned, many of our students
[3:10:51] can take advantage of the summer offerings when we're closed.
[3:10:55] If we could just go to the next slide,
[3:10:57] there are a few photos here of some of the teen events
[3:11:02] of the past year, the one on the left in particular
[3:11:06] was very popular, a game night.
[3:11:10] And kind of focused on some role-playing games and very well attended as our many of these events for teens.
[3:11:24] All right, I'm going to talk a little bit about library trends.
[3:11:29] At our library, we continue to have a desire for connectivity.
[3:11:37] So individuals and families want to be able to come to the library and connect with each other and with others.
[3:11:43] and we have some examples of some of those things that the library provides for our individuals
[3:11:49] and families in the community such as the toddler programs and allowing parents after
[3:11:55] those programs to be able to interact and socialize with each other.
[3:12:00] We have groups that meet in the library such as the Pins and Needles Handywork Group, which
[3:12:06] is a long time group that has met in the library that offers opportunities for individuals
[3:12:16] with hobbies and other needs such as that to meet together in a space and to be able to work
[3:12:21] on those skills or learn those skills if they're new to them. We have an increased interest
[3:12:31] that we are meeting with hands-on classes, the individuals and families want to come to the
[3:12:38] library and learn how to do things, and we see that in the maker's space as well as with
[3:12:44] other programs such as quilting and sourdough starter and other things like that that we are offering
[3:12:51] in a library that allow our patrons to come and learn in a hands-on manner. We are also
[3:12:59] have been increased interest in our community of family activities activities that they can come
[3:13:04] and do as an entire family. And we have a wide range of opportunities of programming and
[3:13:14] activities that they can come and do that. We are of course also seeing just an increase in
[3:13:20] interest in use of the maker space. And there is a picture of one of the activities that they did
[3:13:27] using the 3D printer and one of the things that we're looking at and doing in the
[3:13:34] makers faces both creating opportunities for open lab for individuals who know
[3:13:40] how to use the space to come in and use it but also creating some modules that
[3:13:45] people who don't know how to use a 3D printer or some of the other equipment can
[3:13:50] come in and watch a short video and then kind of have that step by step walk them
[3:13:55] through how to use the equipment in the makerspace so that that can be available to all levels
[3:14:02] of interest.
[3:14:04] E-books and E-Audio continue to be massively popular with our library.
[3:14:10] We've got just a little over 28,000 checkouts each month, so massively popular programming
[3:14:21] there for opportunities there.
[3:14:23] And then passive programming is another thing that is a great interest in our community that's
[3:14:28] programming that individuals and families can come and do not at a specific time, but at a time
[3:14:35] that works for them, where they can come and check out a book bag with an activity in it,
[3:14:41] where they can come and participate during the summer reading, there was a town city building
[3:14:50] project, they could come and create their own buildings on their own schedule and then contribute
[3:14:55] that into the to the city that was being built. So that was...
[3:15:00] That's a nice opportunity that we give to patrons who may not always be able to come specifically during the times that our programs are set.
[3:15:09] And then, just a little bit of a look at some of the most popular things that are being checked out from a library where the crowd adzing is the most popular fiction book that has been checked out,
[3:15:22] be coming by Michelle Obama's, the most popular non-fiction, our most popular DVD, is Mary Poppins Returns.
[3:15:31] That is currently the most popular we expect Avengers Endgame to take that lead not too far in the future.
[3:15:41] And then the most popular picture book that is being checked out is the Good Egg.
[3:15:47] The library also plays a very important role in the cultural life of Forum.
[3:15:53] And as you'll see on these next three slides, this is everything from concerts of all types.
[3:15:58] Joe McQueen, who was a hundred-year-old jazz musician who had been living in Utah for 75 years, performed as dead contouring.
[3:16:09] And we'll see on the next slide, we had community performances, everything from Alice and Wonderland to the Nutcracker,
[3:16:16] and in the next slide, we can see that we had off of visits and readings.
[3:16:23] Of the only things, we also had a chemistry magic show, a UV puppetry presentation,
[3:16:30] and a jazz quartet, the Turtle Island quartet.
[3:16:33] His appearance came as a result of the grant that the library wrote.
[3:16:37] While most performers of
[3:16:49] the important thing is that the library is not just a place to check out books,
[3:16:53] but it's also a place to become culturally literate as well.
[3:17:01] And the big project of the year was the beginning
[3:17:04] of the construction of the Library Hall, a project
[3:17:07] that has been talked about and dreamed
[3:17:09] about for many years.
[3:17:11] Currently, all of the fittings have been poured,
[3:17:17] and a lot of dirt has been moved.
[3:17:20] And the large cement pour for the auditorium floor
[3:17:23] should take place about the first of October, and they're continued to work on finishing projects
[3:17:33] like what do or nobsane need, or what other kind of materials and other kinds of things.
[3:17:41] I find the construction interesting, so occasionally I drive down state streets so I can
[3:17:47] see what's happening, so I think everyone's interested in it and looking forward to when
[3:17:51] it's completed.
[3:17:52] Okay.
[3:17:58] Thank you. Let's give them a round of applause.
[3:18:05] So don't get up just yet. I just wanted
[3:18:08] to say we love our library. We love what it does. I'm always amazed when I walk out
[3:18:15] of the children's library to be passed by families with children and mothers that are
[3:18:21] all getting books and taking them out to their car. And it's just great to see the activity
[3:18:27] that occurs, and then I always love coming to different events at the library, you know, the
[3:18:34] bagpipes, you know, the broke choir, anyway, just great events, Utah State University coming
[3:18:42] down. So we appreciate very much what Sharer has done and the library staff do and we appreciate
[3:18:49] very much what you as a commission do to help guide the library and the direction that's going.
[3:18:55] so thank you very much. One more round of applause please.
[3:19:05] Okay, we have time for
[3:19:07] personal appearances. We have two that have signed up. I would ask that you keep your comments
[3:19:13] to three minutes and give us your name when you come to the podium. First we'll hear from Mark
[3:19:18] Tippitz after which we'll hear from Eric Wilkie.
[3:19:32] If you have a map in my wife, she has some
[3:19:39] My name is Mark Kippitz. I live in Orm, Utah. My address is 876 South, 725 West.
[3:19:48] The other night, just give you a glimpse at how my wife and I spend our evenings.
[3:19:54] We were watching a spy thriller on Netflix.
[3:19:57] And, um...
[3:20:00] Very early in the movie, the head of the Defense Department was talking to the Prime Minister, and
[3:20:09] he said the citizens' demands safety and security, but that always comes that a cost.
[3:20:17] I'm here tonight to talk about our first responders in our public safety department.
[3:20:23] I had the opportunity over the weekend to meet a fire captain from Probeau, and we talked
[3:20:30] a little bit about Orum, and he said, Orum used to have the best reputation.
[3:20:38] Everybody wanted to come and serve at Orum's police department or fire department, but he
[3:20:47] And now, unfortunately, the morale is so low that no one wants to come.
[3:20:56] In this handout that gave you, there's some letters there.
[3:21:02] And in one of them,
[3:21:08] they made reference to, for nearly 20 years, the City of Wormons required
[3:21:13] programmatic certifications prior to hiring, and at one point at one time, every firefighter
[3:21:21] was a paramedic, held over recently, we have lowered our standards.
[3:21:26] This year, we have started to hire advanced EMTs.
[3:21:32] With that said, the question I would like each of you to consider is in a game of chest.
[3:21:39] would you be willing to trade a queen for a pawn?
[3:21:46] Again, would you consider trading a queen for a pawn?
[3:21:53] From another firefighter he says,
[3:21:54] It changes that we want to see are not just money and benefits.
[3:21:57] We need to see a change in our morale.
[3:22:00] And a recent discussion with another firefighter
[3:22:02] just after being called,
[3:22:05] after involved the death of a small child.
[3:22:08] We both came to the conclusion that it was more stressful from the stress that we were getting
[3:22:15] from our city government than it is having to come to these fatal calls.
[3:22:20] I would like to turn these letters over to you and hope that you will spend a few minutes
[3:22:25] and read them.
[3:22:26] I would like to see Oram back to where we were public safety was our priority, and that we had the best first responders in the state, and I know that that's something that we can do.
[3:22:46] I thank you for your service.
[3:22:47] Thank you.
[3:22:58] Mayor Council members, good to see you again. My name is Eric Wilkie.
[3:23:01] As for the career ladder, I will not be eligible for my raise until at least March 2020.
[3:23:07] There are many others like me.
[3:23:09] The certifications are simply not immediately obtainable.
[3:23:12] Councilman Spencer asked repeatedly in the last meeting if classes were obtainable and
[3:23:16] if employees would be eligible.
[3:23:19] Would it surprise you to hear that several of our employees still haven't been able to take
[3:23:23] advantage of the paramedic two and paramedic three pay levels that were implemented several
[3:23:27] to go because classes have been unavailable in postpone. Again, you gave approval for the budget,
[3:23:34] and most likely you thought the money was being spent in that area, but you thought wrong.
[3:23:38] The previous career ladder, steps like the newest ones, are really just carrots being dangled
[3:23:45] in front of us, and as we learned from the last meeting, there is no IOU process for the fire department,
[3:23:52] like the police department has.
[3:23:54] My pay when it comes in March, barring the canceled classes or other misfortunes out of
[3:23:59] my control will be greatly appreciated.
[3:24:01] In the meantime, I am willing to guess that we will continue to share the same feelings
[3:24:05] of frustration, knowing that you are being told one thing while another is happening,
[3:24:10] and while you give direction to do something, in fact, the opposite continues to occur.
[3:24:15] I have been told I cannot complain unless I have a solution.
[3:24:18] I have adopted this philosophy, and I'd like to share a few suggestions that may resolve some of the issues we are facing.
[3:24:24] Number one, most if not all the agencies in Salt Lake Valley have a pay scale system.
[3:24:29] The system is defined and it's not ambiguous.
[3:24:32] It works there. They don't have to have compression problems and leapfrog problems like we have.
[3:24:39] A survey is conducted every few or a few years ago, which identifies them in the major improvements that needed to be made.
[3:24:47] If it is not apparent, yeah, what improvements need to be made, it might be time for another survey.
[3:24:52] Lastly, if any of this is new information for you, then someone is not doing their job very well.
[3:24:57] I certainly should...
[3:25:00] Be the responsibility of the public to bring these things to your attention. Thank you again for your support and willingness to address the current situations.
[3:25:08] I read this from an anonymous source, one of our firefighters who feels under the breath of retaliation. He cannot speak out because of what will happen to his personal career.
[3:25:18] My son spoke up two weeks ago, 12 hours prior to the last shift that he worked for this
[3:25:26] city after 11 years.
[3:25:29] The battalion chief showed up, took all of his safety equipment, his personal equipment,
[3:25:33] leaving him with a radio helmet, safety vest, considered him a safety officer.
[3:25:37] He had the clothes on his back, and that was it.
[3:25:41] No one replaced him.
[3:25:42] No one came in to protect his rookie as a mentor.
[3:25:46] This means, and this is not happened before, and in recent memory, nobody has ever had this done.
[3:25:53] This means that that station was down one man.
[3:25:56] They could not respond to a fire.
[3:25:58] They could not respond to any crash that needed extrication.
[3:26:02] My son, his rookie, that station, and the citizens of this area, were endangered.
[3:26:09] If something would have happened in that 12-hour time frame, say a fire in a building adjacent,
[3:26:14] They would have stood out there by standards.
[3:26:20] You know that they would have gone in anyway under their own
[3:26:23] own dress and safety to take care of the citizens of this.
[3:26:28] Retaliation is alive and well in this fire department.
[3:26:32] We are all on the same team and here to help plead with you that we might find the root of this.
[3:26:39] Thank you.
[3:26:40] Thank you.
[3:26:41] We'll now go ahead and close the personal parents portion of our meeting and move on to our consent items.
[3:26:48] We have four consent items.
[3:26:50] If any city council member would like to move the consent item to our scheduled items, please let me know.
[3:26:57] I will go ahead and read through this.
[3:26:59] The first is approval of meeting minutes of our city council meeting August 27, 2019.
[3:27:05] and also the minutes of our City Council work session of September 3, 2019.
[3:27:13] Number two is we have City Manager appointments.
[3:27:16] The first is to appoint Hayesum Soccer to serve on the Planning Commission,
[3:27:21] who is replacing Dave Moulton, who is coming off
[3:27:26] and then the reappointment of staff and Frisbee to serve on the board of building and fire code appeals.
[3:27:33] The third item is an ordinance amending the city code to reflect the change from Department of Administrative Services to the Finance Department.
[3:27:42] The fourth is the Finance Department Director, Brandon Nelson, per our advice and consent on his appointment as the city's new Finance Department Director.
[3:27:56] Do I have any of those items that anyone wants to move down to a scheduled item?
[3:28:02] If not, we'll go ahead and take a vote.
[3:28:04] I move that we approve all of these items.
[3:28:07] Is there a second?
[3:28:09] Okay.
[3:28:09] Councilor Seastrand was with you.
[3:28:13] Aye.
[3:28:15] Okay.
[3:28:15] Those actions take place.
[3:28:17] And at this point.
[3:28:18] Aye.
[3:28:19] At this point.
[3:28:20] Thanks, Tom.
[3:28:21] At this point in time.
[3:28:22] We would like to have the city recorder come and administer the oath of office to Brandon Nelson as the new finance department director.
[3:29:14] We're giving him a round of applause.
[3:29:22] In graduation, Brandon, you'll do a wonderful job as you have been for many years and we
[3:29:27] appreciate the work that Richard Manning has done for many years.
[3:29:32] Well, now we've been to our schedule items.
[3:29:33] The first one is a public hearing.
[3:29:35] This is an ordinance amending appendix U of the Orm City Code by updating the tree requirements
[3:29:41] in all zones and Jason Bench is our presenter.
[3:29:58] Thank you man, members of the council.
[3:30:00] This is a simple request in, as you recall in the appendix U, there are tree selections that allow citizens to select trees throughout the city, specifically we're looking at trees that were within the districts.
[3:30:15] Recently we've had a couple of applicants come in and basically let us know that it was kind of difficult to find some of these tree selections locally in the nurseries.
[3:30:24] And as we did that, we reviewed the tree selection with Josh Story, who's urban forester and Jim or who's a parks manager and basically came up with some selections within these districts that would allow at least an option of four trees within the districts.
[3:30:39] The idea behind the selections in the districts is to have different and unique trees without a throughout the districts.
[3:30:46] and so are proposing to these be updated. In addition to that as he's gone through, there are a couple
[3:30:51] trees that have had some issues, particularly the ash trees and some of the red maple trees that
[3:30:58] have are susceptible to disease and he's asked that these be removed so that people don't plant
[3:31:03] these going forward. So the public commission has reviewed it in a recommendation for approval and
[3:31:08] glad to address any questions.
[3:31:12] Any questions or comments from the council?
[3:31:17] Okay, this is a public
[3:31:18] hearing so we will open it up to the public. Anyone who would like to come forward please
[3:31:23] give us your name and keep your comments the three minutes.
[3:31:29] Seeing as how no one's coming
[3:31:30] forward will close the public comment portion of our public hearing and bring it back to the council
[3:31:36] any questions from the council. I'd like a comment. Yes. I just didn't drive it out of the city.
[3:31:43] I really enjoyed the variety of trees that we have and I commend our park's group and the
[3:31:51] the arborist on what they've done to maintain trees and to do a great job and I fully support
[3:31:56] this change and adding some additional trees to the options that we're looking at. So I would like
[3:32:02] to make a motion mayor if that's okay. I'll have to wait first and see if there's any other
[3:32:06] comments from the council.
[3:32:11] Okay. Okay, go ahead Mark. I'd like to amend the appendix
[3:32:14] of the Orm City Code by updating the tree requirements and all the zones has stated.
[3:32:19] Is there a second?
[3:32:21] Okay, you need to turn yours on.
[3:32:22] A second.
[3:32:24] Okay.
[3:32:24] Okay, we'll go ahead and start with Councilman Reliance.
[3:32:28] Hi.
[3:32:29] Hi.
[3:32:30] Hi.
[3:32:30] Hi.
[3:32:31] Hey.
[3:32:32] Hey.
[3:32:33] And Tom?
[3:32:33] No, I got it.
[3:32:36] Tom?
[3:32:38] Do you want to vote on this?
[3:32:40] Sorry.
[3:32:40] I'm talking to you again.
[3:32:42] Okay.
[3:32:42] people live we're gonna be live for a little while here. Okay so the ordinance passes
[3:32:48] appreciate that. Thank you. Okay the next is a public hearing on an ordinance
[3:32:53] amending section 226-10i in the standard land use code 4832 a concerning water
[3:33:02] storage tanks and appendix a the arm city code pertaining to water storage tanks and
[3:33:08] presenters, Jason. Thank you, Mayor. Members of the Council. These are changes to allow
[3:33:13] water tanks lower than the current elevation, as you can see in the ordinance. We currently
[3:33:18] allow up by the treatment plant at 4910, which is the elevation above sea level.
[3:33:24] What we're proposing is to modify that to allow
[3:33:28] our storage tanks in lower levels, particularly in the R75 and R8 zone, but it has to still be
[3:33:35] publicly owned tank or some of that services they publicly are public facility such as the water
[3:33:41] concerns he district. So the ordinances are outlined for that specific purpose. It has to be
[3:33:46] a municipal water storage tank as outlined. So we propose that these be changed to allow a future
[3:33:52] expansion of these types of tanks that would be particularly two of municipal water authority.
[3:33:58] So any questions that I can address?
[3:34:03] Any questions from the council?
[3:34:07] Okay, this is a public hearing.
[3:34:09] So we will open it up to the public, anyone wishing to come in on this ordinance change, please give us your name and hold your comments to three minutes.
[3:34:20] Seeing as how no one is coming forward will close this public comment portion of our public hearing and bring it back to the council any comments from the council.
[3:34:32] All right, I would be open to a motion.
[3:34:34] I can do that.
[3:34:35] Move that we amend section 22610i and standard land use code 4832 water storage tanks and appendix a of the RM city code pertain to water storage tanks.
[3:34:48] Is there a second?
[3:34:52] Okay.
[3:34:53] I will start with Councilmember Seastream.
[3:34:57] Aye.
[3:34:58] Aye.
[3:34:58] Aye.
[3:34:59] Aye.
[3:35:00] Okay?
[3:35:03] The ordinance passes. Appreciate that. We'll move on to item 10.3. This is a public hearing for an ordinance.
[3:35:12] The applicant requests the city reasoned the property located at 355 West University Parkway from the R8 zone to the PD-5 zone and amendment the PD-5 zone to include standard land use code.
[3:35:27] 55 30 gasoline service station with or without store as a permitted use and our presenter is Jason Bench
[3:35:36] I think we have the applicant here if she would like to come forward or if there's two of you have you come forward
[3:35:42] And if you could introduce yourselves
[3:35:45] You'll need to turn on the speaker there
[3:35:50] Okay
[3:35:50] It's Leslie Mascar and with right development group would you like my address as well
[3:35:54] We don't want your address, I'm sorry
[3:35:57] And I'm Kevin Krosha with Horox, we've been working with them.
[3:36:00] Okay.
[3:36:02] Horox engineers?
[3:36:03] Yes.
[3:36:04] Horox engineers.
[3:36:05] Okay.
[3:36:05] Thank you.
[3:36:06] Jason will turn the time over to you.
[3:36:08] Thank you, Mayor.
[3:36:09] Members of the Council, just to orient yourself with the PD-5 zone, there, it's a long
[3:36:13] university parkway, roughly from seconds east all the way to fourth west.
[3:36:21] The property in question is this piece right here, which is on right now, by century
[3:36:25] Utah.
[3:36:25] Sounds like you may have purchased the property.
[3:36:27] And formerly owned by a century-to-wire,
[3:36:29] Conservancy District, the applicants are here
[3:36:31] to request that that property be rezoned
[3:36:33] to the PD-5 zone.
[3:36:35] So that's one request.
[3:36:36] The other request is to amend the PD-5 zone
[3:36:39] to add as a land use within that zone,
[3:36:43] gasoline, service stations, a within without a store.
[3:36:46] So there's two requests before you tonight.
[3:36:53] Just to show you the concept plan
[3:36:54] that the applicants have proposed,
[3:36:55] they do want to keep the existing office building
[3:36:57] That's currently there. They do also want to propose a hotel that you see there, and then they also want to propose a the Maverick C-store on the corner of the fourth West and University Parkway.
[3:37:10] As part of our review, we did, as part of the BRT review, science, public finance, and connection with RCLCo and Altens here, as they did a an overall study of the BRT line.
[3:37:24] And one of their projects or locations that they identified was this particular property
[3:37:28] that if, if and when it is redeveloped, they felt it was inappropriate because of the views
[3:37:33] because of the access and proximity to the transit.
[3:37:36] As you recall, there is a direct stop for the BRT line directly in front of this property.
[3:37:42] It is have some specific and fantastic views for my 15 others.
[3:37:47] So with that, I mean, they can, or did support up to 200,000 square feet of office.
[3:37:52] Of course, that's market driven.
[3:37:54] This is the consultants coming up with the plan.
[3:37:57] It's not a definite, but that is something that they had supported.
[3:38:00] Staff also, what support that as well.
[3:38:04] But the applicant's request, I guess, in two parts, is that, like I say, the humanities
[3:38:12] to allow the standard land use code, and then also,
[3:38:14] rezoned it to PDFIME.
[3:38:16] So, planning commission did review the project,
[3:38:19] And they did, I'll recommend that the guests, that's all you could be denied and also that the
[3:38:26] PDV 5 is on request to be denied also.
[3:38:28] We would suggest that maybe that may continue to allow the applicant time to come back with a different
[3:38:33] concept plan.
[3:38:34] And that's the Council fills a different thing going forward, but that would be staffs request.
[3:38:38] Any questions that I can specifically address?
[3:38:40] No, I have a question for Leslie, is there anybody working in the office building right now?
[3:38:48] I know that central Utah water moved to exact where and has purchased that.
[3:38:54] So is there anybody in that office building as we speak?
[3:38:57] It's currently vacant.
[3:39:00] All right.
[3:39:01] And they did have, and you can see underlying this,
[3:39:04] some very beautiful gardens and grounds sitting there and my question is, we're going to discuss some of the things that could occur,
[3:39:16] but you did mention that you would like to, as part of the plan anyway, maybe use some of those grounds and have a little park there in the corner.
[3:39:28] Can you maybe talk about that a little bit?
[3:39:30] I've prepared a presentation, would it be okay if we pull that up?
[3:39:36] I provided that to Steve earlier.
[3:39:38] Sure.
[3:39:39] Hold on one second, Sam, did you have a comment or do you want to wait?
[3:39:43] Well, I'll just a question, and we can address later, but it had to do with the recommendation from staff
[3:39:48] if we wanted to proceed down that way.
[3:39:50] If we continued the PDs on part of it and voted now to decline or reject the...
[3:40:00] The gas station part of it. Is there a mechanism where we can send it back to the planning commission to have them review this again?
[3:40:07] Because one of the reasons I asked that last year when we were voting on the student housing project, not that far from here.
[3:40:15] I had hoped that we could send it back to the planning commission so they could review it again.
[3:40:20] Because in three weeks between when they voted on it and when we voted on it, so much changed where the staff went from negative to neutral to positive.
[3:40:29] But we just proceeded to vote, if we did, go down that path by continuing it here, do we also have a mechanism to send it back to the planning commission to have them review any alternate plan that is proposed?
[3:40:41] I would have to defer to Steve on that.
[3:40:43] Sure, you could request it to go back to the planning commission.
[3:40:46] Have that asked them to review it again and give you their comments and recommendations on it.
[3:40:50] Okay, thank you.
[3:40:52] Okay,
[3:40:57] so,
[3:41:07] other setting up may or any question. The current ingress and egress is situated. Is that required to be there?
[3:41:17] Do they have flexibility to move that, either further to the south or to the north?
[3:41:24] There is an elevation change as you go further south, so there is a significant elevation difference. I imagine they could.
[3:41:30] I mean, that's, they'd have to dig into the hillside and then have a driveway going up.
[3:41:35] But that's not required by the current.
[3:41:39] No, I think it's separated further south, Paul.
[3:41:41] Good regards to them.
[3:41:42] The widen the access a little bit.
[3:41:44] It's there.
[3:41:45] They're also the access going west.
[3:41:48] There is needs to be a separation between those two.
[3:41:51] Thank you.
[3:41:52] And just to make it plain, you does not allow us to do an access on the university parkway.
[3:41:59] That has grown this property, correct?
[3:42:02] All right, Leslie.
[3:42:07] Okay?
[3:42:08] But I guess I can go ahead and get started.
[3:42:11] The request that's before you tonight is Jason.
[3:42:14] So eloquently described is we have a request for a tax amendment
[3:42:19] to include a C-store use.
[3:42:22] The zone that is directly adjacent on the west side
[3:42:25] actually allows convenient stores as part of that zone.
[3:42:30] I believe it's a permitted use.
[3:42:32] And the second request is to re-zone to the PD zone.
[3:42:37] My first slide illustrates, as it's pulling up.
[3:42:45] It illustrates the PD-5 zone.
[3:42:48] But I did ensure that there was a bit of transparency
[3:42:50] so that you can see what is located within that area.
[3:42:55] The staff reported identifies that this area,
[3:42:59] the PD-5 zone is fully developed out, and in fact it is. A convenient store, there's
[3:43:07] a science as far as where it can locate. They typically locate at hard corners. They can't locate
[3:43:14] in line, mid-block, just because their business is all about convenience. And so it's how do I
[3:43:23] capture the existing traffic that's located in the surrounding area into the site as quickly as possible,
[3:43:29] and is conveniently as possible, and so if you look at that particular area, there are only
[3:43:35] a few areas where the convenience store can actually locate. One property being our property
[3:43:43] that which includes our proposal, and then the other intersection would be Main Street,
[3:43:49] which includes a card dealership, and then also a variety of other businesses, including some
[3:43:55] this thing building that are located within that intersection area.
[3:44:01] How are you guys coming on that?
[3:44:04] I have a question.
[3:44:06] Sure.
[3:44:07] Councillor Stranger.
[3:44:07] You mentioned, I guess, the Maverick is what you're talking about.
[3:44:12] Maverick is what we're proposing for this particular site.
[3:44:15] Yes, yes.
[3:44:16] They're policy.
[3:44:16] They don't.
[3:44:18] They're a midblocks all over.
[3:44:19] In order for them to be successful.
[3:44:21] Yes.
[3:44:22] But the hard corner is the most critical portion of property that they need to be located
[3:44:27] at.
[3:44:29] And so yes, you can see that there are some convenient source that may look at block, however
[3:44:35] the access needs to be superior in order to get vehicles in and out.
[3:44:41] But to have passenger vehicles drive along distance, it becomes very inconvenient and difficult.
[3:44:47] This is the slide that I wanted to point to, and as you can see, at the corner of Main Street in the University Parkway, it is currently zoned as a PD12 zone, and so...
[3:45:00] This zone change would not be applied to that particular portion of the property, and then on the rest of that intersection, you have Ashley furniture.
[3:45:10] The existing parking requirement within the zone is one parking solper 250 square feet, and so they do need that parking associated with it.
[3:45:20] Visibility is very important to car dealerships, and so the likelihood of a convenience or being located at that corner is very small.
[3:45:27] the pet smart, the parcel is so small in order to get any type of
[3:45:33] this story. You would actually have to assemble both of those
[3:45:36] parcels. The typical size of a convenient source about two
[3:45:39] acres. And so you would need a sufficient area in order to
[3:45:45] make that happen at that particular location. In the event that
[3:45:49] the council does would like to see a convenient
[3:45:53] store located at this site where we're proposing it, there are also some other mechanisms
[3:45:59] that you could consider. One would be to allow us to rezone to the highway commercial zone,
[3:46:05] which is located directly west of this property, and then the other mechanism would be to allow
[3:46:11] us to create a new zone, such as the PD12 zone, but it would be a separate zone, which would allow
[3:46:16] all of the PD5 uses with the inclusion of course of the convenience store, and we would
[3:46:23] absolutely be open to that.
[3:46:25] So, Leslie, just one second, Jason, do you concur with that?
[3:46:30] Changing if this were changed to a PD12, allowing then a convenience store in there that
[3:46:36] would not affect any other PD-5 areas with a convenience store?
[3:46:41] We don't.
[3:46:42] We don't want to see a gas station on that corner.
[3:46:45] No, no, I know that, but what I was saying is it would not affect the rest of the PD-5's
[3:46:49] And if it was a PD12, that is an option.
[3:46:57] I'd please, all right, thank you so much.
[3:47:00] This is the second of discussion tonight.
[3:47:05] I just wanted to point out the existing building.
[3:47:08] It's 28,000 square feet.
[3:47:11] We plan on retaining the building and utilizing it.
[3:47:14] It's a very nice building.
[3:47:16] And then I also wanted to point the curvature of this road,
[3:47:19] which also impacts some of the views from I-15 and I'll kind of go through those with you.
[3:47:26] This is a view of this site. You can see it kind of back here.
[3:47:32] It's headed. You can actually see the building.
[3:47:35] This is from the west.
[3:47:36] This is from the walking east.
[3:47:38] Looking east.
[3:47:39] Thank you so much.
[3:47:40] This is the crispy cream and then this is the water conservancy property right here.
[3:47:45] And then this is a view that's farther back, it's about two blocks west of the water conservancy property, and you can kind of see it right about here.
[3:47:59] And then if you're sitting on the property looking west, this is your view, very beautiful vegetation and landscaping.
[3:48:09] This is the crispy cream.
[3:48:12] If you notice the building is about 18 feet from the bottom up to the roof line,
[3:48:20] if you won't apply that several times to the peak of the vegetation,
[3:48:26] the vegetation actually expands over 108 feet.
[3:48:31] This is the view looking towards the rear of the property or the south side of the property looking
[3:48:37] west, which is of hotels and existing multi-family buildings, and then of course we're just
[3:48:46] back kind of looking east at the site. This is the proposal that we have tonight. It includes
[3:48:54] the convenient store located at the hard corner with the dispensers located along University Parkway.
[3:49:02] At the rear, we have a four-story hotel, which we will also retain, it will include 90 rooms and also four stories.
[3:49:12] And then as I mentioned earlier, there's an existing office building with 28,000 square feet.
[3:49:19] We are currently working with Maverick on the site.
[3:49:23] And as the mayor mentioned earlier, we would be open to providing some type of a pocket park located at the corner so that
[3:49:32] passengers who are using the BRT line will be able to connect into the site, enjoy the
[3:49:41] pocket park, and then also be able to purchase any amenities that are located within the
[3:49:49] convenience store. We're also happy to include some bike racks as well. We know that biking
[3:49:54] is something that's really important to a lot of those BRT passengers as well.
[3:50:02] Lastly, what would the park include and how big would it be? Would it have any water feature to it?
[3:50:10] If you would like if water feature, we discuss that initially, but we would be open to including some type of a water feature.
[3:50:17] And then also, I believe we spoke about some type of an entrance feature sign for Oram City. And of course, we would be open to that as well.
[3:50:29] There's also an existing amphitheater that is located.
[3:50:33] I'm not sure if anyone has been out to the site that is located in this area,
[3:50:38] and we're also going to retain that as an additional amenity.
[3:50:44] Something else that I would really like to point out about the convenient store
[3:50:47] is that they have an excellent security system.
[3:50:51] And I just feel like this adds an additional level of security
[3:50:55] for the passengers of the BRT line, especially for those passengers who are traveling throughout
[3:51:01] the dark hours of the night.
[3:51:04] Maverick is typically used as kind of a safe spot where divorce couples will bring, they'll
[3:51:10] meet up at a Maverick because their security system is just such high quality.
[3:51:16] In fact, it typically covers their site and then it spills over onto the streets and so local
[3:51:23] officers, if there's any kind of an accident at the intersection, they typically reach out to
[3:51:29] Maverick. That's always one of their first calls so that they can see what actually occurred.
[3:51:38] This is an economic development strategic plan that was prepared in 2014 by Zion Bank,
[3:51:45] public finance. I believe it was adopted by the City Council in 2015. I've highlighted a few
[3:51:52] sections of this study and it basically states that there's a shortage or a leakage of yearly
[3:52:02] cells of approximately 35 to 36 million with a combined use between the convenient stores
[3:52:10] and then also the hotels.
[3:52:12] And I'm happy to pass this around, would you mind helping me?
[3:52:17] May I?
[3:52:18] Is it okay if we approach the council and?
[3:52:20] Yeah, go ahead and pass that around.
[3:52:30] I'm a police skip this.
[3:52:32] Jason mentioned an additional study that was recently performed by the same group at Science
[3:52:40] Public Finance.
[3:52:41] They provided a TOD study and what they're illustrating in this slide is that the rent
[3:52:50] rates for office is $16 a square foot.
[3:52:53] And the reason why this is significant is, I've mentioned to many council members, it places a valuation of the building, the existing building of six and a half million.
[3:53:05] And so if you take the 28,000 square foot building, you multiply that by the $16 square foot office rate.
[3:53:12] It provides you with a valuation of 448,000.
[3:53:16] You divide that by the 7% capitalization rate,
[3:53:19] which is shown right here.
[3:53:21] And it provides you of a valuation of 6,5 million
[3:53:25] on the building.
[3:53:28] This is another portion of that study.
[3:53:32] And it's just illustrating that this site, 400 West
[3:53:36] and the University Parkway, is also ideal for future retail,
[3:53:41] just two.
[3:53:41] So, Leslie, one thing I might say, the rental rates out in Lehigh are much higher than that, obviously,
[3:53:49] and we have the King and Technology Park, and their rental rates are higher than the $16
[3:53:57] of square foot as well. So, they're in the $21, I think, $23, $25, and at Lehigh they're higher than that.
[3:54:06] So I understand you're 16, but I think the 16 is skewing your report in my opinion.
[3:54:13] If it is higher than you're
[3:54:19] right, then you're talking about growth rate with KM.
[3:54:25] So net versus growth, but anyway, the rental rate that I've seen available for those properties
[3:54:33] are higher than what you're showing here.
[3:54:36] So this is actually the...
[3:54:38] And that's what I'm saying
[3:54:42] once you did this,
[3:54:43] the doctor should act as queen, etc.
[3:54:47] I think they're about the same and she can confirm or deny that.
[3:54:51] So this is actually from the study that was prepared by
[3:54:54] Science Public Finance.
[3:54:56] This is the TOD study that Jason referred to earlier.
[3:55:00] And this is their number, which is $16 a square foot. The highest that we've seen from our brokers is about
[3:55:08] $18 a square foot. And so you will see a slight fluctuation, but our numbers are actually fairly close to
[3:55:16] the numbers that we're provided in this report that was prepared for a warm city.
[3:55:24] And the last thing that I have is
[3:55:26] some elevations that Maverick has kindly provided to us, which I understand you're most likely
[3:55:33] familiar with our product, but they have included some new colors and materials associated
[3:55:40] with this particular building. And I would like to introduce my traffic engineer. His name is Kevin
[3:55:48] Krosha. I'd like to give him a few minutes to address traffic and the traffic impact study which was prepared.
[3:55:56] Okay, thank you, Mayor and Council, just want to be brief and quick, just regarding the traffic.
[3:56:02] We looked at the site when a sea source included in the traffic study, it's a high generator of traffic, especially during the peak hours, and so as we looked at it.
[3:56:15] With the, with it being near University Parkway, we looked at that intersection as well as the two intersections, the access to the west as well as the access onto the property.
[3:56:26] And so, looking at the overall kind of with growth and with the site on the included in the analysis,
[3:56:36] the only real mitigations required would be to update the signal timing on University Parkway.
[3:56:44] That's its own animal. It's a big intersection and adding lanes would probably be on realistic anyways.
[3:56:52] And so that would be a large coordination effort with you
[3:56:55] dot on looking at that on that side of things.
[3:56:59] Also look, sorry Mayor.
[3:57:00] No, go ahead.
[3:57:02] And then looking at the site specifically and the two accesses
[3:57:06] the access to the west as well as the site access.
[3:57:11] Looked at with our 2050 traffic projections as well as the
[3:57:18] the distance of those two accesses being so close.
[3:57:22] We looked at the queueing.
[3:57:24] That's anticipated with the signal universe,
[3:57:28] the parkway, as well as just to make sure
[3:57:32] that the queue isn't, you know,
[3:57:35] so the left turns going west
[3:57:36] and left turns turning in onto the site.
[3:57:39] Wouldn't impact each other.
[3:57:41] Our analysis shows that the 95th percentile
[3:57:45] will not, there will not be any impact.
[3:57:47] Of course, I'm not gonna say that
[3:57:48] It's never going to happen, but when we looked at it in the analysis, if it ever did happen,
[3:57:55] it would happen for maybe 10 to 20 seconds, and then it would the cues would flush out and
[3:58:01] it would operate just fine.
[3:58:04] The other, sorry, were those the studies you did based on current traffic flows that are going
[3:58:10] through the area there?
[3:58:11] And so the other thing we also looked at too is for our future growth.
[3:58:14] We looked at mags, travel demand model, and their anticipated growth with all the projects
[3:58:22] anticipated through 2050, just to make sure that we're getting the right projections
[3:58:29] for growth.
[3:58:31] The other recommendations we have is, as Leslie mentioned, there are, I think it was Paul,
[3:58:39] there's a wider access to the site, a 50-foot access that will be accessing the site,
[3:58:43] And we would extend that 50 foot access to about 80 feet into the site to allow for the cars to turn in and to access the C-store without congesting access.
[3:58:59] Also, just four trucks, large trucks accessing the site would take the access road all the way to the back before entering into the C-store that corners too tight for a large truck.
[3:59:12] And then, I guess, again, I think those were kind of the main recommendations from the study.
[3:59:22] So, when it comes to traffic, the only way I can really relate to this is the Maverick store on 8th North.
[3:59:30] Just east of the freeway.
[3:59:33] And it's right across from McDonald's, it's north of 8th North.
[3:59:37] It looks like you have eight pump stations proposed to you if I'm correct.
[3:59:44] I mean, as I counted those, it looks like there's eight islands.
[3:59:48] But there's eight island pumps, you know.
[3:59:50] And I just know that on eighth north, where the fabric is, and with that many islands,
[3:59:57] it is a constant flow of...
[4:00:00] Traffic in and out on a very regular basis and it gets pretty congested. They also have a married hotel, two married hotels, right next to them, just behind them.
[4:00:12] But I am aware of how much traffic this will generate. At the same time, crispy creams, doesn't generate a lot of traffic all the time, but sometimes it generates a tremendous amount.
[4:00:26] When it has free donuts, when it has a sale, when it's a holiday, it becomes, you know,
[4:00:33] people are backed up all the way down the parkway for a block and then come around.
[4:00:40] So I feel like it's kind of a tight road to begin with.
[4:00:44] And the amount of traffic going in and out of the Maverick,
[4:00:47] I think, would bring tremendous amount of pressure on this area.
[4:00:51] That's just my visual and my personal thinking anyway.
[4:00:56] If we don't have Paul, make a few comments about that and about.
[4:01:01] If he wants to join us in that council room, he's out in the hall hoping that we don't
[4:01:07] put him on the spot, but he loves it.
[4:01:10] Paul, come on up.
[4:01:12] Maybe you can tell us what your thoughts are on the traffic as far as a maverick right there.
[4:01:22] Do you have the other slide that shows the left turn,
[4:01:30] queuing?
[4:01:34] So while Jason's trying to queue that up, Kevin with Horox did a good analysis,
[4:01:42] the
[4:01:42] basically the proposed site would generate approximately a just a little over 4700 vehicles
[4:01:49] of A,
[4:01:53] a Maverick, a high volume Maverick, especially if it's the only one and
[4:01:59] for blocks.
[4:02:01] I might generate more than that.
[4:02:04] You can kind of see the, I don't know if you can see,
[4:02:07] make out the left turn arrows there,
[4:02:09] between the criss-peak-green,
[4:02:11] chop and the fabric access.
[4:02:14] But those are pretty close back to back.
[4:02:16] So for instance, you've got somebody northbound
[4:02:19] wanting to make a left-end to the criss-peak-green
[4:02:21] and all of the other businesses that are in that area.
[4:02:24] At the same time, somebody's coming down
[4:02:26] left into the fabric.
[4:02:29] So, you'd be playing chicken.
[4:02:31] So, what would happen if someone trying to do a left turn into the Maverick, you have more
[4:02:37] than two or three cars and it backs up past the entrance to the crispy cream, they would
[4:02:42] then make a left turn from the through lane, so they wouldn't be able to make it over to
[4:02:48] the left turn area.
[4:02:49] So, that's my biggest concern with the site, is that, yeah, you don't, doesn't allow an access
[4:02:54] on University Parkway and I support that. University Parkway has probably 55 to 60,000 vehicles
[4:03:01] a day on that. But on that area, and so we do need to limit the access to this side,
[4:03:10] and one of my biggest concerns through the whole process was that offset intersection.
[4:03:16] But I mean, if we blocked crispy cream entrance and exit, then that is a stuck area, and
[4:03:23] then cars are backing up over onto the University Park.
[4:03:27] God, I wouldn't recommend doing that.
[4:03:30] But what I'm saying is the cars would do that.
[4:03:33] If you had enough cars trying to come in, you're close enough that you could actually block
[4:03:38] that off with cars wanting to turn into Maverick, where a crispy cream couldn't get in
[4:03:43] around.
[4:03:44] I think we're seeing the same thing, yes, that's a concern when you have two intersections that close together in that offset.
[4:03:51] One of the things, you know, we really haven't explored putting in the access further to the south.
[4:03:59] Of course, there, you know, maybe there's an opportunity to have two accesses.
[4:04:04] One where it's currently out, that's just a right in right out, and then one that's a whole access further to the south.
[4:04:11] So real quick. I don't know if that would be conducive to the what Leslie's talking about.
[4:04:17] You need to get the quick in and out for the.
[4:04:19] What is the distance from the crispy cream entrance to the Maverick entrance, I don't know how many
[4:04:26] car lengths that is or how much footage that it's 80 80 feet. And so a car length is how far along.
[4:04:34] about 19 feet for an ashto passing your vehicle. So you're talking two cars. Trying to turn left,
[4:04:42] two cars, trying to turn left. And so you've only got four cars there plus maybe two more.
[4:04:49] So you've only got a room for about six cars. Well I'm going by your 20 feet. Well and that's, you know,
[4:04:56] most people don't go bumper to bumper either. Most people like to leave a few feet.
[4:05:00] You know, I'm just saying it looks to me like you've got room for about six cars before you totally block crispy cream and then you block a less than that, but that's the matter. Okay.
[4:05:13] Councilmember Seestrand, did you ever comment?
[4:05:16] I think so. I'm trying to remember what it was.
[4:05:19] We can come back. Councilmember Sunder has a comment and we'll come back to you next.
[4:05:23] It was mentioned to help with the traffic flow, we could synchronize the lights on, University Parkway, you made a comment about that, can you?
[4:05:33] Well, the traffic signals on the parkway are already synchronized.
[4:05:37] Well, I mean, it could change the timing or whatever.
[4:05:40] Well, the timing has been changed to handle the high volume of traffic that's on the parkway.
[4:05:47] So, I can't imagine you'd ought changing their synchronization for the 55 to 60,000 vehicles a day to accommodate
[4:05:58] 4,700 vehicles from the disperposed site.
[4:06:03] I can't imagine that happening.
[4:06:07] Other than that, I think Mr. Crochos then a great job of analyzing the site.
[4:06:11] Again, because of the way they wanted, because of the way the developer proposed laying out the site.
[4:06:20] You know, they didn't want to have an access further to the south.
[4:06:23] They didn't want to consider that.
[4:06:24] But again, it's the, you know, how quickly can you get somebody in and out of a convenience?
[4:06:29] And so it was one of those, you know, it was, it was hard to balance that issue.
[4:06:35] Now, if there wasn't that crispy, true cream act of the other side of the street,
[4:06:38] or if it was further to the site and lined up, but it is what it is.
[4:06:44] But whatever we do with that site, whatever happens to that site, we're going to have the same issue with whatever happens there.
[4:06:51] Well, I was just going to say your different uses actually dictate different amounts of traffic.
[4:06:59] So Seastore necessarily involves people getting in and out quickly with convenience and you're back and forth and back and forth.
[4:07:07] But that's different than what you would see with a hotel or an office building.
[4:07:13] Councillor Cistrand, did you remember anything you want to say?
[4:07:16] Yes.
[4:07:16] I remember that from before.
[4:07:18] I was making a comment.
[4:07:20] Well, the aspect that I was looking at was if you isolate the different uses that are on
[4:07:25] their palm.
[4:07:26] So the office, the 28,000 square foot office, that's not generating much traffic.
[4:07:33] Well, their traffic is more the peak out, you know, when people come to work.
[4:07:39] What about the hotel?
[4:07:41] And then the hotel is more kind of an evening sort of a thing and, you know, a morning.
[4:07:48] But I, you know, I think they're probably a pretty good mix of uses.
[4:07:52] But in my mind, and again, we haven't, we haven't actually studied what Zion's proposed.
[4:07:59] in their BRT when they looked at their BRT study, we haven't actually done a traffic study
[4:08:05] to say, okay, what would happen if there was a more of an office component on this?
[4:08:10] Right.
[4:08:11] That was kind of where I was trying to get to was, we're looking at primarily the concern
[4:08:15] as the C-store from that standpoint because of the constant traffic in and out.
[4:08:20] And this store is going to be more of a constant traffic feature, too.
[4:08:24] or as a commercial build, an office building
[4:08:27] would generate less traffic.
[4:08:30] Generally speaking, that's for your peak hours.
[4:08:34] Except for your peak hour.
[4:08:36] But then again, I don't know how much
[4:08:38] is the UVX line going to be able to contribute
[4:08:41] to somebody who wants to work in that.
[4:08:44] And if you use transit, then I think
[4:08:50] that's one of the reasons why Zion's recommended that site
[4:08:53] for office is because it would be, it would be, it would be, it would be, it would,
[4:08:57] yes, it would, right now too, there's UVX is carrying 15,000 to 16,000 passengers a day
[4:09:05] on it.
[4:09:07] And this would be, this would be a site where I think a lot of what would happen at the office
[4:09:15] building.
[4:09:16] Now, again, if you compare the UVX that's there at that intersection, yeah, the C-store,
[4:09:23] Yeah, sure, if somebody wants to get a big gold, I'm sorry, that's the wrong brand.
[4:09:29] Anyway, whatever else you get better, you know, that's one of those things that, yes, it's a convenience.
[4:09:34] If I've got a few minutes between the, you know, then I'm going to go ahead and go there.
[4:09:39] But versus somebody who's going to, let's say, work at that location.
[4:09:45] And there are not too many people or I think are going to take transit for a few blocks
[4:09:51] to go get some goodies at a convenience store, no matter what kind of a convenience store
[4:09:57] it is, but if it's office, they're going to...
[4:10:00] We're going to take that service every day.
[4:10:02] Thank you.
[4:10:04] I'm very illicit to find if I address some of those items.
[4:10:07] Sure.
[4:10:08] I'm going to say real quick.
[4:10:11] Councilor Lorette.
[4:10:12] Do you have a question that she maybe could address?
[4:10:17] All right.
[4:10:18] Go ahead.
[4:10:19] I'm sorry.
[4:10:23] I just have a few things.
[4:10:26] Typically, it can be against storm.
[4:10:28] They're not necessarily a destination location.
[4:10:31] However, the capture of the existing traffic that is located all the time.
[4:10:35] on the roads, it's not like a Chick-fil-A where you're going to actually drive to a restaurant
[4:10:42] to be able to enjoy that facility, but it's all about convenience and capturing that
[4:10:47] existing traffic, and so a convenience sort of doesn't necessarily add additional traffic
[4:10:52] to the roads, it's just capturing that.
[4:10:56] We have identified three different uses on the site, which we feel are very complimentary
[4:11:01] of one another, especially geared towards the high peak times. The convenience store obviously
[4:11:10] has a different peak volume traffic flow than the hotel where the hotel you're going to
[4:11:17] see customers coming in throughout the day. The convenience store, it's basically capturing
[4:11:22] that existing traffic and then obviously the office, the peak hours for that would be associated
[4:11:29] to most likely 8 to 5 or 9 to 5, and so we feel like those uses all complement each other very
[4:11:37] nicely. The other item that was brought up is the additional access. We're not necessarily
[4:11:45] hung on the idea. We like the location of the existing access, but if it does present some issues with
[4:11:53] healing and stacking which RTS identifies that it doesn't and all allow Kevin to address that.
[4:11:59] If it does, we have sufficient space on the site to actually locate that farther to the
[4:12:05] south or as Paul mentioned, we would be open to providing a secondary access if that's
[4:12:11] something that is absolutely necessary but as I've mentioned RTS, it doesn't necessarily
[4:12:16] reflect those issues that were brought up.
[4:12:19] The other item that was asked to consider is 200,000 square feet of office space and that the recent study that was performed by, it was for get their name, science, public finance.
[4:12:33] It actually identifies that 64% of the writers that are on the BRT line are between the ages of 18 to 24.
[4:12:41] And so if we're providing a lot of additional office space, I'm not sure how many really fit within that category of 18 to 24.
[4:12:51] The likelihood of them having their own vehicles is actually pretty high.
[4:12:56] And if we were to develop this site with a 200,000 square foot of office space,
[4:13:02] the code would require up to 800 new parking stalls associated to this site.
[4:13:08] That's all I have, and then I'm going to turn it over to my traffic engineer so he can.
[4:13:12] Okay.
[4:13:14] Yeah, so looking at the cueing, so yeah, it's about 80 feet for that kind of between the two accesses there.
[4:13:23] So when we run the analysis, we ran it in a program called Synchro, where there is a simulation aspect to that,
[4:13:29] We put the anticipated volumes in there and we run it 10 different times where then we take
[4:13:38] the average of those 10 runs to get a good estimate of what those average queues are going
[4:13:45] to be.
[4:13:46] And as I mentioned earlier, our analysis shows that there will not be necessarily much conflict
[4:13:53] between the two accesses, but of course if the city would just pass a no-christ-be-cream
[4:13:58] light, it's on during PMPK hour, I think we'd be okay, right?
[4:14:03] But there's always that the potential of that overflow occurring, right?
[4:14:09] And as we took our traffic counts, the majority of the vehicles accessing the
[4:14:16] Krispy Cream do come from University Parkway.
[4:14:19] And so on those occasions where there are so many vehicles, it probably, I've never been
[4:14:23] there when it's spilled out onto University Parkway, but I'm sure it has before.
[4:14:27] It has to be seen it.
[4:14:30] Yeah, and so, but the majority of them are coming from university, Parkway, and turning right into the site versus turning left.
[4:14:36] I know that.
[4:14:38] So, my question is, you just mentioned it's 80 feet from the one entrance to the other entrance.
[4:14:45] And you show a left turn into crispy greens and a left turn into Maverick.
[4:14:52] And so, if 80 feet that allows four vehicles and you've got two basically going into crispy cream.
[4:15:02] I think there's no way that you're not going to run into stacking and covering up crispy cream and then backing up.
[4:15:12] Two cars to go into Maverick. I think it is totally unreasonable. I mean, if you go like I say to eights north, in turn there, you'll see what I'm talking about. Two cars doesn't get it.
[4:15:26] And when cars, anyway, it just, I don't think it would work, but just practical experience.
[4:15:33] Yeah, and that makes sense, and I do, as we mentioned at a report, I mean, the analysis
[4:15:40] does say that it would work, but of course there's always those chances that it's going to
[4:15:44] happen.
[4:15:45] And even in the simulations, we saw that happen a few times, but when it did happen, it
[4:15:50] was cleared with, you know, within.
[4:15:53] I just can't.
[4:15:54] So in vision two cars turning into Maverick as being reasonable, I mean that isn't what happens
[4:16:01] out of Maverick, but anyway, but you have more because Debbie had a question, go ahead, Debbie.
[4:16:11] So my assignment is with the Planning Commission and I wasn't this meeting when they talked
[4:16:14] about this and I have to say that there was little or no support for the C-store.
[4:16:21] The hotel, I think, was fine, they were fine with it, the office was fine.
[4:16:25] But there was not a person on the commission that thought a gas station was appropriate here.
[4:16:31] Some of their reasons is that we've mentioned this is a great place.
[4:16:36] The views, several of them mentioned the views.
[4:16:39] They were concerned about the egress and ingress.
[4:16:43] And so I think I personally think the hotel would be fine, the office,
[4:16:47] but I think the gas station is something that we...
[4:16:50] There's no doubt that we need a gas station, we are ourselves taxed, we can just
[4:16:55] just show that we need it, but we think that we as they, the commission,
[4:17:00] think that could probably be okay to someplace else where we could capture
[4:17:03] ourselves.
[4:17:04] So, I guess the way I, what I'm saying is if we, if we could do a mixed use or
[4:17:09] move the hotel closer to the Parkway, this isn't a prime piece of real estate
[4:17:17] And I think our planning commission, I think they are almost unanimous in the nine this
[4:17:22] year member.
[4:17:23] They were unanimous.
[4:17:24] They were unanimous.
[4:17:25] So I think there's just very little appeal to the sea store.
[4:17:27] So I just wanted to communicate with what they said, and I'm like said, I do think there's
[4:17:35] a merit here.
[4:17:36] And I think they're telling me office could certainly work and maybe we're going to put the
[4:17:39] different concept plan for the gas station.
[4:17:43] Feel that you would be open to potentially considering
[4:17:46] if the existing C-store, is there any
[4:17:54] existing, where is it, all right?
[4:17:56] If we took this existing C-store and located at closer
[4:18:00] to the street, no.
[4:18:03] The dispensers to the rear and provide a nice
[4:18:06] pocket part.
[4:18:08] I think a hotel closer to the parkway
[4:18:10] would be acceptable if a nice park there
[4:18:13] But I don't think the gas station would have very much appeal, that's just my opinion.
[4:18:19] So the dispensers are is that the building, the architecture, I'm just trying to get a feedback so we know how to move.
[4:18:26] I just think it's the gas station.
[4:18:28] I think that Mavericks are actually lovely.
[4:18:30] I think they do a good job.
[4:18:31] I don't think anything to do with Mavericks is just having a gas station there.
[4:18:35] I just don't think it's the right fit for that property.
[4:18:39] Jamie has a comment.
[4:18:42] Thank you, just a question for you, Kevin, and, frankly, I'm surprised to see here, I just want to clarify that
[4:18:49] Horox engineers was the engineer that completed the City's Transportation Master Plan, is that correct?
[4:18:57] Yeah, and you're part of a project team that represents the City at Block to the North on the Roundabout Project here on 4th West.
[4:19:05] So, how does what you're doing in this particular situation affect the traffic flows and the outcomes on the other projects that the city has retained you to represent the city on?
[4:19:24] Well, from what we've done, there was a much impact to the north of the intersection,
[4:19:36] But, I mean, we did look at using the travel demand model, which was using the transportation
[4:19:42] master plan.
[4:19:43] It has been updated a few times since we did it in the master plan, but we used that.
[4:19:47] We actually hired you to update it, didn't we?
[4:19:52] In the modeling.
[4:19:55] As part of the master transportation plan?
[4:19:58] Yes, that was a few years ago.
[4:20:04] So I'm thinking very similar along the lines that Debbie is and I'm excited to see some activity with this site.
[4:20:13] I think it's a very, you know, great location, excited to see what ends up going in there.
[4:20:19] I'm just not convinced that this is, is it yet? You know, very similar, love the office, love the hotel, the gas station is what concerns me.
[4:20:28] And not even necessarily, the convenient store is much.
[4:20:32] If we had like quick-served restaurants or something like that
[4:20:35] on the ground level and then had, you know, office space
[4:20:39] about it, you know, some kind of mixed use.
[4:20:40] I think that would really help us best leverage
[4:20:43] that UVX station, which is right across the crosswalk.
[4:20:47] In my mind, if I was envisioning what would be the absolute worst thing
[4:20:51] to put right next to a transit stop, it would be a gas station.
[4:20:55] And I, you know, nothing against Maverick or, you know,
[4:20:57] I have an electric vehicle, and nothing against gas vehicles, we have one as well, but I just
[4:21:05] don't see...
[4:21:06] Maverick offers EV stations.
[4:21:09] I just don't see this as necessarily the forward thinking, like future of how I'd love
[4:21:15] to see that site develop.
[4:21:18] I think the mixed use would also help us, I talked about this in the pre-meeting, the need
[4:21:23] for additional parking where this really is a prime real estate and if you have mixed use
[4:21:29] where you have businesses using it during the day and different types of uses, I think
[4:21:33] you've captured that a little bit here with the office space and the hotel, but it just
[4:21:38] reduces the amount of parking required to really adequately park those types of uses.
[4:21:46] In the earlier presentation, I think most of the images were on kind of coming up the hill
[4:21:51] and really kind of stressing the tie-in to the zone to the west.
[4:21:56] Whereas I think the city's approaching this more from the standpoint of how it fits in with
[4:22:00] everything to the east of there, which if you look at just how things are on the grade,
[4:22:05] I think that it fits better with the property to the east.
[4:22:10] And even if you look at the zoning map where this kind of stands out as a residential zone
[4:22:14] and the midst of all these different types of commercial zones, it just seems like a better fit
[4:22:18] for the PD5 zone, and so I'm not necessarily opposed to incorporating that, you know, the PD5 zone at the right time and for the right use.
[4:22:27] I'm just not, I'm not concerned that the gas station is the right way to do that.
[4:22:32] Another point was brought up about the security cameras that, you know,
[4:22:36] Maverick puts on their stations and how that can be useful, even which is kind of keeping things safe.
[4:22:41] The concern I have is when I think it was part of our impact fee study where we were looking at
[4:22:48] Or maybe it was a business licensing presentation where we were talking about different types of businesses throughout the city
[4:22:53] And how many calls per square foot or per location we got and convenience store was just way out ahead of all the other types of land uses that we had in the city
[4:23:03] And so I understand that they have tighter security
[4:23:07] But there's a reason for that because we need higher security there and and so I'm not I don't necessarily by the argument that having that next to the transit stop would help with security in my mind
[4:23:18] It might be the opposite of that
[4:23:22] As far as the
[4:23:23] The point about this not necessarily being a destination
[4:23:27] I think there's some validity to that in that it's not necessarily going to create a lot of neutrips just to go to the gas station
[4:23:35] But if you look at it in the specific proximity here, I do think it creates a lot of additional
[4:23:41] trips on that 400 West site.
[4:23:44] So maybe not more trips along University Parkway, it's probably just capturing existing
[4:23:48] trips there.
[4:23:49] But I do think that 400 West, you know, kind of inlet there is going to have a huge uptick in
[4:23:55] the in and out traffic, whereas with a hotel or an office space, you know, you might one person
[4:24:01] might be going in and out of there a couple of times a day.
[4:24:04] But if it's a gas station or something like that,
[4:24:06] you're just going to have people constantly replacing each other
[4:24:09] along that intersection.
[4:24:12] There was also something brought up about young people,
[4:24:15] not necessarily using the office space as much.
[4:24:17] I'm not sure I would agree with that.
[4:24:19] I most of the people I know that are in school are working as well
[4:24:22] and have a job.
[4:24:25] And even if you're talking about people that are graduated
[4:24:28] in a full-time job outside of that,
[4:24:32] I think a lot more are starting to choose public transit if they can have that convenience factor
[4:24:37] of oh yeah my office is right next to the station so and especially with I'm not sure how long
[4:24:43] the UVX line is going to continue to be free but as far as free fares I do think that
[4:24:50] could factor in as well where if it was office space I think you'll have more people choosing
[4:24:56] that as even if they still have a car that they leave at home, I think they'll...
[4:25:00] We'll be using that a lot more for the daily commute. If their office is literally right across the street from the U.B.
[4:25:06] Exitation. So, again, I'm excited to see what goes in here and I'm confident that we can work together to define that, but I'm just not sure where they're yet with this proposal.
[4:25:22] Okay. I've got a bunch of comments I want to make, but I think we'll open it up to the public to hear any comments from the public first.
[4:25:30] and then I'll make my comments.
[4:25:32] So this is a public hearing, so we will open it up
[4:25:34] for anyone who would like to make a public comment.
[4:25:37] Please hold your comments to three minutes
[4:25:39] and give us your name when you come to the microphone.
[4:25:52] Name is Linda Brown.
[4:25:54] As I'm hearing, you're only comments on the traffic
[4:25:56] is coming off from University Parkway, heading south.
[4:26:00] My husband Barry and I use that street often
[4:26:04] as we come off from Santiago Road
[4:26:06] between a lot of apartments, and there is a blind hill, a blind curve coming up that hill,
[4:26:14] and it would be a quick right turn into this maverick property, and I'll have to turn into
[4:26:20] crispy cream. I think it would be a real hazard for traffic from coming from the south.
[4:26:27] Thank you.
[4:26:29] Were you to the neighborhood meeting?
[4:26:33] You were?
[4:26:45] I'm Ridge Orgy.
[4:26:46] I'm one of the neighbors.
[4:26:47] I'm not directly behind the development.
[4:26:50] I am further down.
[4:26:53] I am a diagonal from the development.
[4:26:56] I know that other zones were brought up as a possibility.
[4:27:01] Like a highway zone, or a PD12 zone, or other zones.
[4:27:04] I would hope that whatever zone you choose to change this property to, your paying attention
[4:27:12] to the neighbors.
[4:27:13] I've been familiar with PD-5, I know the seven foot wall, I know the 20 foot set back so forth
[4:27:17] and so on.
[4:27:18] PD-12, I don't know if that was an option for a gas station or not, but that wall is only
[4:27:23] about five feet.
[4:27:25] The highway zone, I don't know how that impacts the neighbors.
[4:27:29] And you're also talking about, I don't know if any of the neighbors are here if they're
[4:27:33] of you directly behind there, you're talking about possibly moving the entrance into that area
[4:27:39] for their south, some of those neighbors, I'm not sure what they would think of that.
[4:27:43] And then I did want to make a comment about what they made about what they stated about 18 to
[4:27:49] 24-year-olds, primarily writing that line.
[4:27:53] I guess when I was working, I probably would not give up my car because I would take my car during
[4:28:01] the day to run other errands and do other things.
[4:28:04] I also don't know that you have much transit,
[4:28:07] so if you're trying to do it,
[4:28:08] make it an office building complex,
[4:28:10] I don't know that you have many bus lines going across
[4:28:13] the city for them to get on that bus line
[4:28:17] to get on the other line to get to the office building.
[4:28:23] And so I don't know if that works at this point in time
[4:28:26] in terms of how the mass transit set up in Orange City.
[4:28:30] And I, you know, to speak positively of the right development group, I understand that they work well with neighbors, so I did want to say something about them.
[4:28:40] Thanks.
[4:28:43] Thank you.
[4:28:50] My name is Martin Wright.
[4:28:52] I came today because I wanted to talk about something else, but that's okay.
[4:28:58] I've watched, and you gotta go watch what happens around other cities.
[4:29:02] I work in just in Linden, they're building roads, they're building buildings and you can't predict how much traffic in there on one lane roads.
[4:29:12] This is a major road that you're taking people off and moving them on to.
[4:29:17] You're moving them on to an intersection.
[4:29:20] You're going to have the height where she had the gas station pumps.
[4:29:25] Were those lights shining across the street through the traffic?
[4:29:29] You know, across the university because it's higher up right there, it's shooting across because
[4:29:34] they pull through those pumps.
[4:29:37] You know, I honestly don't like the way Maverick's looked.
[4:29:40] That's just my personal opinion.
[4:29:41] I've been throughout the country.
[4:29:43] People have different ways of managing this.
[4:29:46] With the hotel, higher up.
[4:29:48] Make them drive in to get to the hotel, use the parking from the office building to supplement
[4:29:53] the hotel.
[4:29:53] I've been to hotels like that recently in Raleigh, North Carolina, that they have it all.
[4:30:00] Office building at night, the hotel takes all the parking spaces during the day, the office building has all the parking spaces back.
[4:30:07] You know, there's ways to do to complement the parking. You know, there's ways to make this a win, win for everybody.
[4:30:15] I don't think that having a gas station right there with the traffic mayor like you said, there's not enough space there.
[4:30:22] If you're going to add more a wider traffic entrance and you're going to write more easements to the side of it to give people on and off, it makes sense.
[4:30:33] But if you're just going to move it and put a divider down the middle and expect people to get into it, I don't see how they're going to do it.
[4:30:39] So either you got to move where the map where it's going to be at or change the philosophy of how we, and what do you want to see to look like when we first thing you drive into?
[4:30:49] Oh, there's an American right hand side. That's great. I don't think I want to, I want to be in a city like that.
[4:30:56] I'd rather see something that's more classy. Maybe it's hidden beside something.
[4:31:00] You know, but we want to see the city wants to be family oriented and this just kind of makes it community.
[4:31:07] You know, it takes that away. It takes that away.
[4:31:11] Thank you.
[4:31:14] Anyone else wishing to speak?
[4:31:17] If not, we'll close the public comment portion of our meeting and bring it back to the council.
[4:31:23] I would like to make some comments, unless anybody also wants to make some. First, Mark.
[4:31:32] Do you actually own this property or is it just on contract to buy a pending outcome of the meeting?
[4:31:38] We're currently under contract and we're scheduled to close soon on it.
[4:31:42] Regardless we're moving forward with the purchase.
[4:31:45] Thank you.
[4:31:48] Any other comments?
[4:31:49] So, yes, go ahead, Leslie.
[4:31:52] Some of the needs.
[4:31:53] I really appreciate them coming out tonight.
[4:31:57] I know it's such a big sacrifice to be here.
[4:32:01] And I just really appreciate their feedback.
[4:32:03] We work so closely with up to this point.
[4:32:06] We are going to ensure that we retain all of the landscaping,
[4:32:11] the existing mature landscaping to the south of the parcel,
[4:32:16] which will provide some additional screening from our site.
[4:32:20] We've also worked very closely in where we're placing our existing buildings to kind of push them as far from the existing residential homes as possible.
[4:32:31] And the only other thing that I have to add is as far as the canopy and lighting from the canopy projecting out onto other areas.
[4:32:42] So it's actually downward directing lighting and so all of that will be retained within the site.
[4:32:47] That's all I have to say.
[4:32:49] Thank you.
[4:32:50] So I appreciate the discussion that we've had and the different topics.
[4:32:56] So it is a beautiful site.
[4:32:57] Obviously, you feel the same way since it's not an inexpensive site to purchase.
[4:33:04] It has great value.
[4:33:06] I love the fact that you're going to keep the office building.
[4:33:08] I love the fact that you're going to do a pocket park that you could do a water feature there and maybe an identification feature.
[4:33:18] I think the idea of putting a hotel there is very makes a lot of sense.
[4:33:23] What we're trying to do as a city is to bring our buildings closer to the road and then to have landscaping along the road and then to have a sidewalk next to the building.
[4:33:36] And we've been changing state street that way and we'd like to do that here as well.
[4:33:44] So to me it would make sense to put a nice hotel there.
[4:33:50] Like I said, I've mentioned to you before, there's a nice marriot downtown Salt Lake on
[4:33:55] state street that is, you know, you have some pretty black glass, you have some beautiful
[4:34:03] metal. I mean, it looks really beautiful and classy. I think you could do a beautiful building
[4:34:09] like that. Whether you put a convenience store in the bottom of it or not, that would be up to you.
[4:34:15] I'm against putting in a gas station. I'm against putting in a maverick. I love the maverick brand.
[4:34:22] But I'm against putting it here. So I would like to really see either an office building or a really
[4:34:28] high-class well-built with great elevations hotel, not a medium type hotel with
[4:34:39] Spanish architecture but something that is high-class and looks really nice. The
[4:34:44] other thing that I think to remember is so if you do that there and you do the
[4:34:49] office space, then you have the space where you've got the hotel listed to the
[4:34:54] that's empty. And then the fourth story hotel there. So if you're flipping that with...
[4:35:00] We don't do the C-store. The question is, what do you do with that property? So a couple of suggestions we talked about at work session, you could put two really nice restaurants there. That would be one option. Another option is, often times, as you see, by the Maverick Estation 8th North, Marriott has put two hotels next to each other. That is, often done throughout many cities in the U.S., Marriott will put two hotels in the city.
[4:35:30] the same location. I could see you putting a nice hotel on
[4:35:35] University Parkway and even another different hotel, maybe
[4:35:39] the same brand, back where you have the hotel down here. That
[4:35:44] could make sense because UVU has a lot of people visiting, a lot
[4:35:48] of people coming and going. As you read in our study, we are
[4:35:53] short on hotel rooms in the city as far as income revenue goes,
[4:35:59] short on gas, but also on hotel rooms. I could see you putting two hotels here and doing very
[4:36:06] well with both of them. The other, so two restaurants, two hotels, the other thing, and I
[4:36:13] in Sam mentioned it to me, but I mentioned it, but it caught my thought pattern is he talked
[4:36:18] about a destination. Could you make this a destination? So what I mean by that is if you took
[4:36:25] of this property, could you do something that would make it a destination? By that, I mean, in
[4:36:32] Phoenix, they have a children's interactive museum that is three stories tall. It's about
[4:36:38] a block and a half long, and it has, I mean, it's not something that you go see. It's something
[4:36:45] you interact. So they have things where kids are on bridges, on special areas. I mean, certain
[4:36:54] interactive players. Anyway, we have a lot of children in our city. We're a family city
[4:37:00] USA, and I could give you the name and show you the reference. But if you were to put
[4:37:05] a destination in there together with some of these other facilities, I think you could maximize
[4:37:13] your return on investment for your square footage.
[4:37:18] Yeah, I ask a question.
[4:37:20] I appreciate your feedback.
[4:37:21] I really do.
[4:37:23] If proposed to QSRs or a restaurant,
[4:37:27] we would most place them where the convenience store is.
[4:37:32] It's very critical for QSR, a quick serve restaurant,
[4:37:37] or a restaurant to be visible.
[4:37:39] Sure.
[4:37:39] The major corridors and so that would be something.
[4:37:42] But it could also be part of the hotel building on the main floor.
[4:37:46] Just like when you look at our midtown 360, we have some very nice restaurants on the main floor
[4:37:54] and we have apartments that are going up above it.
[4:37:58] So on a mixed use facility, it would work very well, not so much a quick serve, but maybe a quick serve.
[4:38:06] I don't know, but if you had a really nice hotel, you could put some restaurants along the base of that hotel.
[4:38:12] And I think that would work really well.
[4:38:16] If it's approved, can we tell them what hotels to put there, you can't do it, can you?
[4:38:21] No, we can't, but we wouldn't, we have the right to approve or not approve what size hotel
[4:38:31] and we would request a type of hotel, but we wouldn't have control over it unless Jason, you know, different than I.
[4:38:38] good day but a hotel six or more tells they could and that's there are some type of development agreement
[4:38:45] they wouldn't limit them to a certain type of hotel but we could do that development agreement
[4:38:49] yeah yeah that's why recently met with motel six not for this look um it there there
[4:38:56] sweet spot they can pay at ten to fourteen dollars a square foot this wouldn't make that
[4:39:02] higher and so it's absolutely impossible to get a motel six at this location.
[4:39:09] Okay, but you could have a nice, I mean, you were talking about the Hilton brand and the
[4:39:14] Marriott brand.
[4:39:14] Or very upran, yes, and it's, and the Marriott brand has about a hundred different variations
[4:39:21] of hotels in their family of hotels.
[4:39:25] So you can have a really nice one and like I said, oftentimes you have two marriots in the same
[4:39:30] location throughout many cities of the US.
[4:39:33] But I think you could put in some nice restaurants, nice hotels.
[4:39:37] You could put in a destination that would draw people in, and you could put in a beautiful
[4:39:41] park, and I think you could make this pencil out without the sea store.
[4:39:46] Sea store certainly business-wise makes sense to you.
[4:39:50] It doesn't make sense to us as a city, so I'm trying to look at it, is there a compromise
[4:39:55] and some creativity where we could look at some ideas.
[4:40:00] To do something that makes sense from a financial return standpoint. So that's what I'm trying to bring forward.
[4:40:08] Anyway, you were saying you'd like to hear some creative thoughts, those are some creative thoughts. So you bet.
[4:40:16] If there's no other comments from the council, I'm ready to make a motion. I'm sorry, Mark.
[4:40:22] Thank you. First of all, Leslie, can I say you're one of the nicest developers we worked with?
[4:40:28] You are very gracious and very probably one of the briefs.
[4:40:32] I appreciate that. Appreciate that.
[4:40:36] As I've thought about this, I guess I'm looking at it more as a long term perspective.
[4:40:43] Over the years, this whole strip has been very vital to the city in the overall development
[4:40:49] from the standpoint of it going from orchards to developing significant retail base, a significant
[4:40:57] positive entrance that the EVX beautification that's gone on, it's really a beautiful part
[4:41:06] of town, and I think it was just interesting and not too long ago, and we heard that the
[4:41:12] Central Utah Water Conservancy District, which has been a great partner to the city,
[4:41:16] was moving to another location. It really offered an interesting perspective of
[4:41:21] to say, okay, here's this right at the edge of the hill, point of the mountain
[4:41:25] visible from everywhere, potentially, the crowning jewel on the rest of this
[4:41:31] development up and down University Parkway. And I, I, I agree with the mayor
[4:41:38] that I don't think the sea store is, is what needs to be the most
[4:41:41] visible thing from wherever you're coming from.
[4:41:47] I would hope that there's the possibility to look at something that really would be a beautiful
[4:41:52] out of a subutiful facility that is a bit of a landmark in Oram.
[4:41:57] I like the idea of the office complex.
[4:42:00] I've seen some beautiful office buildings built along the freeway.
[4:42:04] We had a giant, for example, wanted to make a statement with the building right off the
[4:42:09] freeway.
[4:42:10] This to me seems like it would be really potentially a really beautiful spot for not only the views of the employees that work there, but also for the view coming into the city.
[4:42:22] So I'm okay with the hotel, I'm not excited about restaurants either.
[4:42:28] I think I would rather see this be a very nice professional office development that takes advantage of its location of its accessibility proximity to the university.
[4:42:40] It's just my thought. Thank you.
[4:42:42] But I asked Marker question on that.
[4:42:45] If it was a stacked building where you had, you know,
[4:42:48] a nice restaurant on the main floor with office above it,
[4:42:51] would you be comfortable with that?
[4:42:52] Good, maybe.
[4:42:54] I mean, it's interesting because a key part of this area
[4:42:57] has a key driver has been the retail sales.
[4:43:00] So there's the part of me that says,
[4:43:02] you know, for a city, from an ultimate standpoint of
[4:43:06] revenue generating,
[4:43:07] The C-Store is a positive in that it generates a paramount of retail sales tax if I'm not mistaken, right?
[4:43:17] So it's a matter of there's that aspect, but I also think there's the aspect of the character, the community and the location and the proximity and the visibility that leads me to
[4:43:29] I'm not at all in favor of any kind of housing.
[4:43:32] I'm okay with hotel because I think hotels can be very, you know, positive impression but I really kind of liked what was laid out by our planning group that the, they envision are very nice quality business development here that becomes a bit of an anchor with, with the worm.
[4:43:52] So, and if a restaurant on the bottom floor, it's part of that, I'd be open to that, but not just to stand alone, you know, restaurant.
[4:44:05] Okay, I would like to make a motion.
[4:44:07] I would like to move that we continue.
[4:44:11] The request for the reason of the property, located at 355 West University Parkway,
[4:44:16] way to October the 29th at 6 p.m. That's our council meeting, two council meetings from now,
[4:44:25] giving about a month's worth of time, and would ask for a second.
[4:44:31] Point of question, Mayor. Yes.
[4:44:33] It's there a reason to put it on that day. I mean, it's possible you might.
[4:44:37] Well, we could put it sooner, but I'm thinking that if we're going to have discussions on how to do this,
[4:44:42] Leslie could tell us.
[4:44:44] I'll talk about 29th of a little work, I'll just fine.
[4:44:47] Okay.
[4:44:47] Great.
[4:44:49] And I'm going to make two motions.
[4:44:50] This is the first.
[4:44:52] So is there a second to this motion?
[4:44:54] Second.
[4:44:55] Okay.
[4:44:56] We'll start with Councilmember Seastron.
[4:44:58] Bye.
[4:44:59] Bye.
[4:45:00] Aye, aye, aye. Okay, that request is continued.
[4:45:04] I'm sorry. Aye. Thank you. Aye. Aye. Aye. So, that is continued to October 29 at 6pm. I would now like to move that the, that we deny
[4:45:20] meeting the PD-5 zone to include standard land use code 5530 gasoline
[4:45:27] service station with or without store as a permitted use. Is there a
[4:45:32] second? Okay. Councilmember Lens. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Tom?
[4:45:42] Okay. Thank you. All right.
[4:45:44] So that passes and we will continue as I said earlier. The reason request to
[4:45:51] October the 29th of 6 p.m. So thank you Leslie and appreciate having you here.
[4:45:57] Be appreciate your time.
[4:45:59] Okay. Thank you, Jason.
[4:46:00] Mayor, could I just ask a clarifying question?
[4:46:03] I know that we've already voted on continuing it.
[4:46:07] But I'm just curious what the general sense from the council is,
[4:46:10] if we do come with a dramatically different proposal,
[4:46:13] are we comfortable sending it back to the Planning Commission for review?
[4:46:20] Yes, so my request, let me put it this way and I don't know if I can amend my motion, but my request would be that you do go back to the planning commission and would there be enough time Jason for that to occur?
[4:46:35] Without having a concept plan, I'm not sure.
[4:46:38] Okay, it's possible, but so let me ask Leslie are you
[4:46:45] And maybe that's two of you can and be October
[4:46:51] Second and 16th
[4:46:54] Yeah, so we'd have to yeah, so if you went on the 16th and came to us on the 29th
[4:47:00] Does that it's possible is
[4:47:07] All right, well, we'll leave it at that. Let's just continue it. We're just to
[4:47:12] just to call it a hation that it's not a requirement for them to.
[4:47:16] So, let's just plan on the 29th and however things evolve, we'll see how that works.
[4:47:24] Okay, thank you. Appreciate it.
[4:47:26] All right, we'd like to move on now to a public hearing item 10.4.
[4:47:31] This is an ordinance where the applicant requests the city of men, the orange city,
[4:47:36] General plan on approximately 16.72 acres of property located generally a 1577 South Geneva
[4:47:45] road from the LDR low density residential designation to the MDR medium density residential
[4:47:51] designation and Jason Bench's our presenter.
[4:47:55] Thank you, Mayor.
[4:47:57] I just want to quickly give you a brief overview of this area and all your most of you are
[4:48:03] with this area. But just the southwest area was annexed in August of 2015. There was a very
[4:48:10] long night. Those that were on the council at that point. I think we got done it two o'clock in the
[4:48:14] morning. But the annexation or annex area was 227 acres, although the total service area which
[4:48:19] will have some maps is a lot larger than that, 289. So the impact fee area is the density, the
[4:48:25] 1250 year use that we referred to tonight is based on the entire impact fee area, not just the
[4:48:31] in 27 acres that was annexed at the time. So as we look at the capacity and the ability for the units,
[4:48:38] we're talking the entire area, not including any other areas that were not part of that area,
[4:48:42] like the Klinger property and others that were not annexed that are currently in
[4:48:47] not in the Manoshoye on the map as well. At the time, the Council approved a general plan map that
[4:48:53] had low density residential between Geneva Road and the Roro Tracks going east and light industrial
[4:49:00] going west along Geneva Road. The impact fee areas were approved, including the
[4:49:07] 1250 ERUs or units that were allowed in that area. And at the time, the
[4:49:13] property was rezoned. We showed you a quick map. This is the current zoning map.
[4:49:18] So the majority of the property was in a holding zone or rezoned in all
[4:49:21] things on to OS5, which is a five-acre minimum zone. With the idea that the
[4:49:26] applicant would come back when they're ready to develop and propose a
[4:49:29] So you can see some areas of the R8, the two M1 zones, and the PD43 that was owned that night.
[4:49:36] So this represents the annexed area of 227 acres.
[4:49:40] Like I mentioned, the LDR areas were on majority on the east side of Geneva Road,
[4:49:47] and then the LIR light industrial on the west.
[4:49:51] And the service area that you can see in the cross-touched areas,
[4:49:54] that's including the tourney and acres which was the entire area for the impact fee areas.
[4:50:00] The conservation easements on the west and the agriculture easement were not included in the service area or the potential annexed areas. The property owners did not want it to be included at that point.
[4:50:13] Before you tonight is Mr. McDowell, who wants to the property that you accept?
[4:50:17] Jason, could we ask Mr. McDowell to come forward?
[4:50:25] If you want to sit there with Jason, that'd be great.
[4:50:29] The Ryan is here requesting that he has two applications.
[4:50:33] One is not before each an eye for the PD zone.
[4:50:35] He had an application in prior to our changing the requirements
[4:50:38] to not allow applications on currently residential properties.
[4:50:42] So that is in the process.
[4:50:44] And then a general plan amendment, which he's here before you tonight,
[4:50:47] at our request he's agreed to come before you with just the general plan amendment
[4:50:51] to see if the council wants to move forward with a different designation
[4:50:55] other than the load density that was approved back in 2015. So he agreed and then is willing to come
[4:51:00] before you tonight. And so we're presenting that as an option. So before you tonight is his property,
[4:51:06] which is the 16 plus acres that he's requesting the PDZell in the proposed PDZell that he has,
[4:51:12] so just give you a quick concept plan. There's 11.6 units per acre. He does have some attached,
[4:51:20] You know, it's fine, get in this area here, and then you've got some single family attached,
[4:51:24] or detached units there, which I'll show you a couple examples of those as well.
[4:51:29] So this is, our is proposed to attach units that we build on the east side of the property,
[4:51:35] and then this represents the single family detached units that he wants to build,
[4:51:40] closer to the Geneva Road area.
[4:51:43] a quick question. Yes. What are the square footage of the units? How many bedrooms and the
[4:51:50] approximate starting cost? So we have been working with different home builders on different
[4:51:58] products in this range.
[4:52:02] And what we have seen is most of these single family units are probably
[4:52:06] going to be around the 2200 square foot range and they're going to have a two-car garage. But
[4:52:11] that's going to be dependent on each building can be a little bit different.
[4:52:16] So you could have one, three better and one, four better and depending on how you use the space.
[4:52:19] Some of them can be a little bit bigger.
[4:52:21] Some of them can be a little bit smaller.
[4:52:23] But we actually plan on doing all two car garages.
[4:52:28] And then the price point that we've been targeting is about $300,000 starting on the single family.
[4:52:36] So two issues before tonight. One is the Council want to stay status quo, keep the land use designation that was approved in 2015, which was the low density residential 4.3 ERUs per acre, which is what the equivalent is, or you want to consider doing something different.
[4:52:56] If that's the case, there are a couple things a staff we need to, I think, at least let
[4:53:02] you know that should be considered.
[4:53:04] One is the IFFP, which is the impact fee facility's plan and the impact fee analysis should
[4:53:09] be amended prior to any change in a zone.
[4:53:14] Right now it's a zone for the impact fees based on the load density residential, so the
[4:53:18] impact fees are based on that, although Ryan agreed in the planning commission that he'd be
[4:53:22] willing to pay that impact fee, it may not be fair to future developers if they want
[4:53:25] come in and pay a higher impact fee if it can be lowered, if you decide to go a different
[4:53:30] rate.
[4:53:31] So that should be looked at and that's probably four to six, maybe eight months, process
[4:53:35] to get that looked at.
[4:53:37] The other thing is the spring water lift stations, which this, although the line in Geneva
[4:53:41] road does gravity feed to the north, it does fall into two lift stations in the spring
[4:53:46] water area that they have been lifts it to the sewer treatment plant.
[4:53:50] Those two lift stations are currently in design based on this density and other densities
[4:53:54] in the area to design it a certain capacities so that it can handle future capacity.
[4:53:59] If this area is upgraded, meaning that the PRDs or other densities are permitted in this area,
[4:54:07] then we need to look at that to see if those lift stations should not be upgraded now rather
[4:54:11] than having them built and then two years later to decide that we need to upgrade them because
[4:54:14] we are over capacity.
[4:54:16] So those are the two key things that we need to look at.
[4:54:19] So Jason, I would add a third to that, and that is the traffic situation, how much additional
[4:54:26] traffic this will put on to Geneva Road and how many entrances and exits there are.
[4:54:33] Maybe you could just go over a little bit about where the entrance to next it is.
[4:54:37] So because, yeah, I don't know if you're familiar with the Lakeview Parkway, but let me see if
[4:54:42] I can,
[4:54:44] so Ryan was kind enough to provide this map, which I just lost.
[4:55:00] So if you can see right, well, it's not, sorry. So the property in question, which I can't point in this pointer, but the cul-de-sac that comes off, Geneva Road, the Lakeview Parkways, the one that you can see labeled there, that actually will. So the his access will actually come off, you know, or Geneva Road, onto that little cul-de-sac.
[4:55:20] So the point being, so this is the end of the cul-de-sac that we just saw in that. So he has one access here, although he does show future access points going north and south, there is no plan right now to connect those.
[4:55:32] even those would be dependent upon the property owners to the north and to the south.
[4:55:37] Right, so they would have to develop to have that go through.
[4:55:40] And if they didn't develop or took a long time,
[4:55:43] that would then leave us with the one entrance.
[4:55:46] Right, so those things can be worked out.
[4:55:47] If the council decides that, yeah, that's a new direction we want to go.
[4:55:50] Then we can look at access and we can do those types of things.
[4:55:53] The point of the meeting tonight I think is to find out the direction that the council wants to go to.
[4:56:01] or do we want to then deviate and move forward? If we want to move forward in a different direction,
[4:56:06] then I think these three things that we just discussed.
[4:56:09] So NMDR is eight, is that correct?
[4:56:11] Penal plan is eight units to the acre, and right now we're at 4.3.
[4:56:16] 4.3 is what the facilities plan into the older yard.
[4:56:20] And that area, right?
[4:56:21] Can someone really have a question?
[4:56:23] Yeah, so PRD is considered medium density or still.
[4:56:29] So it is under the designation of low density.
[4:56:31] So we can, without the city, and you guys are familiar with
[4:56:34] priorities coming before you, and they typically are
[4:56:36] right now designing it about six, five to six units per acre.
[4:56:40] Or if the one thing I was saying, like the Baxter Gardens,
[4:56:42] we just did, that seemed to fit nicely with the single
[4:56:46] family.
[4:56:47] Yeah, well, it was below four, I mean, a five.
[4:56:49] It was four points, something the one that we're looking
[4:56:51] at tomorrow on the center street in a 1000 east is 4.5.
[4:56:56] And so they based on the number of units in the street,
[4:57:00] configurations of things, not very few of them
[4:57:02] get up to seven years per acre, if we did allow a PRD,
[4:57:06] would we have to go back and redo all of our plans
[4:57:07] or would we just incrementally just do a little bit
[4:57:10] because it's three more per acre, four to seven.
[4:57:14] I think based on the fact that we've approved them
[4:57:16] at a 4.3 density, if we choose now to increase that
[4:57:19] by doing PRDs in that area, we really need to look at it
[4:57:22] because that option would be available to anybody
[4:57:24] in that area.
[4:57:25] And so I think we need to look at it if we're going to allow this property, for example, about a PRD.
[4:57:29] We really should look at the whole area to see if that makes sense as a city
[4:57:33] and then update these plans, so our fees may be adjusted one way or the other.
[4:57:37] The list stations need to be adjusted one way or the other, so that we can, before we go down that road,
[4:57:41] I think we need to look at that.
[4:57:44] Come on, Summer's sister.
[4:57:46] Yeah, typically when there's a request to change his own.
[4:57:49] There's usually a statement as to why the current zone is not functional or viable.
[4:57:54] is there a reason why the current R8 zone or master plan is not viable?
[4:57:59] Thank you for that question. Yes. So if you could go to the table.
[4:58:12] Okay.
[4:58:16] So thank you for that question. That's actually one of the points that I would bring up is
[4:58:22] when you look at our property. If you look on this slide, you can see
[4:58:26] Does this?
[4:58:28] So we are right here, Elm Press Farm, right here.
[4:58:32] So we are currently sandwiched in between industrial and on my map.
[4:58:39] This was a city map that I thought maybe you can help me with this.
[4:58:43] But these are the two tracks here and your current map.
[4:58:46] I think it showed a low density residential right here.
[4:58:48] Is that correct?
[4:58:50] That's current.
[4:58:51] But it's probably going to be more low density or low-end industrial.
[4:58:53] OK.
[4:58:54] So, this is probably more accurate, and so, when we're looking at our, at our, that question
[4:59:03] of, as far as density, there's a few things that we're taking into account, one of
[4:59:09] them is that the density that's currently at single-family homes in that price range are
[4:59:14] going to be prohibitively expensive for most people that are looking to live, to move to
[4:59:25] on the east and the west, and you've also got the front runner tracks, the Southern Pacific Railroad, and I-15, just to the east of us.
[4:59:34] Another factor in that is, you know, anywhere you look in a city where they're doing lower density,
[4:59:41] a single family, and that range, you're looking half a million dollar plus homes.
[4:59:46] And we don't feel that that is appropriate for the way this property sits.
[4:59:53] When we, if you look at this, if you were to fast forward maybe five years and let's just assume,
[4:59:59] in five years that we have...
[5:00:00] The lake view parkway. That parkway, as you can kind of see on the map, this is actually an older alignment, so it doesn't show. This actually is going to cut in further here, I think, than what this map shows.
[5:00:15] So if we fast forward five years and let's just assume this is all developed out and if we go back to that, where's that, what's the cross section and that
[5:00:30] one.
[5:00:31] So if you look at the type of stuff that's going to be going around us, if you look at, actually I want to right there, so this is, this is just, just south of us on Geneva, this is all going, I guess, this is, I saw this originally, I think, a week or so ago where this is all going to be warehouse space.
[5:00:50] And so it doesn't, we wouldn't, I guess if I were buying a half million dollar plus home and I knew and I didn't know what was coming down the pipeline as far as there's going to be warehousing right across the street for me.
[5:01:07] There's obviously you'd be able to see the front runner and you'd be able to see the freeway.
[5:01:11] But you're going to have that in five years or so you're going to have that lake view parkway, which is a major, major road that's going to be going through there.
[5:01:18] So there's quite a few factors that I think factor into why we believe that that low of
[5:01:29] density doesn't work and I think honestly probably the biggest is just the cost of homes
[5:01:36] that will be that will have to build in that area.
[5:01:39] I mean there'll be very expensive homes and typically you're not going to want to put those
[5:01:43] very expensive homes right in the same area that you're doing industrial right up against the
[5:01:47] road tracks and right in front of where there's a major thoroughfidder coming through.
[5:01:57] Show that map again with the property to the north.
[5:02:00] Tie to the mayor's, mayor's point that you're accounting on some traffic flow exit to the
[5:02:05] north.
[5:02:06] I'm sorry.
[5:02:07] It looked like in your map that you had some access out to the Geneva Road, but you're
[5:02:13] also planning on some traffic flow heading north and south out of here.
[5:02:18] Yes.
[5:02:20] So is that not go right into a conservation or an agricultural
[5:02:24] management property that has no intention of ever developing?
[5:02:27] Well, when we originally came before the city, we actually proposed that this
[5:02:33] would be private and not connect, but the city or the staff requests that we add those
[5:02:39] subroads and I believe they felt like, you know, in the eventuality that it does
[5:02:46] develop that they'd want those there. And so it's not necessarily a critical part of our design,
[5:02:53] and we, you know, it's not something that we requested or we wanted necessarily.
[5:02:58] Well what you're saying is all the traffic would go out the one exit on the west.
[5:03:03] So is there a good option for exits on the north of the south?
[5:03:06] We didn't design that in as far as, I mean, we designed this or we originally envisioned it as just a private street.
[5:03:15] all going with just the one exit. Thank you. That's it, Mayor. Any other questions or comments from the council?
[5:03:25] Council and relance? Regarding the road access there, is there any way to make that road wider or the intersection wider so that you can have, you know, dedicated turn lanes coming out of there?
[5:03:38] because I, I don't imagine that there would be a ton of traffic congestion in this small
[5:03:45] neighborhood, as long as you have, you know, white enough streets and things like that.
[5:03:49] But if the, if the only traffic concern was really that intersection, which you need a road,
[5:03:54] can we address that by just improving the proposed intersection there?
[5:03:59] I would imagine, and, and again, this is a very preliminary concept, and I would imagine
[5:04:08] there are multiple ways to handle that, and we're open to, you know, whatever is the the
[5:04:14] wisest route to go as far as handling traffic and the way to connect into Geneva. So yes, I believe so.
[5:04:23] And is there enough frontage on Geneva road with your property specifically where you could have
[5:04:31] two roads coming into Geneva Road or with those V2 close together?
[5:04:37] That's a great question.
[5:04:39] We do, I believe, have enough frontage.
[5:04:42] We've met with you, not, and it's been a while, and so I can't remember, but I believe they kind of pushed
[5:04:52] this towards more of the one entrance, and so what you see here as we've got this kind of split entrance,
[5:04:57] which
[5:05:00] With the island or the median in the middle, which is kind of the current design. But I believe
[5:05:06] it was more of an issue and maybe can help me out if he remembers, but it was more of an issue
[5:05:13] with getting access from you. We currently have two accesses on the property. There's two driveways
[5:05:19] currently on the property right now. I'm not sure if it's easy to answer this question right up front.
[5:05:28] But if we did, instead of going with the proposed zoning,
[5:05:32] if we went with a PRD, for example, how many units would you lose?
[5:05:38] And would that mean that half of the town homes become single family homes?
[5:05:45] Or can you speak to what that might look like on the page?
[5:05:50] Yeah, that does require a little bit of math in my head.
[5:05:54] But we would basically, if we were to do a PRD here, I'm assuming you're thinking seven
[5:06:02] units, the acre, is that, is that, I think that's the limit, right?
[5:06:05] Yeah, so at that point we would eliminate all of the town homes that would only be, basically,
[5:06:12] we would hit that density with only the single family.
[5:06:15] And with we talked about this, I think a couple of weeks ago, but with, I think the single
[5:06:22] family homes, the plan was to sell those with the town homes, I think a portion were planned
[5:06:27] to retain and rent those cowards or something like that.
[5:06:30] Yeah, I think our plan and, you know, as we flesh through it, as we've, as we've come,
[5:06:38] we originally started with an entire, when we originally presented our, our original concept
[5:06:43] was only town homes, is it four years ago?
[5:06:46] No, this was about a year ago, I believe.
[5:06:51] And so we presented our original concept that we presented to staff was solely town homes.
[5:06:58] And it is evolved to this point where we have the mixture of the town homes and the single family.
[5:07:05] And as we've evolved to this point, we have basically come to that point where we feel like the town homes would be more of a rental property.
[5:07:15] and then the single families would be a foresell project and would be, sorry, it would be like a 50 depending on how the financing worked out,
[5:07:24] it would be about about 50, 50, so that we can secure that type of financing for it.
[5:07:30] And would both the single family homes, the town homes, be on an HOA and the same HOA or separate?
[5:07:37] Yes. Thank you for that question.
[5:07:45] So the way we envision it is, you can kind of see some of the clubhouse, and again, this is very preliminary, but we've got some open space and clubhouse in the middle here, well kind of in the middle, right in this area, and this would all be common to the entire development.
[5:08:06] So, whether you owned or whether you rented, you would have access to this pool, clubhouse, open space area.
[5:08:13] Same really with this open space area over here with the top lot and the field.
[5:08:20] I would imagine that the single family home residents probably wouldn't use this as much,
[5:08:25] but this one we kind of place centrally so that both community or both,
[5:08:31] it would kind of be in the middle for everyone to access that they would everyone to be able to enjoy it.
[5:08:37] And if it went to a PRD where it was all single family homes, would you still envision that same type of shared pool clubhouse space?
[5:08:47] That's part of the nature.
[5:08:47] We would still, I mean if we were to if we were to go to something less dense, we would still provide amenities.
[5:08:56] And I don't have an exact plan of what those would be, but it would still have open space and amenities and things.
[5:09:03] We wouldn't want to build something that didn't provide those types of things.
[5:09:12] It wouldn't want to build the way that you would want to live there.
[5:09:15] We'd want to have places for people to gather and to join and have barbecues and all of them.
[5:09:24] That's all for now.
[5:09:25] Could we have Paul Goodrich come back into the city council chambers? I'd like to hear from him as far as
[5:09:33] Traffic goes
[5:09:35] Coming out on to Geneva Road
[5:09:39] Paul, if you could talk to us about the
[5:09:44] I'm sorry, what Tom?
[5:09:51] You bet you bet Paul could you tell us about the traffic and
[5:09:58] You know how much traffic you believe
[5:10:00] Anybody there would be? How much room Geneva road needs?
[5:10:05] Patient, do you have the slide that shows where the new Lakeview Parkway is going to be? Thank you.
[5:10:14] So anyway,
[5:10:19] looking at that slide that's on the screen right now, Geneva Road is the access that's kind of,
[5:10:27] take in the angle. I don't know if you can see that very, okay, well you can see where Lake
[5:10:35] View Parkway is depicted. Well Geneva Road is over to the right and you can kind of see that
[5:10:44] that one section of Geneva Road is right where this project is coming in is about where that
[5:10:49] this act is, at that location.
[5:10:54] Part of the problem is, in my estimation, what's going to
[5:10:59] be generated by this site is going to be a little over 2,200 vehicles a day. It could possibly
[5:11:07] be higher than that because it takes a while to get to services, grocery stores, gas stations,
[5:11:16] schools, all of those other things. It takes a while to get there. It could be higher than that.
[5:11:22] With that access shown at that location, and maybe I can back up and say that on the transportation
[5:11:32] master plant, the region's transportation master plant, the Lakeview Parkway is shown to be in need within the next 10 years.
[5:11:40] Now, I don't think it's, you know, one of our high needs, other than as development happens and as rezoning occurs, we protect a corridor.
[5:11:50] Provost already planning for it and has part of it in place, I believe.
[5:11:54] Yes, they do.
[5:11:58] But I don't think I personally, I don't think it's one of those things that we want to spend our resources in giving federal funding to put a road that's going to benefit
[5:12:09] and spend a 7% match on the millions of dollars of it's going to take to build that roadway.
[5:12:18] And one of the things that I'm thinking may happen as we do a corridor analysis with you dot of the Geneva Road corridor,
[5:12:25] or basically, and it's not just Geneva Road, but it's everything west of I-15.
[5:12:31] right now the 2050 model shows that there is a need because of traffic to have a second
[5:12:37] I-15 somewhere between I-15 and the lake. Not the other side of the lake, this side of the lake.
[5:12:46] Well, one of the things that I think might happen with this area is that lake view parkway may actually
[5:12:52] you come bigger and when it goes down south of the airport, it may actually even go across the
[5:12:58] proble bay to be, it's not going to be another I-15, but it's actually, it's actually
[5:13:04] envisioned that way.
[5:13:06] Yes, I know, I know the vision is that way, but anyway, it looks like we're going to have
[5:13:11] a study with proble and vineyard and other communities on this corridor to look at that.
[5:13:17] Um, anyway, this is what's already adopted on our master plan, the City Council, I don't
[5:13:26] know, five, six, seven years ago, adopted this general plan for this layout like this.
[5:13:33] But again, you know, and if you look at the concept plan, they do show a road stubbing to
[5:13:38] the north and they still show a road stubbing to the south.
[5:13:41] But those properties aren't ready to develop, and they have an obtain to the road corridor to be able to make a grid network connection.
[5:13:52] And having 2200 plus vehicles a day going to, whether it's one location on Geneva Road or two that's very close together on Geneva Road, it's still one location.
[5:14:05] So
[5:14:09] anyway, I think it's premature to from a traffic standpoint to approve anything like that until some zoning and some general plan changes happen for properties on both sides so that we can make sure that we have a grid network system.
[5:14:26] I mean, that's what we've got through the rest of the forum. That's one of the reasons why we have less traffic problems in other cities.
[5:14:32] And you mean where the stub roads could go to the north and south?
[5:14:37] See those stub roads to the north and south right now just go nowhere.
[5:14:41] And if we're just sending everything to the west, to basically to Geneva Road,
[5:14:48] and I know the developer, you know, I haven't met with the Utah people about this access,
[5:14:57] but after I show them or remind them.
[5:15:00] How it's going to be dead ended and how late few parkways going to carry the majority of the traffic to the south.
[5:15:07] They may change their mind about giving them two accesses.
[5:15:12] So, anyway, I think it's premature.
[5:15:14] I think there's too much density just from a traffic standpoint, without the roads, without the grid network,
[5:15:21] with everything just trying to go to Geneva Road.
[5:15:25] Any other questions?
[5:15:27] Okay, thank you, appreciate it. Tom, did you have some comments?
[5:15:41] Well, we could all tell that we are being asked to be out there.
[5:15:46] It is based on not only units going out to all projects,
[5:15:51] but frankly granting this project more than this whole fair share of doors
[5:15:56] is unfair to the other property holders who will get less for their money.
[5:16:01] Thank you very much.
[5:16:02] They can develop as many people.
[5:16:05] So, for me, changing that requires the novel change in how much we've shown to me,
[5:16:10] back to you, so, frankly, I want to go down that road.
[5:16:17] Okay, thank you, Tom.
[5:16:20] This is a public hearing, so I would like to go ahead and open it up to the public.
[5:16:24] We would request that anyone who speaks, give us their name, and hold their comments
[5:16:29] to three minutes, and the time is now open.
[5:16:32] Mayor.
[5:16:33] Make a comment.
[5:16:35] Maybe a suspected developer maybe has a presentation that he wants to make before public
[5:16:39] comment.
[5:16:39] Yes.
[5:16:40] If it's okay.
[5:16:41] Sure.
[5:16:41] Yeah.
[5:16:42] I was not aware of that.
[5:16:43] Thank you.
[5:16:44] Appreciate it.
[5:16:44] We will hold off.
[5:16:46] Public comment, portion of the hearing.
[5:16:49] Tell after his presentation.
[5:16:53] Thank you.
[5:16:55] So, a couple of points, I guess, to address some of the concerns that have been brought
[5:17:00] up.
[5:17:01] If we look at the entire area and we're talking about, you know, fairness and and
[5:17:07] densities and things like that, just to, I guess, get a good overall picture of what
[5:17:14] we're looking at.
[5:17:15] So our property, you can see which is Elmcress Farm, which is about 16 acres.
[5:17:20] Ryan, one question real quick.
[5:17:22] So have you purchased that property and do you own it?
[5:17:24] Yes.
[5:17:25] We do own it.
[5:17:28] So originally and that it's probably confusing because originally when I brought the annexation
[5:17:33] petition forward, the property that I was working on at the time was this Wilkerson Farm property.
[5:17:41] And so just to refresh memories,
[5:17:45] I put together the annex, excuse me, the annexation
[5:17:48] petition for this region with the intent to develop the Wilkerson Farm property which was about
[5:17:56] We were denied, our application was denied and that property has since been sold to a charitable trust.
[5:18:06] And that charitable trust is the purpose of it is to maintain open farm ground to maintain farm grounds within cities.
[5:18:18] And so they've taken it out of development basically.
[5:18:22] And so, and that gets to my larger point of the overall density in the area and the traffic.
[5:18:28] So, so when you're looking at RPs at the north end of the LM for LM crest farms,
[5:18:33] a couple of unique things about us is we're talking about the future like few parkway
[5:18:38] and how it may even be bigger.
[5:18:41] So, I would ask you to just kind of use your imagination and just kind of think,
[5:18:44] you know, let's say five years from now, let's say we come back five years from now
[5:18:48] with an application and that that that parkways in and some of that industrials in.
[5:18:55] It's not going to be, I believe at that point it's not going to be a question of whether
[5:19:00] we should do single family.
[5:19:01] It's going to be a question of how much can we fit on this property at that point because
[5:19:05] it's going to be a massive road going right in front of us.
[5:19:09] We're going to have warehouses all around us.
[5:19:12] We have a multi-family to the north, we have multi-family to the south and yet we're trying
[5:19:17] you aren't, you know, large, large, large single family in between those.
[5:19:22] If you look at the fairness question, if we were to divvy up these units, right, I guess
[5:19:32] is the question before us.
[5:19:34] So the way the densities are calculated now and the way their distributors, basically,
[5:19:43] the entire area. So this entire area is all slated, excuse me, I guess it goes more like this.
[5:19:53] So this all this residential is slated to have basically the same density.
[5:20:00] Minus the conservation easement, which was not included and this is the school here that's not included.
[5:20:08] So, I guess the point being, if you take the Wilkerson farm just for one out of the equation,
[5:20:15] because it's now in a charitable trust to be kept in farming and perpetuity, that opens up quite a few units.
[5:20:23] If you look at the AC property, which is also slated to have quite a bit of density, that's already developed, and it's not likely to change its use.
[5:20:33] If you look at this millhaven property here, this is already developed to single family.
[5:20:41] And then you've got these smaller units here, which are all, I guess, wouldn't say remnant, but there's one acre to one point, you know, something acres.
[5:20:50] and they already have homes on them, and then you've got this home here at the Brown Home, which is already has a home on it.
[5:20:59] So you have, I guess the point is, I don't believe it's realistic to expect all those properties to develop out at that density.
[5:21:10] I believe even if you just considered only the workers in farm as being taken out of development, and you don't consider the easy property,
[5:21:17] who knows, maybe they'll, you know, sometime in the future decide to add something to their
[5:21:21] property. I don't know. I can't speak for them. But I believe that it's quite likely that
[5:21:27] many of these properties that are in this area that this density has been allotted to will
[5:21:31] not change their use, or it's not likely that they will change their use. And so, as far as the,
[5:21:39] as far as the traffic and the discussions, I completely agree that we've got to be smart with
[5:21:45] traffic and we've got to design this in a smart way to not affect, you know, to not to
[5:21:52] not be a burden and we're open to looking at different options in different ways to mitigate
[5:21:58] that. But I think if you look at the overall area, this is one of the least dense areas in
[5:22:05] the entire city. If you look at the fact that we've got this massive, these massive areas here,
[5:22:16] So, you've got this massive conservation easement, this massive agriculture easement, you've got the conservation easement over here.
[5:22:24] You've got, you know, the church property up here, which is owned by the presiding bishopric.
[5:22:30] It's not owned by the arm that's going to develop or build buildings.
[5:22:35] So, that's going to be a fairly low dense property.
[5:22:39] This general area is a pretty low dense area in the city and it will remain so because of just all of the easements and things that are on the property and so I believe
[5:22:51] You know
[5:22:53] Our
[5:22:54] The density that we're requesting is is you know kind of a drop in the bucket. It's not really going to be a massive burden on
[5:23:02] On the entire area if you if you consider it as a whole
[5:23:05] So a question, if you were to switch to medium density, then Peterson would have that availability to them as well, correct?
[5:23:18] If council goes that way, they would.
[5:23:20] Okay.
[5:23:20] At least the precedents would be set.
[5:23:22] Presidents.
[5:23:24] And the Taylor property could go that way.
[5:23:28] The other deliverer property could go that way.
[5:23:31] So that's eight, that's 12, that's 20, and you have 16, so it could be 36 to 40 acres that would change from low density to medium density.
[5:23:45] And if you take out the 14 for the Wilkerson farm, and I can't speak for the tailors, I wouldn't presume to.
[5:23:51] I don't know what they'll plan on doing with their property.
[5:23:53] And I don't know exactly what they're, you know, why they section out the 5.25 acres out of the conservationies, and I know they live there, and they have their home there.
[5:24:05] And so I don't know what their plans are, but I would have seen it with Peterson's plans are.
[5:24:11] I don't believe they have any at this point.
[5:24:15] And again, I hate to speak for them, maybe they do, but I haven't heard of anything.
[5:24:20] But I wouldn't imagine that the tailors would be looking to do much density considering that they put most of their property.
[5:24:29] They were the ones that didn't disconcervation.
[5:24:31] He's been over here as well.
[5:24:32] So they're not necessarily the, I wouldn't pack them for looking to do much density.
[5:24:37] But again, I can't speak for them.
[5:24:38] I don't know what their plans are.
[5:24:42] But I believe, you know, just looking at the entire area.
[5:24:46] I believe this is, for talking about trying to bring people to forum that they can afford it,
[5:24:53] they can afford to move here without spending, you know, where at least $500,000 now on a single pound.
[5:25:00] On that size of a lot, at least. And that's conservative, I believe, if it were me building the home and
[5:25:06] be more starting more at around $600,000. And so, you know, I believe our vision is, we want
[5:25:14] to provide a product that people can afford to have a single-family home, have a two-car garage,
[5:25:22] have an affordable place to live within a convenient, with inconvenient reach of the freeway,
[5:25:29] was in convenient reach of the schools and not have these people that would be moving into
[5:25:37] these homes moving to Eagle Mountain and commuting here or moving to pace and commuting here
[5:25:41] but moving here and staying here. And I believe that's what I believe is good for the city as well.
[5:25:49] I believe that if the city is intent on having either apartments either you're living in an apartment
[5:25:57] or you're living in a half a million dollar plus home,
[5:25:59] then there's, I think, a large segment of the population,
[5:26:02] unfortunately, it gets left out of that equation.
[5:26:05] And I think, you know, we feel like this is a great place to do this.
[5:26:07] I don't believe that there are many places in the city now.
[5:26:10] You could do this type of a product and it's a very, very popular product.
[5:26:14] I believe if we had them up right now, we could sell them immediately.
[5:26:17] I mean, there's a demand for this type of a home.
[5:26:20] There's a lot of people that can't afford to live here
[5:26:23] that would love to have a single family home here.
[5:26:25] I think we could sell these homes very quickly and people would love to live here in those homes.
[5:26:31] Councillor Sey-Strand has a question for you?
[5:26:34] I just wanted to thank you for clarifying the vision, because as you mentioned, there's church
[5:26:40] property to the North, there's the Taher family, there's all these other places that are low density.
[5:26:46] My thought was, hold on up.
[5:26:47] That's exactly what we had in mind.
[5:26:50] That's what we envisioned for this area.
[5:26:51] That's what you were part of that old discussion, and you know, that's what the intent of property owners in the neighbors in the area was to retain this as a load entity, rural family area, that it was not intended to be a high density issue, it was not that's why the Wilkinson Farm was denied was there was no intention to do anything other than preserve this area with the conservation easements and the agricultural easements and those things to say,
[5:27:20] That's what the property owners in this area, and that's what the city envisioned is that there are other places in the city where you're going to see
[5:27:28] High-density apartments on very busy streets like state street and and University Parkway in various areas, but for this area that's rare that's unique
[5:27:38] That's a farming community. That's what we were trying to preserve, and I think as you laid that out, I felt well, yeah, that's exactly what
[5:27:48] that's what everybody want it. So I'm approaching this from a standpoint of I don't know
[5:27:55] that low density residential is a failing proposition. I think there are many people that are
[5:28:00] looking for a nice quiet rural area in Oram to enjoy a very quiet lifestyle surrounded by farms,
[5:28:09] surrounded by livestock, surrounded by the amenities that you don't see too often in big cities.
[5:28:15] I think that's a huge plus and a benefit, and I'm really anxious to hear from the neighbors too that are here to speak, so I won't say any more, but I do think that's what was intended, was to go with that, and everything we did was in that regard, the NC calculations, all of the planning was tied to that, and I'm really concerned that just a few years into it, now we're back here to say the neighbors, now we changed our mind.
[5:28:44] we see this as a medium or identity, that doesn't apply with me because I think we were all part of a really good plan
[5:28:51] to say, how do we add this part to the city in a way that really preserves the integrity of this community?
[5:28:58] Thank you. I appreciate you saying that because I do understand the idea of maintaining this as farm ground and as rural.
[5:29:12] I guess I just, unfortunately, see, when I look at it, you know, I feel like, well, yeah, but the city did approve, you know, the Mansel project, which is all multi-family, which is this.
[5:29:24] Oh, we did, which was a paid for the infrastructure development and the city, okay, on for it.
[5:29:30] That was the, that was the exchange for that.
[5:29:32] you can go just south of 2000 south and by lower density or lower cost higher density housing in
[5:29:39] proble. But I think the intent was here in or we want to keep this distinctive in separate
[5:29:45] and that that was the intent of how we we did that. So that's just my my thought and it doesn't seem
[5:29:51] like it was that long ago that we had to a clock a meetings on on this whole thing because it was
[5:29:58] critical and important.
[5:30:07] I think we were also on this property here. I put the annexation petition together, and we were willing to pay for those utilities, as well. And in fact, Jeff Mansell came in and asked to join on to the annexation petition. We were prepared to do that.
[5:30:29] to move forward without him.
[5:30:31] And so he was kind of a late comer to the whole annexation.
[5:30:35] And then our project was rejected.
[5:30:38] But I think also to your point, as far as what the vision is
[5:30:44] for this area, I guess I just don't understand.
[5:30:48] If that's the vision why we're putting light and dust,
[5:30:51] we're surrounded by light and dust real.
[5:30:54] And we're going to be backing the front runner.
[5:30:56] We're going to be backing the freeway.
[5:30:57] live in this area. I can hear the freeway from at least at least from here. I can hear the
[5:31:04] freeway every day. And I look at, you know, what's coming as far as the Lakeview Parkway.
[5:31:12] Geneva Road is, and I believe our property is also unique in the fact that we will be, you
[5:31:17] know, the last property basically fronting and the parkway is going to cut in. I believe
[5:31:22] a little bit quicker than it shows here, but we'll be the last property fronting the parkway.
[5:31:29] So it's going to have a completely different complexion on our property that it's going to have on these properties down here.
[5:31:36] It's not going to have near the effect.
[5:31:38] Well, we're going to be fronting it.
[5:31:40] These properties down here aren't really going to have to deal with it at all.
[5:31:42] I believe our properties unique in that perspective as well.
[5:31:46] But I believe to your point, there's we're going to be surrounded by industrial.
[5:31:51] we have railroad tracks, we have a free way that you can hear, we have a major parkway coming through.
[5:31:57] And so I believe those types of developments, if we look five years, ten years into the future,
[5:32:04] it's going to have a completely different complex than what we're looking at now.
[5:32:07] And I think that's kind of what we're trying to plan for.
[5:32:09] And again, also I believe, just the cost of putting those single-family homes.
[5:32:15] I wouldn't feel good about selling six, five, six, seven, a hundred thousand dollar
[5:32:21] home to somebody, knowing what's coming in the future.
[5:32:24] They're going to be surrounded by industrial, and they're going to have a huge parkway coming
[5:32:28] in front of them.
[5:32:28] I don't know that I'd feel good about filling that home to them.
[5:32:32] You're not surrounded by industrial.
[5:32:34] What's directly to the north of you is a farm that's in an agricultural leasement.
[5:32:37] There's not going to be any industrial there to the north of you, to the south of you,
[5:32:41] is low-density residential, that's not industrial.
[5:32:44] 80% of your property is surrounded by low density residential or farmland.
[5:32:50] You've got one part that's got a little teeny spot of light industrial when you've got the train tracks.
[5:32:56] On the front runner that passes by every 30 minutes during the day and ends at 12 o'clock at night.
[5:33:03] Oh, yes, somewhere in there.
[5:33:04] I mean, I'm just not seeing this urgency of where surrounded by all these negative things.
[5:33:12] you are in the prime spot of the city of Oram for a rural, lovable farming area Utah.
[5:33:22] It's not a negative.
[5:33:24] Sure, and I appreciate that perspective, and I know there's no sense of room, and I've already
[5:33:30] said it also.
[5:33:30] Yeah, and I know there's some in this room that fill that way as well, it's just, I think,
[5:33:34] you know, we're, I guess, that's where we, we diverge.
[5:33:39] So, do you have more to your presentation or do you do?
[5:33:44] Unless there are questions, again, we would just stress, you know, we believe we want, again, it's a price point.
[5:33:52] We want to provide homes for people that are in that price point.
[5:33:55] We feel that that will do very well.
[5:33:57] We feel that that will be a need that is not being currently met in the city.
[5:34:02] And I think, you know, considering what's coming in the future, I believe that that's a good fit.
[5:34:06] or the larger homes are going to be a good fit, and I appreciate the point that we do have
[5:34:13] an agriculture's relation to the north of us. I don't know what the church will do,
[5:34:19] but I would imagine when they come in, they'll probably do some buildings, and then I would
[5:34:25] imagine that they'll probably maybe be requesting multi-founders as well, because they're a bordering
[5:34:29] multi-founder. I wouldn't imagine I'm not going to be looking to do single-founders. But I believe
[5:34:36] If we're looking towards the future, I believe, what fits, I mean, I mean, I just would not feel comfortable
[5:34:45] Selling a home like that in this area. I just okay
[5:34:48] All right, appreciate that. So we'll go ahead and open it up for public comment anyone who would like to come forward
[5:34:55] Please do so but keep your comments to three minutes and give us your name
[5:35:00] When you come to the microphone.
[5:35:07] My name is Biden Taylor. Not long ago, I stood here to protest the planned industrial development
[5:35:14] across Geneva Road from, even though the outcome of the meeting favored developer. I was
[5:35:21] encouraged by the logic of the final decision. The city council chose to abide by the plan
[5:35:27] adopted when parts of the Lake U area were incorporated. Historically, farms have been established
[5:35:33] away from urban areas. I believe the reasons for this are intuitive. Let's not pretend that problems
[5:35:40] are not created by the invasion of cities into farm operations. On more than one occasion,
[5:35:46] I've heard someone in this type of meeting say, we can develop and they can farm as if everything's
[5:35:52] peachy. And veryably, the observation comes from someone profane from development and not from
[5:36:03] less population density in Oram City's plan for our area.
[5:36:09] However, I appreciate the fact that it includes low-density residential areas that are
[5:36:14] more compatible with ongoing farming.
[5:36:17] We already have an abundance of higher density housing and the associated risks.
[5:36:23] It's just a couple of more comments.
[5:36:26] So yes, we on the five and a quarter acres, my wife and I, that are not under an easement.
[5:36:32] When the easements were created, they had to be lean free, mortgage free.
[5:36:38] We had a mortgage at that time.
[5:36:40] I can guarantee you, we are not going to tear down our barn,
[5:36:43] and rip up our alpha fields and develop it.
[5:36:46] Getting that under an easement is on our list of things to do.
[5:36:52] I think the elephant in the room here is that the developer purchased this property,
[5:36:57] knowing full well what the plan was and how it was owned.
[5:37:01] So I think it's either unwise or very bold speculation to develop their own whole business model on this being changed.
[5:37:13] I have to believe that they're smarter than that, and that they have a backup plan that perhaps creates less profit.
[5:37:19] Maybe they have to wait longer, but it's hard to believe that they are putting us in a position that nobody wants any kind of house besides what we're offering.
[5:37:27] Therefore, we are have to do it this way.
[5:37:34] When last comment, I think the developer used the term shoehorn.
[5:37:39] I think shoehorn is appropriate.
[5:37:41] Yes, we have nice open space down there.
[5:37:43] But the shoehorn in higher density housing, every other place we can get it,
[5:37:48] is just not good planning and good development.
[5:37:51] Thank you.
[5:37:53] Thank you.
[5:38:01] And I think Mr. C. Strann expressed well the feelings for the people in our neighborhood.
[5:38:10] And I would add to that Ryan knew when he bought the property what it was owned as an old secret or no surprise.
[5:38:19] He often has said you can't put individual houses by at the railroad tracks and that's why he had to put an identity.
[5:38:25] I have two maps here and then did some driving today.
[5:38:35] Off of eight South and Orum, right next, back in the freeway are really nice individual
[5:38:41] homes that not back the freeway, back the railroad tracks that are established neighborhood.
[5:38:47] I know people who live there who have stayed there since they bought their homes who intend
[5:38:51] to make it there forever home.
[5:38:53] And if you go a mile point two, one point two miles south, you'll come into Provo and in
[5:39:02] recent states, it's the same situation where the homes are built right against the railroad
[5:39:07] access so that it's not a problem to have individual homes and they're not inexpensive homes,
[5:39:12] they're nice homes, they're permanent neighborhood, there's trees, there's, it's a wonderful
[5:39:17] place to live and people are happy to live there.
[5:39:19] So the railroad tracks can't be a detriment to having an individual home there.
[5:39:26] And as far we have worked with the church that are just north of us, we're playing
[5:39:30] our family properties, partnership in the agriculture, even the easement.
[5:39:35] And at the time the church, we saw their plans we were working with them, they intended to
[5:39:39] put a couple of double churches and have soccer fields, they did not intend to develop into
[5:39:44] high density, have to be or anything. It was going to be more open space.
[5:39:52] Right now we have
[5:40:00] They were supposed to be oner occupied and not be rentals. And the developments of countrywood,
[5:40:07] Shambrae and Normandy have all turned into rentals. They're right now about between 33
[5:40:13] and 35 percent oner occupied in the rest is rentals. So our neighborhood is very much a lot
[5:40:20] of turnover. And really we want some housing that would be contribute to stability and to a good
[5:40:27] neighborhood and I think there's lots of people I'd love to live in a half a million dollar house next to some farm ground.
[5:40:34] Thank you.
[5:40:36] Thank you.
[5:40:48] My name is Christian Clark and I just want to make a comment about how when we, with all the talk about the housing being as what it is.
[5:41:00] I think we're also missing the fact that even though the developer of self mentioned that a lot of people would not be able to afford these homes.
[5:41:08] It should be developed and even as it is now like it's almost quite I mean it's impossible for myself to be able to afford it
[5:41:16] Oh my I'm fortunate I live with family, but my current salary I make 20% of the medium average income of warm
[5:41:22] As a result like I I would I would have no hope of purchasing one of one of the developers homes or one of the homes that in in these rural communities or anywhere else
[5:41:32] just because of what my job is as it is and so all I'm saying is that when we consider
[5:41:42] all these these rezoning and all the homes that are going to be built there, all I
[5:41:48] ask is that you remember that not everybody would have the financial capacity to purchase
[5:41:53] a half a million dollar home.
[5:41:55] Thank you.
[5:41:56] Thank you.
[5:42:08] Adele Levitt.
[5:42:10] And Byron Taylor made a comment about how it is difficult as things are developed for the farmers to still function.
[5:42:21] And one issue that I feel if the zoning is changed so it's higher density.
[5:42:29] There's a token pocket park there, but what happens when there's lots of people they use over onto the open space, which if you're trying to farm it does not work very well.
[5:42:50] And, you know, Mr. McDougal made it sound very undesirable to live in that area, so why does
[5:42:58] he want to put more people there?
[5:43:01] It doesn't make for permanent residents if it's not pleasant to live there and if it's
[5:43:07] that crowded.
[5:43:08] And it's not set up like a PDR that has shopping and other amenities close by, it's just
[5:43:15] back in the men like Sardines, they have to go somewhere.
[5:43:20] It's just a bedroom community where they come and sleep
[5:43:23] and probably get out of there as fast as they can the next day.
[5:43:28] So I really think it needs to stay low density.
[5:43:35] Thank you.
[5:43:36] Thank you.
[5:43:42] Ann Olsen, I'm one of the owners of the property.
[5:43:48] And it's not that it's a bad place.
[5:43:50] It's a great place, but it is going to be a different place.
[5:43:54] Just like the orchards you mentioned up on university, they're not there anymore.
[5:43:59] And when this big parkway comes through that's a major road with the noise and pollution
[5:44:05] and traffic, and as you look at that map and you already see warehouses going next to
[5:44:11] multi-family, and as that works north, you're going to have a big curve, you're going to have
[5:44:17] that's going to be in comparison to the University Parkway on a curve which is going to be
[5:44:22] a lot of noise and then you are going to have trucks and you're going to have bays and you're
[5:44:29] going to have docks and that is going to be at your entrance to this development. It's not a bad
[5:44:36] place but it's not a place for expensive homes and people won't be happy with that and then on
[5:44:42] back side of it, you are, you've got the railroads and you've got industrial. So it's just,
[5:44:48] I don't think it's good planning long term. I don't think it's, I think, the plan that Ryan's
[5:44:54] presented is a better plan long term and I think it's good planning for what is going to happen.
[5:45:00] I mean, and it's coming. It doesn't matter if what we say it's coming, because you've already got the light industrial that's going along the west and that major road is coming.
[5:45:11] As far as the farming, I can respect the farmers. I love open space. I live down in a little area that's, or I'm trying to build a home that's got a lot of water and it's tucked down in a little spot, but the major roadways are missing.
[5:45:26] But it's still getting developed around, but this is right in the path, and it's going to happen.
[5:45:34] So what's the right thing to be there with these trucks, with these dogs, with this major roadway?
[5:45:39] It's not low density in my opinion.
[5:45:43] The other thing that was talked about, I've worked with Garbet Homes, I've worked with Cowboy, I own him stuff with Cowboy,
[5:45:53] And we've done town homerannels, we've actually done detached homerannels that I know
[5:45:58] of.
[5:46:00] And when the people move into those projects, those with the two carger
[5:46:04] oddages and the three bedrooms, if they have the amenities, the people don't move.
[5:46:09] They're there.
[5:46:11] And I also own stacked flats.
[5:46:12] Now they're the people moving in and out.
[5:46:15] But in the others, they say, well, move in and move out.
[5:46:18] They do not move in and out.
[5:46:19] They are stable.
[5:46:20] They love the places and the other thing is I live in South Shorten to cease to the temple and right below me
[5:46:29] There's third acre lots to the north me. There's third acre lots and he's to those there's town homes
[5:46:36] And Van Palmer has dirt field
[5:46:38] He pulls draft horses around that field right along the third acre lots right along the town homes
[5:46:45] Do I have any time left?
[5:46:47] There is no more conflict in fact. There's less with the town homes. There's single family third acre lot guys
[5:46:53] are way worse as far as the farming conflict. They complain like no other
[5:46:59] The people in the town homes do not
[5:47:01] I'd
[5:47:10] just like mention one item. I go down spend the new tell us your name, please a George Tucker. I'm the landowner
[5:47:18] I go down spend time in between the railroad tracks and
[5:47:22] When the Southern Pacific comes along, it's loud, but I hear it coming, it's annoying, it takes
[5:47:30] long time to go by, but it's not a big deal, it's just loud, noisy, and it is what it is.
[5:47:37] But I'll be down there, and the frontrunner will come by, and it'll scare the every living
[5:47:42] heck out of me, because I don't see it coming, and it just shakes me up.
[5:47:47] But I know what's there, and I, oh, it's a front runner,
[5:47:51] then I go about my business, and every time it comes,
[5:47:54] whether it's 30 minutes, I'm not sure how often it comes.
[5:47:58] But I know it's coming.
[5:48:00] And it still scares the heck out of me, every time it comes by,
[5:48:03] and oh, it's the front runner relax.
[5:48:06] So if you put a real nice poem,
[5:48:11] or if you had a lot for sale and a buyer comes,
[5:48:14] And if they're outside, I bet you they could be inside.
[5:48:19] When that front runner comes, they're not buying that lot
[5:48:21] if they have any other choice.
[5:48:24] So I don't know what you do down there.
[5:48:27] I mean, low density would be great,
[5:48:30] away from Geneva Road, and away from the front runner.
[5:48:35] But I don't think it'll work next to the front runner
[5:48:38] because it'll just scare the homeowners to death.
[5:48:41] They'll never buy that lot.
[5:48:43] Thank you.
[5:48:48] Anyone else to care to speak?
[5:48:53] Okay, seeing there no other people coming forward. We'll close the public comment portion of our public hearing and bring it back to the council any more comments or questions from the council
[5:49:06] Okay
[5:49:08] Got a few
[5:49:10] So Jason
[5:49:13] If let's say the Wilkerson Farm stays a farm as a charitable trust, and it's never developed
[5:49:20] for, you know, low-density residential, would that be enough units, essentially?
[5:49:27] It probably wouldn't be enough to satisfy what he's requesting now, would it be enough
[5:49:34] to get them up to a PRD level of development as far as the seven units per acre?
[5:49:40] It's possible, I guess my issue is that even though it's in a charitable trust, there's no guarantee that it would stay in charitable trust.
[5:49:47] I guess in conservation easements, they may sell their rights and it'd be very difficult to get them back, but I'm not sure how this charitable trust is set up.
[5:49:55] The same with the agricultural easement areas, I mean those can be taken out. The property owners have indicated that they never...
[5:50:00] Our will. But there is, like, the AC property, no other things. We just don't know what that's going to, the future is going to bring. So I'd rather not speculate, giving that away when we don't know how it's going to work out.
[5:50:10] And it's part of what I'm struggling with. This is not a very black and white issue for me.
[5:50:18] We kind of have to speculate because we're talking about the long-term plan for this area for not just the next five years, but the next 50 or 100 years.
[5:50:28] And I struggle to tell somebody, I'm sorry, you can't develop your property here because somebody who's indicated they have no desire to develop their property might develop it at some point in the future.
[5:50:41] But, you know, how do you kind of split the baby and be fair to all those parties involved?
[5:50:45] The four years ago when, you know, you guys had the 2 am marathon meeting for the annexation.
[5:50:53] I was sitting out there.
[5:50:55] I was running for the council, but I wasn't on the council yet.
[5:50:58] And I actually had a lot of concerns with kind of where we landed with the low-density residential plan.
[5:51:06] And it's not necessarily that I want to develop this whole area for high-density housing or even medium residential housing.
[5:51:13] But I felt like, you know, the Mansell project versus the Magduva project, it's like we were kind of using two separate sets of principles to apply to that.
[5:51:25] And so I had some consternation about that as far as the current proposal as it stands.
[5:51:34] I think there's just too many question marks as far, you know, how do we figure out transportation and utility infrastructure and things like that.
[5:51:43] I'm not comfortable moving forward as this is right now.
[5:51:47] I might be interested in looking more like a PRD type area if we can balance it out with
[5:51:52] if we have some degree of confidence at least for the next several years, some of these other
[5:51:58] areas are not going to be developed so that we don't need to completely redo our utility master
[5:52:03] plans and upgrade our sewer lines and those types of things.
[5:52:08] I did have a couple specific questions, what elementary school boundary is this in this area?
[5:52:19] No, it's cool, but it's probably...
[5:52:22] Right, but...
[5:52:23] Thank you.
[5:52:23] Vineyard elementary.
[5:52:26] How far of a distance would those students be writing the bus to that school?
[5:52:32] My son does.
[5:52:37] And as far as, if somebody, whether there is this project or another one, wanted to develop and we found out that we got to that breaking point where the planned infrastructure was not sufficient to cover that whole area.
[5:52:52] And if it was only, let's say, on the sewer lines, for example, I'm not saying this is the most efficient way of doing it, but is it possible for a developer to say,
[5:53:01] Well, I'm willing to install my own, you know, sewer line to get for our development to
[5:53:07] the the treatment facility. Is that feasible? Or is that, is it just like a non-starter?
[5:53:14] Because it would be off.
[5:53:15] I'd have to probably defer to, I think Sam Kelly's here, our engineer.
[5:53:31] Is this okay? It is on. It's not that they couldn't do that. It's just that it becomes pretty complex
[5:53:38] to have a private sewer system running through our right away and then getting to the plant.
[5:53:47] I mean, it's not that Ryan couldn't do that.
[5:53:49] If he wanted to do that he could, it's just it would be really hard and challenging and we
[5:53:53] just don't know.
[5:53:54] I mean, the only spot that I know that we have some sort of a private system is down
[5:53:58] in the Gold Key area.
[5:53:59] They have a private lift station that actually feeds below 2,000 south there in ties into our main, and it's pretty small, it's only a 2 inch, but if you're talking in this area, it's going to be a much bigger line.
[5:54:14] What about the cost?
[5:54:16] The cost would be a bit. If he'd have to run a gravity line to do his own system all the way down, and he'd have to engineer that to make sure that he could get graded all the way to the plant,
[5:54:28] have to gravity feed it there and put it in his own lift station if you want to do it
[5:54:32] on his own. But that's why I think we're trying to come to this nexus of if this is
[5:54:37] something that we want to do let's move forward and plan for this whole area and take the time
[5:54:42] and plan for it and do it right. I mean the gravity main engineer road is sized to where there is
[5:54:49] extra capacity in the gravity main but our lift stations don't have that right now and that's why
[5:54:54] we'd want to look at that and make sure we just create this equity throughout the world.
[5:55:00] The whole area, not just look at this one little spot zone, only to come back three months, six months a year and do the same exact thing.
[5:55:08] It's less about the size of the pipe and more about the, we need to upgrade the lift station.
[5:55:14] Right, because right now, the gravity main that we just installed in Geneva Road has capacity, because we needed to
[5:55:21] in order to have enough flow and lay it at a flat enough grade so we could maximize how far
[5:55:27] we could take that gravity line before the men's cell project could go ahead and lift to that area.
[5:55:34] The area that's along the north part of part, you know, next to that egg,
[5:55:37] recultural easement is undersized, but it's already been identified in our master plan that we need to
[5:55:44] So that's not going to be a problem.
[5:55:46] If we go ahead and do this, the big problem is we have two lift lift stations that probably
[5:55:51] are going to run one-and-a-half to two million dollars by the time it's all said and done
[5:55:56] that are being sized for $2,250 ERUs.
[5:56:00] And if we're looking to go medium density in these areas and increase it by a third or half,
[5:56:06] we kind of need to know that now so we can go ahead and plan that and do that.
[5:56:10] But it's not just that. It's also water. We want to make sure we have enough water capacity. We have enough storage for this area, so
[5:56:18] I mean it's not that we're opposed to this
[5:56:23] Development to happen it's just that we want to plan for it just like I think that was said before we just want to make sure we're planned
[5:56:29] And we have the
[5:56:30] When that that affect your impact fees if you didn't all this we'll sure but you're gonna have more folks and maybe maybe the water's fine
[5:56:40] the sewer is going to be fine. I mean, we went through this when we brought these scenarios
[5:56:45] to you guys, I don't know, three or four years ago, we brought a high low and a medium impact
[5:56:50] fee and densities and the fees themselves. They varied. It wasn't much in the whole scheme of things,
[5:56:57] but there was a huge difference in what needed to happen as far as capacity in lines, capacity
[5:57:03] and lift stations, and then if the treatment plant needed to be upgraded as well.
[5:57:09] So, but we just want to make sure we do it, and we do it, and we do it.
[5:57:13] Councillor Spencer?
[5:57:14] Yes.
[5:57:15] Okay.
[5:57:16] Go ahead.
[5:57:17] Well, I just had a question in our study session.
[5:57:20] I mentioned, you know, this area we annexed it, and my thought process was, if we're truly looking in the future, if these people eventually want to build, even if it's low density housing, do we have the infrastructure to be able to build low density housing in this area?
[5:57:37] And I don't think we do.
[5:57:39] Low density housing this area right now.
[5:57:42] I'm talking about the agriculture
[5:57:44] using it and all the other properties that are here.
[5:57:48] The big parcel there to the west of Geneva Road
[5:57:53] was not part of that, so if they decide to come in,
[5:57:56] it's set one in and develop, that's a whole different story
[5:57:59] because they didn't want to come into the annex.
[5:58:01] Right, so that's what I'm saying, is there something we can do now
[5:58:04] to make sure that we are able to do load density housing in the future in these areas that aren't, we didn't look at.
[5:58:12] So I'm assuming it's cheaper to do it now than later. Sure. Sure.
[5:58:17] Yeah, we could, I mean, and that's all part of that.
[5:58:19] When we master plan this area, we looked at that, we looked at what was going to happen
[5:58:26] and yeah, we could go ahead and re-evaluate and add that component to it as well. That's not a problem.
[5:58:30] I mean, I think it's all about cost, right?
[5:58:34] So what is it in the cost is now, if we do that,
[5:58:36] let's say we have to do our listation to whatever.
[5:58:41] Bigger size, whatever.
[5:58:42] What is that going to cost now compared to say in the future?
[5:58:50] And I don't know how big we're, I mean,
[5:58:51] I don't know how many units we're talking here
[5:58:53] if it ever did happen.
[5:58:55] But, right, and that's hard to speculate,
[5:58:57] because I don't know, I mean, right, right, right,
[5:59:00] the way it stands, that property is probably going to develop at least for another 10-15-20
[5:59:05] years or for who knows. So I mean, if it finally does develop in 50 years, I mean, it could
[5:59:12] be triple what the cost is now. I mean, you could try and do some math and estimate and add
[5:59:17] three years of inflation for 50 years and speculated, but yeah, the time to do it and be
[5:59:23] most cost effective, yes, what would be to do it now. The risk you run, though, with some of
[5:59:28] is you don't want your infrastructure to be too big to where it actually becomes somewhat of a maintenance problem.
[5:59:35] So in all reality it might not be a bad idea to have it designed and we know it's going to happen.
[5:59:42] But I mean with sewerage you need to have it's probably a little bit more info than you want to know, but you have to have at least a minimum of two feet per second of velocity.
[5:59:51] Because if you don't then solid start to settle out and then you have maintenance issues and you have to clean it and flush it.
[5:59:58] So, in case if we wanted to do this,
[6:00:01] And it's going to be a medium density. We had to say a 60 inch pipe. It may not flow fat. We may not have enough flow to move it and actually becomes more of an issue. So I guess I don't know if I answered your question.
[6:00:15] I doubt it is.
[6:00:16] My thing is that now is a deeper.
[6:00:17] If we're looking to the future and if we're going to do it right the first time, I would like to do it right the first time.
[6:00:24] Thanks.
[6:00:24] I'm sorry, Mr. Houston.
[6:00:26] Correct me if I'm wrong, but we looked at the future. We build a master plan.
[6:00:30] Did we not do it right the first time?
[6:00:33] Do we not have the adequate capacity based on the master plan for this area now?
[6:00:38] Right now.
[6:00:40] So David, we did it right the first time.
[6:00:43] I'm sorry, but we didn't include certain areas it could have.
[6:00:45] We didn't because they made a commitment that they have no intention of developing that land.
[6:00:50] They are going to commit it that they would do it themselves if they ever want it.
[6:00:54] And furthermore, when you're thinking about saying, well, we need to think about this people,
[6:01:00] the people you're making pay for that development are these people that on the land down here.
[6:01:05] And we're going to make you pay the development, yes, because that's what this proposal is,
[6:01:10] is to change those development fees, and those development fees affect all of the landowner.
[6:01:15] I was asking to see what it would cost to do this.
[6:01:19] But to me, it doesn't matter because why do I want to have them pay for something that has nothing to do with them down the road?
[6:01:27] Because no matter what it costs, they've got to pay for it.
[6:01:31] I think everybody has to pay for it.
[6:01:32] That's my point.
[6:01:33] And everybody here is saying, wait a minute.
[6:01:36] They have no intention of building or developing that.
[6:01:39] That's why the master plan was set the way it was.
[6:01:42] I think Sam wants to be able to see some.
[6:01:44] And I think just stepping back from the specifics of this particular property, and I talked about this a couple months ago,
[6:01:53] one of our key areas of focus as a city council this year was housing affordability.
[6:01:58] We kind of started with affordable housing, and I objected to that phrasing simply because when you say the phrase,
[6:02:05] affordable housing, people envision a giant apartment complex where, you know, you have cheap apartments.
[6:02:11] And I don't think that was at all the intent that our city council had, but rather how do we make it affordable for people to live in Oram?
[6:02:18] And that covers people on a broad spectrum whether they're running, they're trying to get a starter home.
[6:02:24] And if you go back to December of 2016, there was a development called Oram Orchards, right by Oram Elementary,
[6:02:31] where they were proposing to do a reason where it was still single family homes, but it was just a little bit more dense.
[6:02:39] And it wasn't really that much smaller than my own lot where we have our house.
[6:02:45] And I think they were the only two that voted for it because most thought that that was two
[6:02:50] dense to have single family homes in this neighborhood across from an elementary school.
[6:02:56] Whereas in my mind, that made perfect sense.
[6:02:58] And so as a result, the zoning stayed the same.
[6:03:01] They still developed it for homes, but then those homes were much more expensive.
[6:03:05] And you couldn't have as many families living right next to their elementary school.
[6:03:11] I'm not saying it was a bad development, I'm just saying if we believe that housing affordability is literally one of our top four priorities as a city council these are those moments where we have the opportunity to make that happen and again I'm not necessarily saying that this specific proposal is you know shovel ready and we should run with it.
[6:03:33] But the PRD, for example, in my mind, if we can make the numbers still balance out where
[6:03:40] if we have these areas that we believe that for the foreseeable future, they're not going
[6:03:45] to be developed and that means that we have single family homes that get developed where
[6:03:50] people can actually buy them and own them to take care of the property.
[6:03:54] I think that's part of what we're missing is that middle ground on that housing spectrum,
[6:04:01] It's either one of these giant mansions or cheap apartments, but that middle ground, in my mind that's where we can most importantly focus our attention as a city council.
[6:04:11] How do we help people get into that starter home so that they can start building equity and building wealth as an individual or as a family?
[6:04:19] In my mind that's what creates long-term housing affordability rather than just trying to get into a cheap apartment right off the bat.
[6:04:26] So, I'm not comfortable with the proposal as it currently stands,
[6:04:31] but if we want to continue it or just kind of pursue that PRD option in my mind,
[6:04:36] that might be a better way to define compromise.
[6:04:41] Okay, any other comments from the council?
[6:04:43] I am also interested in the PRD idea.
[6:04:47] I know what we did with Backster Gardens.
[6:04:49] I thought there was a lot of good neighborhood input and the compromises,
[6:04:53] good so and it fit really nice in a single family area so I'm interested in the
[6:04:58] PRD. I hope that took a...
[6:05:00] Compromise for the townhouse and more of a twin-home looking sort of thing. I mean, I'm comfortable with that, look and fail. I know it's 7 to the unit, but you said to the acre, I mean. So, be looking at, as you said, you said 4.3 and go to 7, that's about 2.7 more homes, almost 3 more homes. And over 16 acres, I would be about 43 more homes. So, I guess my question is, this 43 homes mean we have to rewrite all of it. Is there enough?
[6:05:30] Is there enough in the area to pass that capacity wise or do we have to rewrite everything?
[6:05:36] So the answer is probably yes, but the question is then
[6:05:40] The rest of the properties and you got the neighboring property and the neighboring property and the other property
[6:05:45] It's not just one development here. You're looking at it's the entire area. I guess if that's the direction that the council wants to go
[6:05:52] Then we just need to know that so that we can adjust our numbers
[6:05:57] I think we're, and it's been mentioned before, we're starting to pick and choose who and
[6:06:03] what area is against the higher density than what is already proposed in the vision.
[6:06:11] And one of my, I go back to the traffic, 2200 cars, whatever it was coming out of there.
[6:06:19] And we're already in a nightmare of traffic problems, and there's a lot of ifs to correct
[6:06:25] that.
[6:06:26] And I don't think the developer has any answers on it.
[6:06:29] And you knew what your pan, what this was zoned when you bought it, and it's been zoned
[6:06:39] is the vision from 2015 or whatever it was, you know, we went to a lot of expense and a lot
[6:06:47] of money and to redo that. I don't think the developer wants to pay for all that, you know,
[6:06:57] the utility service study again and traffic studies and all that. I'm just comfortable with
[6:07:05] it is now and you know as far as the agricultural easement they had an opportunity to come
[6:07:12] into this and they they I remember they denied it and they just wasn't even questionable
[6:07:20] on that so I'm comfortable with denying this request at a motion any no I'd like to make some
[6:07:28] comments you okay with that okay you're meeting
[6:07:34] So, I'd just like to go back to when this all started, when Ryan, and I appreciate what
[6:07:42] you did, Ryan, when you were looking at putting apartments where the Wilkinson farm was,
[6:07:48] and man-cell came in a little bit later, and we looked at the apartments, didn't really
[6:07:54] like the idea of a whole bunch of apartments there, but we did like the idea of multifamily
[6:08:00] homes available to buy, which is what man's cell is selling right there.
[6:08:08] But also as a city, we looked at the cost of infrastructure.
[6:08:14] It was about $8 million.
[6:08:16] And we made a conscious decision that we did not want to take the risk as a city to invest
[6:08:23] eight million dollars and then see if we could sell lots and so forth or see lots sold where
[6:08:32] we could get our money back and I remember that was a big risk and we told Mansell and I
[6:08:38] think we told you as well to go back and we would consider annexing this property in if in fact
[6:08:46] the developers took the risk for the infrastructure and not the city and so that's what we did
[6:08:53] And Mansell came back and said, yes, I will go ahead and take that risk.
[6:08:58] I will pay that $8 million.
[6:09:01] And then you will go ahead and do the impact fees.
[6:09:04] And I will receive the money back from the impact fees
[6:09:08] to pay my part of the development.
[6:09:11] But this whole annexation was predicated upon the developer
[6:09:17] actually taking the risk for the infrastructure.
[6:09:21] And so we developed this as low density, we could have developed it as high density, and we
[6:09:29] could have made the infrastructure much bigger, and the cost would have been much greater,
[6:09:34] and I don't believe man's cell would have funded it, and we weren't willing to fund it.
[6:09:40] So I think we went down a path that we're looking at what could be afforded, and who would pay
[6:09:49] and who was take the risk and who is willing to put all that together and that's the path that we've gone down.
[6:09:58] And so we're now in the middle.
[6:10:00] And saying, do we now want to change that path and do something different? And again, if we did that, we would have a lot of expense on our part, and we would take a lot of risk on our part to for all the infrastructure.
[6:10:16] So I feel like the path we started down, you know, it could have been a different path. We could have gone high density everywhere, put in a lot of infrastructure, taking a lot of risk.
[6:10:28] But we chose not to, and I feel like to change course now is not a good idea.
[6:10:36] I feel like we're going in this particular area.
[6:10:39] We're going down a course that made sense, and I think that we should stay the course.
[6:10:47] Concentment relance.
[6:10:48] I have a hunch what motion Mark's going to make, and I'll probably vote in favor of it.
[6:10:53] But before we proceed with that, I'm just curious, the PRD concept is that something that
[6:10:58] Council is willing to pursue, or is it just dead in the water, stick to what we have?
[6:11:05] I'm not willing.
[6:11:07] You're the swing vote.
[6:11:09] If you can unmute.
[6:11:13] Tom, you're awake, or sleep.
[6:11:14] It's a topic.
[6:11:16] Repeat the comments.
[6:11:17] I didn't hear you.
[6:11:18] So the question was, if we vote no on this proposal today, would you be interested in pursuing a PRD
[6:11:26] concepts, at this site, if we can do that without having to change all of our, you know,
[6:11:33] utility master plan and all those kinds of, in other words, if we assume that the
[6:11:36] Wilkerson farm or some of those other areas are indeed not going to develop, and the
[6:11:41] PRD concepts works within the existing utility master plan, would you be comfortable pursuing
[6:11:48] that PRD option?
[6:11:51] Yeah, I think you say comfortable exploring, and frankly, if those others are developing
[6:11:55] they be allocated fairway among all my own owners, but yeah, I mean at this point I'm not
[6:12:01] in favor of what's being presented, but yeah, what's behind the door number two I don't
[6:12:06] know but I'd be happy to explore.
[6:12:08] Okay, that's all.
[6:12:09] It is important, I think, for all of us to realize what Jason has brought up is that we don't
[6:12:16] know what these properties are going to do, and we change this to medium density, they may
[6:12:24] want to all change to medium density, and a bunch of them may want to come in and be part of
[6:12:30] this, in which case our infrastructure is not big enough.
[6:12:36] So I think that's really important to understand that we're either going to have to update
[6:12:44] and upgrade all of our infrastructure, and somebody's going to have to pay for it to do this,
[6:12:50] we don't know the cost of that yet or else we're going to have to stay the way we are.
[6:12:56] But that's that's still a big what if to assume that it is a what if people
[6:13:00] to acquire that they acquire this property specifically to keep it as farmland if we're
[6:13:07] building our plan around well when they develop it it just doesn't I don't understand
[6:13:12] that logic.
[6:13:13] Maybe do you have a comment?
[6:13:15] Yeah just had a comment Mayor just with regard to if in fact some of these
[6:13:20] facilities do have to be upgraded, in particular most likely the sewer lift station would
[6:13:26] have to be upgraded.
[6:13:28] That's something similar to what we did with Mr. Mansell and his development, if the developer
[6:13:32] was willing, we could enter into some sort of agreement with him that he would basically
[6:13:36] front that cost and then he could potentially be reimbursed through the impact fees we collected
[6:13:41] those.
[6:13:42] The question is, say Ryan's willing to do that, so you do that, but then all of a sudden
[6:13:48] Peterson says, well, I want to jump in and Brian Taylor says, I want to jump in and I understand.
[6:13:57] I'm just saying, and you may not live forever.
[6:14:00] Somebody might live after you that says, I want to jump in and
[6:14:07] I understand that.
[6:14:09] I'm just talking about your five acres, okay?
[6:14:13] You might have a child who lives beyond year, years and they may want to develop the five acres.
[6:14:25] Okay fine. So all I'm saying is, we don't know what's going to happen. So what happens
[6:14:31] if Ryan upgrades everything for him, but then all of a sudden you've got another
[6:14:37] twenty acres that want to come online, and then are they going to upgrade, have to upgrade again?
[6:14:42] Well, you know, probably this is a question for Sam or Neil, but I would expect that we wouldn't do an upgrade
[6:14:48] that would only served his additional units.
[6:14:50] So then the question is, is Ryan going to pay for the upgrade for all the possibilities that
[6:14:55] are out there?
[6:14:56] And does that pencil, or does that problem?
[6:15:00] That would be up to him to determine, we would obviously have to determine what that cost, say we want to
[6:15:07] increase the capacity of the lift station by 50 percent. You know, which would handle much more than
[6:15:13] just his development.
[6:15:13] I mean, I think you need to realize we're going down the road of low density. If we want to
[6:15:20] go down the road of medium or high density, you have to prepare and have a plan to pay for all the
[6:15:30] available. And then if you're going to put that all on Brian's back, maybe he's got all that money
[6:15:36] to pay for that, but maybe he doesn't. But I don't know if we as a Bitty want to. We made the decision
[6:15:41] before that we were not going to take that risk. Right. And that's sort of similar to what Mr.
[6:15:46] Mansell did. I mean, he fronted millions of dollars in capacity. He took the risk. He took the risk.
[6:15:52] And it wasn't just to serve, you know, capacity for his development, but it was to serve capacity
[6:15:57] for the entire area, it would be sort of similar, you know, Mr. McDougall, if we went down
[6:16:03] this road, I would expect we would anticipate him to front the entire cost of, say, upgrading
[6:16:08] the list that's listed by, for example, 50 percent for his property, for Peterson,
[6:16:13] everybody else, for Taylor's property, for Devo's property, all the way down the line.
[6:16:19] I'm just saying if that were the way it would happen, if that's the direction the council wanted
[6:16:23] to go, that's how I would anticipate it would be paid for.
[6:16:27] Jamie, do you have a comment?
[6:16:28] And I think, Mayor and Council, that that would need to be initiated by way of another general
[6:16:33] plan amendment.
[6:16:35] So there would be a process that we would go through even an advance of, for example, running
[6:16:40] the numbers, we would go through a process of going through public hearings with both the
[6:16:45] planning commission and the City Council again.
[6:16:47] Well, you're changing course.
[6:16:50] You're stopping everything we've been doing, we're saying now we're going to do something
[6:16:54] different.
[6:16:54] So, the reason I say that is I would anticipate that that process would probably take 12 months to get everything from where we are if the decision was made to proceed with the change of course to actually.
[6:17:14] And that's really what we're talking about. We're talking about a change of course for this whole area.
[6:17:20] So, you're really doing what we did in 2015, basically?
[6:17:25] You're starting over.
[6:17:27] All over.
[6:17:28] So, Debbie, I think.
[6:17:30] What I asked is a PRD considered low density.
[6:17:33] I thought you said yes.
[6:17:35] It is, but the IFP was specifically designed at 4.3.
[6:17:40] So, I'm not interested in going to medium or high density here.
[6:17:42] I'm trying to find a way to kind of compromise.
[6:17:45] But I think the PRD within our existing zoning structure
[6:17:50] can include up to eight units. Correct. So the infrastructure would need to be
[6:17:55] sized, not to four or five, it would be sized to up to eight. If these people
[6:18:00] want to join in, you've just doubled the capacity for all of that? You said
[6:18:04] seven unless there was a structure on the house. Well, the difference between
[6:18:08] city and this specific location is that this was designed and annexed at a
[6:18:13] specific density allocation, which was 4.3. Other city areas, there is that
[6:18:18] that specificity. This one was designed specifically for that 4.3 and everything around it was
[6:18:23] just. I'm not interested in high density or medium density. I'm interested in some little bump
[6:18:27] up in this load density. That's all I'm interested in. I'm not already discussing.
[6:18:31] But that's what we're. That's what I asked. That's what I asked. That's what I'm understanding.
[6:18:35] Well that's hold on. We have Mark Street Strand first and then it's Sam.
[6:18:42] I was just going to
[6:18:42] come in on something that I was taken so I'm fine. Okay. I think it's also just worth pointing out
[6:18:48] if we're talking about developing more units on this property, that means they're paying
[6:18:53] more impact fees. And so it's as if we're imagining this fixed pie of impact fees that are
[6:19:00] coming in to address this growing cost. But if, you know, Peterson came in and wanted to develop
[6:19:07] for example, it's per unit, right? So we would have more impact fees coming in. Yes, but the costs
[6:19:13] It's not linear, there is a difference in, for example, sizing a eight inch line versus a
[6:19:21] 12 versus a 16 or whatever, and I'm looking for Sam, and he's not in his head.
[6:19:27] 8-12 and 16 are good sizes for pipelines?
[6:19:30] But my point is, if we can, I guess, make the numbers pencil on the PRD for this specific
[6:19:37] property, and somebody else, again, we're speaking about hypotheticals and putting words
[6:19:42] in people's mouth, many of whom clearly do not want to develop their land in that way.
[6:19:50] We wouldn't be such a disaster as I think what we're making it out to be.
[6:19:56] And I'm not saying it wouldn't be a lot of work and there wouldn't be cost associated with that.
[6:20:00] But there would be more impact fees, even at the current level of impact fees, there would still be more fees to help address that.
[6:20:08] But if I may, for example, we're in the process now of building a lift station to accommodate the current densities that were approved as part of this whole annexation area.
[6:20:20] So, if we move to something different, we can't just, for example, increase the capacity
[6:20:27] of the liftation we have to build an additional liftation.
[6:20:31] And so, those are the kind of conversations that we would need to have, or we can't,
[6:20:39] we may need to add additional infrastructure.
[6:20:42] We can't accommodate the pipes don't have sufficient capacity to accommodate some of what
[6:20:47] we're talking about, so we need to upsized those pipes or add additional pipes.
[6:20:52] This doesn't even speak to the work that we potentially, we would need to do, for example,
[6:20:57] as related to sewer at the treatment plant, where we potentially would need to increase
[6:21:04] capacity to accommodate the additional flows that would result.
[6:21:09] I mean, it's kind of a big puzzle that you can't look at one piece independent from
[6:21:17] other and that's why we need that time, for example, to update those master plans and the capital
[6:21:23] plans and the impact fees. If we're talking about taking this one property which was planned
[6:21:28] at 4 or 4.3 units per acre, you don't need all of the other properties to play along. You could
[6:21:36] have one of the, like, it could be Wilgerson or it could be Taylor or it could be AC.
[6:21:45] If they don't
[6:21:47] I think then there's the argument that can be made
[6:21:49] that you as a counselor picking winners and losers.
[6:21:52] But they did that four years ago with the blue area.
[6:21:55] And I realized he took the risk,
[6:21:57] but we already have high density in that area.
[6:22:00] So it's already been done with that.
[6:22:01] Wasn't picking a winner or a loser,
[6:22:03] he was willing to fund it, and we went ahead with it.
[6:22:06] Nobody else was willing to fund it.
[6:22:08] But nobody else has, I was to develop density.
[6:22:11] And it isn't.
[6:22:12] And he was willing to do the same thing.
[6:22:13] It's a six, but he was willing to sell versus rent.
[6:22:17] I was selling, well.
[6:22:18] Okay, well at the time, it was just rental versus sell.
[6:22:23] It was, it was, it was for sell as well.
[6:22:27] They were town homes, they weren't up there.
[6:22:28] We were happy to pull the minutes.
[6:22:31] The man's help piece is medium density, by the way, it's not high.
[6:22:34] Medium density, okay.
[6:22:35] Now it's normal, Spencer has a comment.
[6:22:37] That's a question for Ryan.
[6:22:40] So, I'd be, that's basically, if it went PRD,
[6:22:42] And you can do seven units.
[6:22:44] Is that pencil for you?
[6:22:46] Yeah, but it did bezel.
[6:22:47] And at $300,000, it would be the starting point for a home.
[6:22:50] That's what our builder's telling us.
[6:22:52] We've been working with Century Helms.
[6:22:54] That's what they say that these homes start at.
[6:22:56] And I would also just like to add,
[6:23:00] when the impact fee study was done five years ago,
[6:23:04] that impact fee study included low density, medium density,
[6:23:06] and high density.
[6:23:08] So that study already has been done.
[6:23:11] So we're going off of right now, low density impact fees.
[6:23:16] So if that impact fee hasn't changed in five years, which is what we would be paying
[6:23:21] if we develop now, then why has the medium density or the high density change?
[6:23:24] Why does that have to be re-done?
[6:23:26] I guess would be my question.
[6:23:27] Because it's already been done.
[6:23:32] But why do we not have to redo it for the low density?
[6:23:35] I guess is my question.
[6:23:38] So if we were to develop right now at 4.
[6:23:41] point, whatever units of the acre, we can't go, we can't use that, so really, the impact
[6:23:47] of the study has to be done regardless of what we know.
[6:23:49] We have a requirement to update that study, however, if we were to transition to a higher
[6:23:55] density sooner, then that would trigger a need to update the impact of the study sooner
[6:24:02] rather than at the required timing, which would put us out because of five or six years.
[6:24:08] Okay,
[6:24:11] I guess I don't understand why it expires for the medium and the high and not
[6:24:15] You need to ask the legislature because they're the ones that put the requirements in place
[6:24:26] Go ahead.
[6:24:26] I guess one more question.
[6:24:28] Sir, is anybody know off hand?
[6:24:31] I know this is four years ago, how much the impact, like how much higher it was for the medium
[6:24:35] residential?
[6:24:37] For example, it's lower.
[6:24:39] The views were lower because there were more units to spread those costs around, so under a higher
[6:24:44] and see scenario the impact these are typically lower.
[6:24:51] Okay Mark, do you want to make a motion?
[6:24:54] Yeah, based on my feelings that when we did the annexation request.
[6:25:00] And we had many neighbors and property owners come to the process of being annexed into forum. We came out with a master plan that I felt was adopted in the grid.
[6:25:10] We set forward on a pathway that allowed us to implement to that master plan.
[6:25:16] I think this was said, but it's a different trajectory.
[6:25:20] And I think it's in conflict with what was discussed in the grid with the annexation as well as with the current plan that we're on.
[6:25:27] I would move to deny the request.
[6:25:31] Second.
[6:25:33] Okay.
[6:25:34] Start with the councilmember Lens.
[6:25:39] Aye.
[6:25:41] Aye.
[6:25:42] Aye.
[6:25:43] Aye.
[6:25:44] Aye.
[6:25:45] Okay, Tom.
[6:25:49] All right.
[6:25:50] So the ordinance is request is denied.
[6:25:55] And thank you Ryan.
[6:25:56] Thank you.
[6:25:56] It was a general plan change.
[6:25:58] The request was not an ordinance.
[6:26:00] I'm sorry, General Plan.
[6:26:02] Okay, thank you.
[6:26:03] All right, thank you.
[6:26:05] Thank you.
[6:26:06] Jamie, do you have any items?
[6:26:09] Okay, we do have a birth date of coming up, which is David Spencer.
[6:26:13] So we are going to adjourn to Room 107.
[6:26:18] I would take a motion for adjournment.
[6:26:20] The move.
[6:26:21] Is there a second?
[6:26:22] Second.
[6:26:23] Okay, I'll in favor say aye.
[6:26:24] Aye.
[6:26:25] Okay, we are adjourned.
[6:26:31] Leo?
[6:26:33] Can you come here?