[0:00] Brandon, probably Jody and and uh

[0:04] potentially others in in further

[0:07] refining the the list of candidates.

[0:11] We want to make sure and get there's a

[0:13] high profile position

[0:17] on one regardless. So we want to get it

[0:19] right and go through a proper uh

[0:22] in-depth process. There's going to be

[0:23] time jinxing us. I don't need a lot of

[0:26] time. Okay.

[0:28] Anything.

[0:30] >> All right. Thank you. Right. The next

[0:32] item on the agenda is a discussion led

[0:36] by Jared Hall, our planning director on

[0:39] detached accessory dwelling minutes. So

[0:43] got 60 minutes and if you if we end at

[0:46] 45 minutes, you've got to sing for 15.

[0:50] [laughter]

[0:52] >> About an hour 30 if you want. I can

[0:54] >> through. So after our last meeting uh

[0:58] took the comments that we heard uh the

[1:01] council talk about especially dealing

[1:04] with the setbacks that was a big issue

[1:06] and what they would look like and uh the

[1:10] idea of

[1:12] how would it look if we had setbacks

[1:17] that cut the expectation that people

[1:20] have now of the setbacks for instance

[1:22] you have to have a 30ft setback or a 25

[1:25] ft setback in the backyard. How would

[1:27] that work? And so we took those comments

[1:30] and we've got some graphics that show

[1:34] what this would be like.

[1:37] >> And as a reminder in this discussion,

[1:41] the goal, you haven't had the goal to

[1:44] try and make every lot be able to have

[1:46] an accessory

[1:48] uh or a detached uh accessory dwelling

[1:52] unit. Sometimes depending on how the

[1:55] property is built or constructed, for

[1:58] instance, they take up their whole

[2:00] buildable envelope on the property. It

[2:02] might make it difficult for someone to

[2:04] have a a a what do we call them now?

[2:09] What are we?

[2:11] >> No, I thought we were calling

[2:12] >> calling him daddos.

[2:16] >> He was doing that.

[2:18] >> So, did Jared would prefer you call them

[2:21] daddos? I will openly bully anyone that

[2:23] refers. [laughter]

[2:25] >> I heard that discussion in planning

[2:27] commission. That is not how it happens.

[2:31] >> Fair enough.

[2:32] >> Uh and so the larger you get in a lot

[2:36] the easier it may be, but the smaller

[2:38] lots admittedly they're difficult

[2:40] because someone may have maxed out uh

[2:43] already what they can build on and do.

[2:45] And so, uh, Jared will walk us through

[2:49] these, uh, graphics that we have.

[2:52] >> Okay. Um, thank you, Gary. So, this is a

[2:55] this is just a generic

[2:58] I don't want I don't want to use the

[3:00] term fake. It's a generic slide showing

[3:02] kind of a a typical or a a prototypical

[3:05] 11,000t lot. They're usually just a

[3:08] little bit longer than they are wide.

[3:09] Sometimes they're a little wider than

[3:10] they're long, but you got to be, you

[3:12] know, in the typical zones that would generate 11,000 square foot

[3:16] lots, you'll have an 85 foot frontage

[3:18] requirement. 100 foot frontage is not out of the norm. Uh, but again, you

[3:23] know, every lot is shaped differently.

[3:24] So, this is just for purposes of

[3:26] discussion about what the setbacks might

[3:28] or what different approaches to setbacks

[3:30] might result in for us to start talking

[3:33] about this. Um what this is showing is

[3:37] in different parts separation from the

[3:39] primary residence at six feet. That's

[3:40] kind of the building code separation

[3:42] from accessories to main main buildings.

[3:45] That's the first one to be aware of.

[3:47] This is showing 25 ft for the rear um

[3:51] for the setback to the ADU from the rear

[3:53] property line. That is a typical R8 rear lot setback is 25 ft. Um, it's

[4:01] important to remember that this is not

[4:03] tied on that on that state code. This is

[4:05] not tied to zoning. It's tied to lot

[4:07] size. But so it might be there might be

[4:08] an 11,000 foot lot in the R8 zone, which

[4:10] would be a 25 ft rear. There might be an

[4:12] 11,000 foot lot in the um R8 and in the

[4:16] R6 zone that would only be a 20ft rear

[4:19] lot setback, but we're going with so it

[4:21] would be tied to that zoning or 25 ft or

[4:25] whatever that case might be. So it's

[4:27] showing that setback and then we talked

[4:29] about in that meeting um [clears throat]

[4:31] in the last meeting

[4:34] uh looking at separation from not just

[4:37] the property lines but from the

[4:38] buildable areas of the adjacent lots so

[4:40] that if somebody has a small house we

[4:42] can look at this better in other

[4:43] graphics too. Somebody has a smaller

[4:45] house and they're only required say an

[4:47] 8ft sideyard like this and this one

[4:49] here. Um, if you're if you're 10 feet,

[4:52] like we're saying on interior sides, you

[4:54] have to be at least 10 feet for your

[4:56] ADU, but you need to be 30 feet from

[4:58] anybody else's buildable area. So, if

[5:00] they add on to their house, you're not

[5:01] closer than you would have been

[5:02] otherwise. That's the thinking behind

[5:04] that kind of a setback. And then again,

[5:07] just a minimum, no matter how far, uh,

[5:08] of 10 feet from interior property lines,

[5:12] border sides, again, that would be

[5:13] facing a street. So, that would show you

[5:15] 25 ft from any street, just like a front

[5:16] yard setback would. So this this um

[5:20] fictional house here 50x30 is a pretty

[5:23] typical ORM twostory house and plunked

[5:26] down here at 25 ft which is the front

[5:28] setback that the R8 zone would require

[5:30] and well inside of its 8ft sideyards

[5:33] that would be required as well. So that

[5:35] kind of shows you this this area right

[5:37] in here about 13x 56 in this um

[5:41] prototype diagram would be available for

[5:43] someone to put an ADU an attached ADU.

[5:45] Does that all make sense?

[5:48] So what we did is take this um

[5:50] configuration, these types of setback

[5:53] applications and apply them to some of

[5:55] the real world um lots that we had

[5:57] randomly selected for the last time we

[5:58] talked and laying those over those. So

[6:01] you can see kind of what Gary was

[6:02] talking about there. It it won't it

[6:04] wouldn't make it possible for every

[6:06] single lot to be used. But again, um,

[6:09] just looking for some of the kind of the

[6:12] goals was to have setbacks that might

[6:14] preclude something like this happening

[6:16] where it's it's further from the house

[6:17] here, but it's right on top of the

[6:19] neighbor's house that happens to be real

[6:21] close to a property line there, bigger

[6:23] unit, and it's plenty far from this

[6:25] adjacent home here, plenty far from the

[6:27] existing house here. It's right on top

[6:29] of these folks. So, trying to keep that

[6:31] from happening as a goal. You want

[6:33] something more into that. And right

[6:36] here, right in back, that back corner,

[6:38] it f it's in there, but it's right on

[6:40] top of this other folk's house. So, we

[6:42] applying it to the real world. You see

[6:44] these kind of situations. This is a

[6:45] culde-sac lot right here. This greened

[6:48] out area. You can see the house

[6:50] footprint right here, but the buildable

[6:52] portion of that lot is all of that. They

[6:54] could add on to all of those lines. So,

[6:56] that's that 30ft setback from their

[6:58] buildable area. Um, that would show if

[7:02] we have that kind of a setback, then it

[7:03] would limit that ADU location from 30 ft

[7:06] away from the buildable, 25 ft for the

[7:08] rear yard, and then 6 ft from the house.

[7:10] So, you have this area in here where you

[7:12] could fit a small ADU perhaps.

[7:14] Uh, this is a lot kind of like the one

[7:16] we were just looking at, but it's a

[7:17] little shallower.

[7:19] So, you went with that 25 ft rear

[7:21] setback showing here, 6 ft from the

[7:23] house, 30 ft again from that buildable

[7:25] area. You see the the house right here.

[7:27] they could add on coming to this area.

[7:29] So that setback of 30 shows from the

[7:31] buildable area instead of from the foam

[7:34] itself and then 25 like 25 ft to the

[7:37] street back here on the corner.

[7:40] You have a kind of a narrow area, but

[7:42] again there are some units that could

[7:43] fit in there. Uh this is a this is a

[7:46] good situation. Gary mentioned people in

[7:48] the way they site their homes. Whoever

[7:49] did this was thinking about an ADU in

[7:51] the future that they couldn't possibly

[7:52] have known about time and traveled back

[7:54] and they got this is the best area of

[7:56] all of them that we kind of randomly

[7:58] sampled in uh given these kinds of

[8:00] setbacks. 30 ft from the buildables and

[8:02] they're built right to their line. 30 ft

[8:04] from the buildables, they're built

[8:05] really close. 20 ft off still gives you

[8:07] a nice big area in this this in this

[8:09] middle of that lot. 11,296

[8:12] ft. So it's not a huge lot. It's right

[8:14] there just inside where we would allow

[8:16] them under that state code. Here's a

[8:18] culde-sac lot. It's a big lot, 13,500

[8:21] ft², but it's a bigger footprint home

[8:23] and taking up a bigger portion of that

[8:25] lot. A lot of that lot is in this area

[8:27] here. Um, some of that square footage is

[8:29] just kind of lost. 30 ft off that

[8:31] buildable setback, 25 ft from the rear.

[8:35] So, you end up with a kind of an odd

[8:36] shaped area that you could use. It might

[8:37] be hard to sight one.

[8:40] This one looks like it would be easy to

[8:42] do. It's a little tougher. 30 ft from

[8:43] the buildables gives you this area. and

[8:45] that 25 foot rear set back. They don't

[8:47] have a whole lot of space they could

[8:49] build it. Again, some lots just will not

[8:51] quite with this nook in their house.

[8:54] They could have maybe gotten something

[8:55] in here, but with that 30 foot off,

[8:57] keeping them off of this house here,

[8:59] it's a little tougher.

[9:01] These again are just samples. We can't

[9:03] show you all 5,800 square or 5,800 lots

[9:06] in the city and how they would work. But

[9:07] yeah,

[9:08] >> and Jared, this is spec specifically as

[9:10] it relates to detached statues.

[9:14] So

[9:14] >> some of these if it doesn't work for

[9:16] detach they could do like a basement

[9:19] ADU.

[9:20] >> Absolutely. Absolutely.

[9:22] >> They come into compliance with all of

[9:23] those specific regions.

[9:25] >> Yeah. Jack, let me go back up to the the

[9:28] wrong word. When somebody realizes what

[9:30] the right word I'm looking for here is,

[9:31] say it and they'll remember.

[9:33] >> This house has not been built to its

[9:35] setbacks. So let's say they couldn't get

[9:36] an ADU, a detached ADU, um, like Bren

[9:39] was saying in the area that they want

[9:40] here. They just can't find the one they

[9:41] want to fit. they want to go bigger or

[9:43] something. Our internal ADUs or attached

[9:46] ADUs, this is a

[9:47] >> I like internal.

[9:47] >> Internal is a term, a different term.

[9:50] Um, they could add on. They have space

[9:52] they got on with their setback. So, they

[9:54] could add on instead and do a nice ADU.

[9:56] Or they could maybe they've got enough

[9:57] space in their basement right now. They

[9:58] could do it.

[10:00] >> That dash line in the [snorts] schematic

[10:02] there is their buildable line for the

[10:05] house on that lot. So they may not be

[10:08] able to get the

[10:10] detached ADU that they want, but they

[10:13] certainly could add on to the house to

[10:16] that crosshatch area, which they can do

[10:19] now, and put a an ADU there. Correct.

[10:23] >> internal.

[10:26] >> Yeah, thank you.

[10:27] >> That's that's a good that's a good

[10:29] point. So all of the and all of these

[10:30] lots, most of the zones would allow

[10:33] internal ADUs. That that's a good fall

[10:35] back.

[10:36] This is this discussion is limited to

[10:39] stadium use. Um let's see. We made it to

[10:42] that one. Uh here's another one that

[10:44] kind of works out better for the folks

[10:45] that have this lot. It's a it's

[10:47] straight. It's an exactly 11,000t lot.

[10:50] Uh there's a nice area in here where you

[10:51] could build a detached ADU

[10:54] or again you could add on if you wanted

[10:55] to an internal. Um, so those are kind of

[10:58] our examples for the spacing for

[11:00] setbacks to talk about and that's what

[11:02] we're again the setbacks we're using in

[11:04] these diagrams.

[11:06] These examples are those maintaining a

[11:09] 25 ft rear and then going 30 ft from the

[11:12] buildable areas on the adjacent lots and

[11:14] 6 ft from

[11:16] >> that looks very fair. I like your work

[11:18] there. That looks like you've addressed

[11:21] concerns on all sides. It's

[11:23] >> it's uh it would preclude some of these

[11:25] kinds of things.

[11:27] but allow other situations maybe to

[11:29] work. So, um any discussions about that

[11:32] before we talk about Pike stuff?

[11:34] >> Um can you maybe and maybe you said this

[11:37] already, I missed it, but can you tell

[11:38] me of of the 11,000 square foot lots

[11:41] that would qualify for this? How many of

[11:43] those would that would these setbacks

[11:46] restrict?

[11:46] >> I don't know. have to

[11:50] we could survey all of the the eligible

[11:53] 11,000 foot lots and see and run this

[11:55] kind of diagram on all of them.

[11:57] >> But we could potentially be eliminating

[11:58] 50% or 60% or we have no idea.

[12:01] >> We wouldn't be able to tell you that. We

[12:02] have to run that.

[12:03] >> My next question is how do these

[12:04] setbacks compare to other cities?

[12:07] >> That's a good question.

[12:08] >> Other places.

[12:09] >> That's a good question. They are um

[12:11] there are several cities that run

[12:13] programs that have the this you maintain

[12:16] 20 or 25 ft from rear. A lot of them

[12:18] have 10 foot sides. That's where I came

[12:20] up with the 10 foot interiors in the

[12:21] first place. Um the cities that are this

[12:24] is maybe a good point to get to. Quinn

[12:26] had asked about um are you there?

[12:31] >> Uh yes, I'm here.

[12:32] >> Awesome. So Quinn, you had asked about

[12:35] um other cities and getting some

[12:36] information from them and Jen's question

[12:38] kind of goes to that. So, I'm going to

[12:39] take a second and go through some

[12:41] numbers if that's okay.

[12:42] >> That would be be really great. Thank

[12:44] you.

[12:44] >> We we haven't heard back from everybody

[12:46] we reached out to. It turns out that

[12:48] planners are notoriously bad at

[12:49] returning phone calls. I don't know if

[12:50] you knew this.

[12:52] >> I know.

[12:52] >> I had no idea. [laughter]

[12:55] >> Return mine.

[12:56] >> Terrible. But waiting for a couple of

[12:58] cities to contact us back with some

[12:59] numbers, but just for a for a a I'm

[13:03] going to start with the one to talk

[13:04] about

[13:06] um the setbacks. Um so in Murray for

[13:09] example uh 10 foot rear setbacks, 10

[13:12] foot side setbacks, 20 foot corner side

[13:14] setbacks. Uh Salt Lake and but they have

[13:17] with those setbacks they've got a total

[13:18] of nine units right now. Um detached

[13:22] units.

[13:23] >> How long have they had that?

[13:25] >> It has been more difficult until

[13:27] recently until 2019. That's as of 2019

[13:31] that it went to those setbacks.

[13:34] Um

[13:36] the South Salt Lake City, this is just

[13:39] permit data from 2025 and 2026. Um they

[13:43] have run 73 units and they've permitted

[13:47] 73 detached accessory dwelling units.

[13:49] Most of those are between 400 and 600

[13:51] ft² and almost all of them.

[13:55] Yeah, that's the note. Almost all are

[13:57] for garage conversions. Uh, Salt Lake

[13:59] City is allowing garage conversions for

[14:01] detached accessory dwelling unit and

[14:02] it's up right up to property lines. So,

[14:04] that's a little different that probably

[14:06] and that I'm assuming that accounts for

[14:08] the greater numbers. It's just easier to

[14:10] do those setbacks and when you're

[14:12] putting them not just garage

[14:13] conversions, but they're allowing them

[14:14] over garages um as well. So, that's one thing. West Jordan allows

[14:19] them at 15t rear property line setbacks

[14:21] and 8ft internals 20 ft from corner

[14:23] sides. Um, they've got 12 units.

[14:27] [clears throat] Bountiful started doing

[14:28] this in 2008. The code now allows for 8

[14:30] foot setbacks at the rear and side

[14:32] property lines. Um they have 27 units

[14:36] and Salt Lake County. Uh same as uh Salt

[14:40] Lake City, they've got 20 total units in

[14:41] unincorporated county. So places like

[14:43] Magna and Karns and um Immigration

[14:46] Canyon, I suppose. White city. I could

[14:48] keep listing them because I have a city

[14:50] planner, but I'm going to stop there.

[14:52] And unincorporated Salt Lake County, 20

[14:54] units. uh they allow them at five feet

[14:56] from property lines uh and one foot from

[14:58] property lines is a garage a garage

[15:00] conversion. They don't have a lot but

[15:02] you know it's it's incorporating camp.

[15:05] So those are the numbers we've been able

[15:06] to get so far. So they're kind of all

[15:08] over the place on setbacks. Um and where

[15:10] you have them at where you have them at

[15:12] lower setbacks you do see greater

[15:15] numbers of units and that that kind of

[15:16] makes sense in Victoria.

[15:19] So I think my concern is I did some

[15:21] research into that too and that way you

[15:23] came up with generally tracks. Murray

[15:24] was 10 feet from uh rear and side. Salt

[15:27] Lake was uh 10 ft rear. Salt Lake City

[15:31] was three feet from side and rear.

[15:32] Colorado Springs was 5T rear side and

[15:35] front. Um and Portland very by location.

[15:38] But I think my point is I feel like that

[15:40] this is kind of an outlier. 25 ft is

[15:41] kind of an outlier for me. So, I think I

[15:43] would feel more comfortable looking at

[15:45] that again and seeing if we could maybe,

[15:47] you know, release some of those because

[15:49] I think my ultimate concern is the what

[15:50] does the law say? It says that they need

[15:52] to be reasonably what is it?

[15:54] >> It can't be unreasonably difficult to

[15:56] locate them.

[15:57] >> It can't be unreasonably difficult to

[15:58] locate them. So, I think we're trying to

[16:00] balance two things. We're trying to

[16:01] balance the privacy of the neighbors

[16:02] with the ability of people to do with

[16:04] their properties what they want in a way

[16:06] that's not unreasonable. So, I would

[16:08] argue that 25 feet is probably a little

[16:10] extreme. And the other thing I'm

[16:11] concerned about is the property um the

[16:14] uh the 30 foot distance between

[16:15] properties

[16:16] >> the buildable to the

[16:17] >> because that that brings up equity

[16:18] issues for me. You know, well, you don't

[16:20] actually have anything there. You could

[16:21] potentially put something there, but you

[16:22] might never, you might not if you build

[16:24] first. Like there's just all kinds of

[16:25] issues there. I would rather have us say

[16:27] look, it needs to be 10 foot from a

[16:28] fence line. And then either way, you're

[16:29] going to be 20 ft between.

[16:31] >> Yeah. No matter what, you'd always say

[16:33] about 20. Some cases you might be.

[16:36] >> That feels more fair to me.

[16:38] >> Would be that would be the result of

[16:39] that. So yeah, that's a conversation we

[16:41] need to have.

[16:42] >> So those are my concerns.

[16:44] >> Will you remind me again what the

[16:45] planning commission recommended?

[16:47] >> The current recommendation is 20 is 10

[16:49] ft from interior property lines. That

[16:51] would include rears. Let me go back to

[16:52] the diagram and just do it this way. So

[16:54] the current recommendation would be 10

[16:56] ft from all property lines that are

[16:59] interior. So the rear and the sides,

[17:01] your ADU would have to be 10 ft from

[17:03] those and at least 20 ft from anybody

[17:05] else's dwelling on their lot. So, if

[17:07] they happen to be a sideyard up against

[17:09] your rear lot area where you want to put

[17:11] your ADU, you got to have 10 feet on

[17:13] your side, then you have to be 20 ft

[17:15] from theirs. Well, if they happen to be

[17:16] 5 ft from their property on your side,

[17:19] stay 20 ft off their building. That's

[17:20] the current post.

[17:22] >> Thank you.

[17:24] >> And you need to remember that that those

[17:26] standards came in to put that in the

[17:29] staff report because state law doesn't

[17:31] require a setback. state law would would

[17:34] allow you to go right to the property

[17:36] line. However, internally as staff, we

[17:38] thought don't do that. Absolutely do not

[17:41] go below 10 on any of these. Doesn't

[17:44] mean you you shouldn't go higher or

[17:46] couldn't go higher depending on

[17:48] balancing those equities, but we felt it

[17:52] important to make sure that the planning

[17:55] commission and council knew we just

[17:58] don't think you should go below 10 at

[18:00] all.

[18:01] >> Thank you. Well, and when I attended the

[18:03] planning commission meeting where they

[18:04] went over this ordinance, there were

[18:06] some discussions that were being had and

[18:08] it was interesting when I mentioned

[18:10] about impact on surrounding properties.

[18:13] Um, several of them were like, "Oh, we

[18:15] didn't think of that." So, that would,

[18:18] you know, what they what they designed

[18:22] was property specific without looking at

[18:26] impact on the surrounding neighbors. And

[18:29] when that was pointed out, I felt like

[18:32] in that meeting that there was some um

[18:35] indication of

[18:37] we missed that.

[18:41] >> I have two other thoughts on um one you

[18:44] and I had talked about um setbacks that

[18:48] might be different in the rear setback

[18:50] for properties that above a normal

[18:52] residential.

[18:52] >> Oh, for yeah, for commercial

[18:54] >> commercial or like there's a school

[18:55] behind you or there's a park behind you

[18:56] or there's trail behind you. I mean like

[18:59] that's I think having the I mean all the

[19:00] way at the property line for me like

[19:01] that's not going to impact anybody and I

[19:03] think that those property owners deserve

[19:04] to to do that. So

[19:05] >> that's a good that's a good point. Non

[19:07] non-residential properties or unused

[19:09] open space properties park space that

[19:11] kind of thing

[19:12] >> but it does impact the neighbor next

[19:14] door. There may not be someone behind,

[19:17] but if I have a neighbor who has filled

[19:19] their backyard with a

[19:22] that impacts me and my quality of life.

[19:24] >> Well, and that's how the side setbacks

[19:26] would would impact that. So, the rear

[19:28] setback I think could be different where

[19:30] the side setbacks could be the same.

[19:33] >> Um, I think if you're filling your

[19:34] backyard with the dwelling,

[19:37] that's a I'm talking about kind of a

[19:39] little different impact there. Well,

[19:42] certainly it would still be limited by

[19:43] size and a number of other factors as

[19:46] well. I don't think that they that would

[19:47] give them license to build the whole

[19:48] fence line in some giant building. I

[19:50] think it would just mean they could be

[19:51] closer to that than maybe someone else

[19:54] who has a neighbor behind them. But it's

[19:55] still if I'm in my h house. I mean, I

[19:57] have that right now, but the home's

[19:59] being built behind me, right? I'm in my

[20:01] house. I have this setback. I can see

[20:04] over here cuz my neighbor has the same

[20:07] setback.

[20:09] If my neighbor fills their backyard with

[20:12] 20 foot tall building, that is then

[20:16] impinging on my

[20:19] um expectation of the zoning that was in

[20:22] place when I moved in and built my

[20:24] house. We're now increasing we're now

[20:27] decreasing my sightelines, increasing um

[20:30] and this isn't even you can't build

[20:32] behind me, you know, nim stuff. this is

[20:34] just normal expectation from an R8

[20:38] um housing development. That's kind of

[20:40] the way I'm looking at it, I guess, is

[20:44] there's not just the rear, but there's

[20:46] side impacts, too, that can affect the

[20:49] quality of life of the people living on

[20:52] either side of someone who fills their

[20:54] backyard with a hatch to in other words,

[20:56] another dwelling really.

[20:58] >> So, I just want to make sure I

[20:59] understand. So you're what you're saying

[21:01] is is the rear the rear in uh setback

[21:05] impacts

[21:07] >> neighbors

[21:07] >> the side neighbors even if the if the

[21:10] side setbacks remain the same if they

[21:12] have is it's the rear imping back. Okay

[21:15] make sure I understood.

[21:16] >> Thank you.

[21:17] >> My my other point was

[21:20] and I don't know how to reconcile this

[21:22] in my head but you have this house can

[21:24] be 8 foot setbacks. So, we're saying,

[21:26] well, your ADU can't be I mean, 10 or 20

[21:30] or whatever, 30 feet from the other

[21:31] property line, but I could extend my

[21:32] house and I could go eight feet for

[21:34] forever. And yeah, there's just this

[21:35] sort of inconsistency between I could

[21:37] build a giant house and it could be two

[21:39] stories, it could be as tall as I want

[21:40] and only 8 ft, but the ADU can only be,

[21:42] you know, there's just a little bit of

[21:43] >> I get what you're saying. So, like the

[21:45] Yeah, the house can be 8 ft off, but the

[21:47] ADU can't. ADU has to be

[21:49] >> accessory dwelling has to be further

[21:51] from my house. Your actual dwelling has

[21:53] to be

[21:54] >> Sure. And I, you know, and maybe that's

[21:55] something we just sort of live with, but

[21:57] I think I would like to see a little bit

[21:58] more consistency. I think that's because

[22:00] the ADU is subordinate to the home. Um,

[22:03] and I'm just going to use my

[22:04] neighborhood as an example with very

[22:06] modest neighborhood. We all built our

[22:07] homes 35, 40 years ago, right? I have

[22:09] had several neighbors that have now

[22:11] expanded their footprint their homes

[22:14] because they can afford they want a

[22:16] little more room now. So I think the

[22:18] fact that the reason the the footprint

[22:22] for the home means um

[22:26] uh I don't know what the right word is

[22:27] dominant superior whatever is for

[22:30] whoever moves into that home whoever

[22:32] builds that home they will always have

[22:34] opportunity

[22:36] for that footprint and it will never be

[22:38] impinged upon by a dwelling built next

[22:41] door. So, it's kind of preserving

[22:45] their any land owner's true opportunity.

[22:50] That's the kind of the way I I feel like

[22:52] you're presenting it. And that's

[22:55] I think a key thing to

[22:57] >> Well, and I just wonder if we're

[22:58] incentivizing something we don't intend

[23:00] to. Are we incentivizing people to build

[23:02] more and closer to the fence line by

[23:04] keeping that rule rather than saying,

[23:05] "Okay, you're going to have a little bit

[23:06] more flexibility, but the impact isn't

[23:08] going to be quite as big if you build an

[23:09] attached unit."

[23:11] That's say that one more time.

[23:13] >> Well, so I wonder if we're in by by

[23:15] keeping the setback rules more strict. I

[23:17] wonder if we're incentivizing people to

[23:19] build more onto their houses than build

[23:21] bigger

[23:22] >> because they I would just build an

[23:23] attached

[23:24] >> So you could go up higher and farther

[23:26] and the impact of the neighbor is going

[23:27] to be greater than if we just let them

[23:29] build a smaller

[23:30] >> but but it would still be protected.

[23:32] Their expectation of the zoning in place

[23:35] when they and like my next door neighbor

[23:37] I know he's never going to go bigger

[23:40] that footprint because he has the same

[23:43] setbacks from the property line. those

[23:45] are preserved and whoever moves in,

[23:48] whoever does it, that's an expectation

[23:52] that is always, you know, I can always

[23:55] have confidence in. So, you want to add

[23:58] and put an ADU in there instead of

[24:00] adding a family room on the back of your

[24:01] house, that's your choice.

[24:03] >> As long as you stay in that same

[24:04] footprint, I really can't say anything

[24:06] about it. I mean, I can be upset or

[24:08] whatever, you know, but it's really not

[24:10] my call because you still preserved the

[24:13] integrity of the zoning that was in

[24:15] place when those homes

[24:18] >> that's kind of my

[24:20] guess. So, I mean, I see what you're

[24:22] saying, but I think um I guess I'm

[24:26] looking more longterm for whoever ends

[24:28] up living in the home and the next door

[24:30] neighbor who lives next to the home that

[24:33] it's just going to stay equal and fair.

[24:37] into the decades forward. [laughter] Um,

[24:40] you know, because everyone can rely on

[24:42] that.

[24:43] >> I think there's also the expectation

[24:45] that if I bought my home in a single

[24:49] family home neighborhood, I expect it to

[24:52] do that. And so that detached unit

[24:56] should be as unobtrusive as possible for

[24:59] that family home feelings. That's part

[25:03] of it for me.

[25:09] question.

[25:10] >> I think you answered all the questions.

[25:12] >> I have a question that's a little bit

[25:13] down the road. So, that's really nice to

[25:15] be able to have that template to put

[25:16] over a lot. So, if someone wants to

[25:18] consider doing this, they come to you or

[25:21] will you have something online that they

[25:23] tool that they can say, okay, if I

[25:25] wanted to do this, this is these are my

[25:26] parameters. And it would be cool if we

[25:29] could make it a tool so they could use

[25:30] it on their lot. I'm not sure we could

[25:31] do that cuz I don't know the technology

[25:33] well enough, but we could certainly do

[25:34] it. Help them see if it would work not

[25:37] set by be neat if there was a way for

[25:39] them to to use what we use to do it.

[25:43] >> Produce these. That would be cool.

[25:45] >> Whatever the council ends up deciding, I

[25:47] would envision we would have something

[25:48] like that that graphically reflects how

[25:52] the ordinance works on our website so

[25:54] somebody could look at it and get a

[25:58] rough idea. And again, every lot's a

[26:00] little different. Sometimes the house

[26:02] isn't as 30t deep. Sometimes it's 45 ft

[26:07] deep. Sometimes they're at 25 ft.

[26:09] Sometimes they're 30.

[26:11] >> So, moves around a little bit.

[26:13] >> An info sheet we would definitely have

[26:15] put online and things like that.

[26:16] >> Yeah.

[26:17] >> And we take those kind of calls a lot

[26:19] already. Not about detached ADUs because

[26:21] right now we're just saying you have to

[26:22] wait and see.

[26:24] We get that a lot with um accessory like

[26:26] sheds and garages. Where can I put it?

[26:30] >> The other thing that comes

[26:31] >> appreciate this conversation. Oh, go

[26:33] ahead. I know.

[26:33] >> Please.

[26:34] >> Um I appreciate the graphic.

[26:36] >> That's Emma. Thank you, Emma. If you're

[26:38] watching watching, you know,

[26:41] >> because it it helps me better helps me

[26:43] visualize visualize this. I'm I I

[26:46] appreciate I appreciate council member

[26:48] Millet what you're saying and and your

[26:51] suggest and the suggestions that have

[26:53] come to create this has helped me better

[26:55] understand I I have I have some concerns

[26:58] about the size of these setbacks. Uh one

[27:01] of the reasons is I don't want the as a

[27:06] state has mandated

[27:08] uh that we allow ADUs

[27:12] on 11,000 square foot lots. I don't want

[27:14] to be construed as somebody trying to

[27:17] make it unreasonably difficult to locate

[27:21] to where we would be used as an example of

[27:26] being unreasonably difficult to locate.

[27:28] That one looked like a looked like one

[27:30] of those little cat tunnels that would

[27:33] go.

[27:33] >> Oh yeah,

[27:34] >> just whatever. But not but I also

[27:37] recognize that we don't have to allow

[27:42] a reasonable we don't every 11,000 plus

[27:45] square foot lot doesn't have to

[27:48] >> fit this either

[27:50] >> that's in it's inevitable be lots that

[27:52] it just whatever we wrote it

[27:54] >> I need I need to think about

[27:55] particularly the the ones the the I

[27:58] understand the rear yard I'm just

[28:00] thinking the 30 feet from the buildable

[28:02] area on each side and I and I get that

[28:04] because some of those some of those

[28:06] examples you used are are alarming and I would not want that but

[28:13] this is a good discussion to try and

[28:15] figure out a balance.

[28:16] >> I listened to ULCT's DAU discussion or

[28:20] they had a little webinar about that

[28:23] 2008

[28:24] >> and I don't think that that setback

[28:26] would be construed as unreasonable by

[28:28] their definition. So, if you haven't

[28:31] watched that, I would encourage you to

[28:32] go watch that because they really do

[28:35] break down what they feel like would be

[28:37] construed as reasonable and unreasonable

[28:39] in those situations. And my

[28:42] interpretation of that is that this

[28:43] would not be construed as unreasonable.

[28:45] Um, and again, just because you have an

[28:47] 11,000 foot lot does not mean that you

[28:49] are therefore have the right to have to

[28:53] Yeah. There's there's not some right

[28:54] that's inherent in having that size of

[28:56] lot that you could then have this. There

[28:58] are limitations on what that looks like

[29:01] and and we are

[29:04] >> with the responsibility of determining

[29:06] what that looks like to make sure that

[29:08] we're not

[29:10] infringing on other people's property

[29:12] rights and the the neighborhood feel and

[29:15] all of that. And and a lot of what they

[29:17] talked about in that was that

[29:22] to to maintain the character of a single

[29:24] family home neighborhood is okay. That's

[29:27] part of what they're doing. This this

[29:28] shouldn't

[29:30] the ADU should not change that for

[29:32] people.

[29:33] >> So, I'll go back. I had to step away

[29:35] from it partway through. So, I'll go

[29:37] back and and watch watch the whole thing

[29:39] again. So, thank you.

[29:42] >> Great.

[29:44] >> Any other questions about that backs or

[29:47] kind of how that might work?

[29:48] >> I would almost say like you gave us

[29:49] these unit numbers. I mean, I they

[29:52] really don't help me unless I know what

[29:54] percentage they are of homes.

[29:56] >> Yeah.

[29:57] >> Salt Lake City 73, but they have so many

[29:59] more houses, right? So, and I'm just to

[30:03] me when I look at these numbers that you

[30:04] gave us, Salt Lake County is huge in

[30:07] geographic area.

[30:08] >> Um, it it actually just makes me think

[30:12] this is a great tool for some people,

[30:14] but this is probably not the most

[30:16] desirable. We probably have more

[30:18] interior ADU opportunities.

[30:20] >> Probably have more interior adus than

[30:22] >> Yeah. So, you know, I just feel like

[30:25] we're um the people who are going to

[30:28] want to do it are going to do it because

[30:30] they can and they're otherwise they're

[30:32] >> they're going to be there are going to

[30:33] be more more there always in every city

[30:35] in most cases there's going to be more

[30:37] opportunity for people to do interior ID

[30:40] use. I think that's that's verifiable.

[30:43] That just it's it's more cost effective

[30:45] sometime. I guess there are times when

[30:46] it wouldn't be, but it's generally been

[30:48] it's been more cost effective. It's a

[30:50] lot. You don't have to rerun the

[30:52] utilities. You don't have to run more.

[30:53] It's expensive to treasure utility lines

[30:55] thing. So, the costs skyrocket pretty

[30:57] quick on on detached, but some things

[31:00] about that are changing. I think but I

[31:02] think those numbers actually kind of

[31:03] bear that out. Salt Lake City is is a

[31:06] big place. They've been doing for a lot

[31:07] longer and 73 seems like a big number

[31:09] until you take it in context. It's still

[31:12] the other thing that happens is if if

[31:14] you have a really narrow lot, a small

[31:15] lot, you're trying to make things fit.

[31:17] We have these setbacks, and this is true

[31:18] of everything, not just detached

[31:20] accessory dwelling units, but you're

[31:22] putting up a shed, you're putting up a

[31:23] garage, and you want to put it further

[31:24] toward your property line. This doesn't

[31:26] even take into account the easements

[31:28] that are probably there. There's

[31:29] probably a seven or an eight or a 10ft

[31:31] easement that you may have to get, if

[31:33] we're allowing it, even if we allow you

[31:34] to go in there, you have to get it

[31:36] vacated or get a waiver from all the

[31:38] utility companies. one of those utility

[31:40] companies won't vacate or won't wave,

[31:42] you don't build in that area, regardless

[31:43] of what our setbacks do or don't

[31:44] require. So, that's out there, too. And

[31:47] that might kill some projects otherwise

[31:49] if people are, well, I'm going to add on

[31:51] to my garage. It's back here. It's only

[31:52] a foot off. My garage is non-conforming

[31:54] because it's built in. Won't let us give

[31:56] a new permit to put the That's going to

[31:58] happen to anybody. Easements are unless

[32:02] you're an engineer, you like

[32:06] >> necessary.

[32:07] Um so you say

[32:12] Jared how how

[32:15] quality assurance work you take the

[32:18] total amount of

[32:20] possible products

[32:23] would say we'll take a random sample of

[32:26] a square root of that and then that was

[32:29] a representative sample that would then

[32:31] help you figure out what was uh the

[32:35] likely outcome um if applied to

[32:38] everything. So maybe we could take a

[32:42] bigger random sample. So if if there's a

[32:44] total of 5,000 11,000 plus square foot

[32:48] single family lots in the city, take the

[32:52] square root of that number, you random

[32:55] amount of them. Why these setbacks?

[32:58] Um and then and see if it is it does

[33:02] that does that mean a majority of those

[33:05] wouldn't be able to do a detached or a

[33:09] minority

[33:11] know would be restricted and

[33:13] >> so I I don't know that I need you to do

[33:15] that. I to me this that that's data is

[33:18] great, right? But to give you the the

[33:22] charge to go do that. I I don't know

[33:24] that that's the key um determinant.

[33:28] Maybe other council members feel

[33:29] differently, but I kind of hate

[33:31] offloading that to you guys. I don't see

[33:33] that as relevant data to the extent that

[33:36] I can use it.

[33:38] >> I would have to teach the

[33:40] >> decision planners what a square root is

[33:42] first.

[33:44] I mean data is great but how do you

[33:46] apply it right? How does it affect

[33:50] >> it? It's important but it's one of

[33:53] several things that we're looking at

[33:54] decision points. Yeah.

[33:56] >> It's also something that we could do if um not that I'm obsessed with

[34:00] deadlines. My whole life is deadlines.

[34:02] So it's also something we could do if um

[34:05] if something is passed and then we're

[34:06] concerned that it was overly restrictive

[34:09] or not restrictive enough or if it if it

[34:11] made it too available. You know what I

[34:12] mean? Um, and it

[34:15] >> Yeah, but it's something we could do. I

[34:17] could do a T-square list right now.

[34:20] >> I think that's another great point. We

[34:21] have to come up with something by August

[34:23] or October 1st. That's what we're

[34:25] charged with by the state. It doesn't

[34:27] mean that we can't revisit this and and

[34:32] change things later. Um,

[34:35] loosening things up is a lot easier than

[34:37] reeling them back in. So I I think that

[34:39] there is some prudence in starting with

[34:43] >> maybe a tighter

[34:45] ordinance to begin with and then as we

[34:49] see the practical implications of it we

[34:52] can decide what what changes would need

[34:56] to happen. We have that ability

[34:58] >> and as an example of that uh recently we

[35:02] worked and redefined the building

[35:04] envelope

[35:05] >> right

[35:06] >> uh of that you can build heights you

[35:09] know when we had a situation where

[35:10] people have built the envelope was their

[35:13] home and that didn't seem to be good so

[35:16] we came up with a new way of looking at

[35:18] the envelope and I can tell you it was

[35:21] our best estimate and best guess we

[35:24] didn't go through every single property

[35:25] and try and look at it what they could

[35:27] do. But what we're doing as people come

[35:30] in and if an issue comes up uh we work

[35:35] through it or if we run into something

[35:38] that okay we didn't anticipate this.

[35:40] What we would do is come back to the

[35:42] council and say okay this is the

[35:45] ordinance we passed. It was our best

[35:48] estimate of what happened. we now run

[35:50] into this situation and a a property

[35:54] owners in this uh trying to build this.

[35:59] Did we mean to capture and stop this

[36:01] from happening? And if we did, great. We

[36:04] leave the ordinance alone. And if we

[36:05] didn't, then we could tweak the

[36:06] ordinance. And there's some simple

[36:08] tweaks that we could do uh with that.

[36:12] but an ordinance like this, if

[36:14] you're asking me and Jared, is this

[36:17] going to be the best ordinance ever

[36:18] written on this and it will never need

[36:20] to be amended? Well, yeah. Well, no, it

[36:23] won't. Uh because it never is. And as we

[36:27] get experience applying it in the real

[36:30] world, we may run across some things

[36:32] like, yeah, we're capturing things that

[36:34] nobody really thought that was a

[36:37] problem. Or it may be, yeah, that's

[36:39] exactly what we wanted to stop from

[36:41] happening. This would be a big impact.

[36:44] So all of our ordinances as we have ex

[36:48] real life experience with them, we'll

[36:50] come back to you and and update you on

[36:53] it. And like the uh the building height

[36:56] or the building envelope one and this

[37:00] one as we go on, you know, we could just

[37:02] schedule out 6 months, 9 months from

[37:06] enactment, we would come back and give

[37:08] you an update on how this ordinance is

[37:10] actually working. So you actually know

[37:14] what the effect is that it's having on

[37:16] the community.

[37:21] » Thank you. Council members, any other

[37:23] questions? I know I I say you've still

[37:25] got 20 minutes, 25 minutes.

[37:28] >> Got two other categories to go through.

[37:30] >> All [laughter] right.

[37:33] >> Because we we did talk about as well in

[37:35] that in that in the previous meeting we

[37:37] talked about [laughter]

[37:38] and again we were we kind of um

[37:42] in the interest of making the deadlines

[37:43] work, we spitballled a lot of these um

[37:46] suggestions. So, looking at heights, we

[37:49] had originally said um

[37:52] oh my gosh, I can't as I'm sitting here

[37:54] remember what we had allowed before and

[37:55] I can't remember. I I apologize. This is

[37:58] just this was a diagram that Emma did

[38:00] for us to show really simply and rel

[38:03] relatively what 14 ft would look like

[38:05] next to a typical home. This is a 30-ft

[38:08] tall home that would allow and like a

[38:10] home on an adjacent lot. This is showing

[38:11] that 25t rear setback, etc. So this is

[38:14] where it would live an ADU in the kind

[38:16] of setbacks that we're talking about

[38:17] here. And with respect to um this

[38:21] actually doesn't show the 25 ft that on

[38:23] the property. Sorry, it's different.

[38:25] This was from before, but this is the

[38:27] kind of mass you'd be looking at. This

[38:29] is a flat roof at 12 ft. Um

[38:33] we're looking at um the kinds of things

[38:35] at a graded graded height allowance. So

[38:38] the minimum setbacks that we require

[38:41] say something like and these are again

[38:42] just kind of spitball numbers a flat

[38:44] roof could have 12 ft of allowable

[38:46] height at the setback that's required

[38:48] the minimum and then give it a one for

[38:50] one increase as it gets further into the

[38:53] itself up to 16 ft for the flat roof and

[38:57] then pitch roofs 14 ft at the minimums

[38:59] and up to 18 ft to get more on the

[39:02] interior of the line. We've been um

[39:06] a little higher than that on the

[39:07] previous the current proposal is greater

[39:10] than that. I I wish I I'd left the slide

[39:12] that showed that and I took it out at

[39:13] the last minute

[39:14] >> thinking. So

[39:15] >> you want to know what? Yeah, we have you

[39:18] want to know what the current It's 20T

[39:21] for uh pitched and 14 for flat.

[39:24] >> Flat. Okay.

[39:25] >> Current.

[39:26] >> There you go.

[39:29] >> And no increases, right? That's just

[39:31] straight.

[39:32] >> Straight. This would this would be and

[39:34] these are again just numbers. Um some of

[39:37] it is related to just ceiling heights

[39:39] that people like to use. 12 foot would

[39:42] accommodate uh for flat roofs. Let me

[39:43] just show you a picture. 12T would

[39:45] easily accommodate a flat roof. This is

[39:47] a converted OnX um unit. Uh it would

[39:51] accommodate these. They're they're

[39:52] technically flat roofs under our

[39:54] definition of 312. So, and this one is

[39:58] you can see the interior of this unit

[40:00] pretty well. It's nice. You can nice

[40:01] high ceiling. This is a unit

[40:03] specifically designed for

[40:04] exhibitionists. There's no shades on it.

[40:07] >> And and what Jared's talking about is

[40:11] one of the big pushes for

[40:14] patch

[40:16] or conx. They're shipping containers

[40:19] shipping those

[40:21] >> modules and you bring them in and you uh

[40:25] you can buy some on Amazon. Now

[40:28] >> I think that's the same structure. It's

[40:30] a It's

[40:31] >> looking at it. It looks like it's the

[40:33] same structure.

[40:33] >> The daytime version.

[40:35] >> Yeah.

[40:38] » It looks taller in the dark, doesn't it?

[40:40] >> Just how it is.

[40:44] [clears throat]

[40:44] >> Dark is magical. So,

[40:46] >> but it would accommodate those kinds of

[40:47] units. And then,

[40:48] >> so can I ask you something? Well,

[40:51] >> so and maybe I don't know if chief if

[40:52] you know this. I someone today told me

[40:55] that those structures are very

[40:57] questionably

[40:59] their safety

[41:00] >> questionable in their safety for fire

[41:02] codes and things like that. Do we that

[41:05] might be something in our list six

[41:07] months from now or a year from now to

[41:08] look at is I I I would like to get some

[41:12] feedback. I don't I don't necessarily

[41:13] want to do that

[41:14] >> now because of the deadline, but I think

[41:17] that would be something we might want to

[41:20] look into. They would have to meet all

[41:23] uh the international residential code,

[41:26] international fire code that

[41:29] >> they couldn't they couldn't not be safe.

[41:31] >> Oh. Oh, really?

[41:32] >> Yeah. They they wouldn't be allowed.

[41:34] They have they would have to fire code

[41:37] >> to be habitable.

[41:38] >> I mean, there are different levels of

[41:39] fire code. No,

[41:41] >> this person made it sound like I would

[41:43] never stay a night in one of those

[41:45] >> code for your house would be what would

[41:47] be required for this

[41:49] >> same code.

[41:53] And we and we that's written in the

[41:55] ordinance too. It has to meet those

[41:56] codes.

[41:57] >> So it might just be quality of

[41:58] materials.

[42:00] >> Sure.

[42:01] >> So the the 18 ft for pitched roofs uh

[42:04] that would accommodate something like

[42:05] the that would let you build a tall

[42:07] enough wall like a 12ft wall inside so

[42:09] you could have a loft that was usable

[42:11] because there are rules about how you

[42:12] have to be able to stand up and stuff.

[42:15] you'd need a pitch roof to do for flat

[42:17] roofs to go and allow um any kind of

[42:20] loft space would be really difficult.

[42:22] Even 16 would be the bare minimum and

[42:24] that might not work either. So,

[42:27] >> how do these heights compared to what

[42:29] other cities are doing?

[42:30] >> I don't have a lot of data on the

[42:32] heights for cities. Most of them are

[42:34] like they're they're related to their

[42:35] accessory structure code. So, they're

[42:36] going to be 18 or 20 and a couple of

[42:39] them have like 12 foot heights.

[42:41] Again, they're kind of around. most from

[42:43] 18 to 20.

[42:44] >> Why would the flat roof minima be

[42:47] different than

[42:50] >> the because of the massing um with the

[42:52] flat roof? I guess I I don't know.

[42:55] That's a good question. It may not it

[42:56] may not be relevant with with respect to

[42:58] these structures. That may not be

[43:00] relevant. I worry about the flat roofs

[43:02] or we worried about the height of flat

[43:03] roofs with the the building envelope

[43:05] ordinance that we're just talking about.

[43:07] That may not be as relevant here.

[43:10] have flat roofs on the brain.

[43:14] >> I'm just a little concerned because I

[43:16] also did research on what other cities

[43:18] are doing. And I went out and looked and

[43:19] measured brought my tape measure out and

[43:21] said, "How tall is this?" You know, and

[43:22] I 12 is like the very lowest of low you

[43:25] could maybe get agree with. And and I

[43:27] think it's just almost too low,

[43:29] >> even another couple of feet just to

[43:31] give, you know, a little bit of latitude

[43:33] because by the time you get the roof and

[43:35] insulation and all the things like it's

[43:37] >> Yeah. You need you need so the wall you

[43:39] don't want the walls to be typical walls

[43:41] now are going to be at least 8 ft in a

[43:43] house and they're maybe going to in new

[43:45] construction they're going to be maybe

[43:47] so another foot and a half of structure

[43:48] would get you that flat roof at 12.

[43:51] >> Yes. And I think that would be an

[43:52] outlier from most of the ordinances I

[43:54] saw they were significantly higher like

[43:56] 20 or I'm not advocating for 20 was too

[43:58] low. I got you. I I I think most of them

[44:00] are based on they've just looked at

[44:01] their accessory their accessory

[44:03] structures in general like garages and

[44:06] sheds and said we allow up to 18 ft or

[44:08] 20 ft. Just use that code

[44:10] >> so it doesn't stand out on the

[44:12] >> right. You're trying to again it's got

[44:13] to be it ought to be le and the other

[44:14] thing is yeah not taller than the

[44:17] primary dwelling that kind of thing.

[44:19] >> I wanted mine to look like one of those

[44:20] fire training guys will come over. It's a

[44:27] good question.

[44:32] » Eat a lot.

[44:34] >> Yes, we do.

[44:36] >> We do too.

[44:37] >> 12 foot. You say then you could have

[44:39] like a 9 foot ceilings and have plenty

[44:45] have another three foot for insulation.

[44:47] You only need a foot and a half

[44:48] insulation.

[44:51] >> So do 10 foot.

[44:52] >> You could do it. I think one of the

[44:54] other reasons that I looked at it this

[44:56] way and said, you know, lower for the

[44:58] flat roof than for the base roof is

[44:59] because we're not allowing in this code,

[45:01] I didn't leave it written in here, but

[45:03] the ADU code isn't allowing that we've

[45:06] proposed is not allowing for second

[45:07] stories, only lofts. So, I was trying to

[45:09] get with 16 ft at least a loft or a

[45:11] small loft for a flat roof and 18 to

[45:14] allow a a small loft in a pitched roof

[45:16] situation like this. But, yeah, you

[45:18] might it that's what I'm thinking is

[45:21] there's no second story. So, I'm not

[45:23] sure why a flat roof needs to be 18 feet

[45:27] or something in the, you know, not sure

[45:29] why a flat roof structure needs to have

[45:32] ceilings or whatever

[45:35] since we don't allow the second stories,

[45:36] but it could allow better lofts to that

[45:39] point. I'm not sure that it matters

[45:40] really something you guys have to

[45:42] decide. It I know why it mattered for us

[45:45] envelope heighting houses and I just

[45:46] kind of transferred that thinking to

[45:47] this and it may not be relevant for

[45:49] these. I don't know.

[45:51] That's a good question.

[45:53] >> So, I have a question on

[45:58] for the flat roof when there is the

[46:00] small pitch to it.

[46:03] >> Um,

[46:05] do we have that the pitch of that has to be towards the

[46:12] main resident's house?

[46:15] >> That's not at all. No,

[46:16] >> I worry about the runoff. Yeah,

[46:20] >> that's so far off the property line

[46:21] anyway that wouldn't

[46:24] >> Yeah,

[46:25] >> potentially. I mean, it depends on

[46:27] around that all

[46:29] >> paved or you know, have they paved up

[46:32] the line? Have they

[46:33] >> any of those things?

[46:35] >> Yeah, we didn't really we didn't talk

[46:36] about orientation of the of the roof.

[46:39] >> So, to her point, the hardscape could be

[46:41] a concern.

[46:43] If they have hardscape in the eight foot

[46:45] setback, then that's totally and and you

[46:48] do the the raid.

[46:51] >> Yeah.

[46:52] >> Well, I guess we need to think about

[46:54] that because that could flood the

[46:55] neighbor.

[46:59] » And we do this with um we would probably

[47:01] review that as

[47:04] I can look at what we've written in our

[47:05] accessory structure code. I don't think

[47:07] we have anything about that, but with

[47:08] building permits, we always look at

[47:10] drainage. you you have to maintain your

[47:12] drainage on your own property

[47:13] regardless. So, whatever we wrote here,

[47:15] >> we have to [snorts] deal with that. And

[47:16] there's lots of cases where people have

[47:17] to install kind of a waterway at the

[47:19] edge of their because they paved right

[47:20] up to the sides. We would look at that

[47:22] kind of thing.

[47:23] >> And I guess that would be the fix,

[47:24] right? Is to put the herb.

[47:27] >> Yeah. And

[47:28] >> so it disates the water.

[47:29] >> Yeah. And and with residential lots, so

[47:32] this is a good this is a good point. And

[47:34] we could talk for an hour about this. We

[47:35] won't, but we could.

[47:36] >> You got 10 minutes.

[47:37] >> Got 10 minutes. And I'll be I'll be

[47:39] >> then we're going to eat our dinner.

[47:40] >> I'm not making promises. No, I'm just

[47:42] kidding. The with residential lots, the

[47:44] thinking is always so drainage is really

[47:46] complicated on commercial lots where a

[47:48] lot of the lot is pavement or rooftop or

[47:50] whatever. On residential lots, the

[47:52] thinking is always that everything just

[47:54] it's that's a lot of lawn and then the

[47:55] driveways all slope to the street. So

[47:57] everything in the building code is

[47:58] saying the water has to go away from the

[48:00] house and then down toward the street.

[48:02] the more things that take up that uh

[48:06] pvious surface and make it impervious to

[48:08] the backyard or the rear, the front

[48:09] yard, what have you, then the more that

[48:11] drainage is not like typical old old

[48:14] style thinking we start to worry about

[48:15] it. So, we don't have in our code a

[48:18] coverage requirement for imperous

[48:20] surface for residential.

[48:23] We could, we probably should. As lots

[48:26] get smaller and homes get bigger. Some

[48:28] of these homes are gigantic. And that as

[48:30] that box fills up, the more of that box

[48:35] on new properties, how that box gets

[48:36] filled up, that's just more runoff and

[48:38] less lawn absorbing that water. And then

[48:41] um you have you have less likelihood

[48:43] that all that drains out to the front.

[48:45] All of that is just to say that when you

[48:47] look at a property, let's just take this

[48:49] house for example in this picture

[48:51] because randomly here it is. There's

[48:53] plenty of lawn absorbing water and this

[48:55] driveway is sloping down to that street.

[48:56] Everything is supposed to do that. They

[48:58] put an ADU in the backyard because they

[49:00] pave they put a foundation here because

[49:02] it meets our requirements. Whatever.

[49:04] Part of its process will be to look at

[49:05] that and say that's got to drain out

[49:06] toward the front too or it's got to

[49:08] drain into the lawn so that it can

[49:10] percolate draining on a hard surface

[49:12] that should all be sloping theoretically

[49:14] up toward the front and out to the

[49:16] street. And probably there are no

[49:18] violations of that anywhere in the city.

[49:20] I'm sure it's all working perfectly.

[49:22] >> Well, we're all gunshy right from that storm two years ago. I had two

[49:25] three houses flooded. They flooded three

[49:28] feet in the walls. So,

[49:31] >> it's something we should look at.

[49:32] >> And a lot of communities have impervious

[49:34] surface lot coverage limit that you

[49:38] can't go above a certain percentage and

[49:41] so you have to have spaces for that type

[49:44] of thing. But ORM does not have such an

[49:46] >> but don't isn't our landscaping minimum

[49:49] landscaping requirement kind of

[49:52] >> indirectly

[49:53] >> but is that only in the front yard

[49:57] >> that's for the front yard but in the

[50:00] rear yard you know one of the things

[50:02] that we haven't talked about yet and and

[50:05] I don't know what to do with it is

[50:07] people taking up the backyard and

[50:09] putting in concrete for parking because

[50:12] now I can drive into the back or

[50:14] something like that and

[50:16] >> sports or sport courts and pickle ball

[50:21] and lots of things.

[50:23] >> Yeah, it's it's it's something that has

[50:26] it's on our radar, but I think we can in

[50:28] the immediate now. I think we can deal

[50:29] with the drainage through the building

[50:31] and we would we'd like more tools in the

[50:34] future though as it goes on. Jerry, can

[50:36] you when you're addressing these

[50:38] heights, can you help us know what

[50:41] process we come to to determine whether

[50:43] a height is good, adequate, sufficient?

[50:45] Because I mean, I arbitrarily be like,

[50:46] "Yeah, 10 feet sounds great, but like

[50:48] what does that actually mean? Has a

[50:49] builder weighed in on this? Are there

[50:50] standards that weigh in on this?" Like,

[50:51] what tells us if that's reasonable or

[50:53] not reasonable?

[50:54] >> Just talking to builders about what

[50:56] works and looking at home plans and

[50:57] things, that's all I've done.

[50:59] >> We have builders that have said 12 foot

[51:00] minimum is reasonable.

[51:01] >> I have builders that have said that to

[51:03] me personally. online builders have told

[51:05] me,

[51:07] [laughter]

[51:07] >> internet builders have said,

[51:09] >> "What are these online builders who are

[51:11] >> I know a lot of online people

[51:14] >> and our experience

[51:16] with building inspection and

[51:17] planchecking as residential homes come

[51:20] in and looking at them. What are the

[51:22] trends for heights? uh walls ex you know

[51:26] and it's anywhere from 8 ft to 10 ft now

[51:30] the walls so that you can have a vaulted

[51:32] ceiling or 10 ft if it's not vaulted you

[51:36] most homes you go into now you know

[51:38] you're looking at 10ft ceilings that's

[51:40] kind of the style

[51:43] um which ironically from 100 years ago

[51:46] is actually smaller

[51:49] >> were 100 years ago

[51:50] >> there are some pretty tall walls anymore

[51:51] in the interior so we're looking at I I

[51:53] 10 is kind of the baseline for

[51:55] >> what's the third thing? We're stopping

[51:56] you again.

[51:57] >> Yeah, I'm sorry. The third thing is

[51:58] overall size. We we um and it's not a um I I don't have any any

[52:04] data for you here other than as we look

[52:06] at the numbers from so we had we had

[52:09] proposed um 850 or 6 you know

[52:13] >> 6

[52:14] >> 650 to 850 to a,000 and those those

[52:19] footprints looked bigger in real life on

[52:21] those plans that we laid out than we had

[52:24] kind of envisioned them. um talking

[52:26] about this with the planning commission

[52:27] last week as well just in letting them

[52:29] know kind of where we were in the

[52:30] process and then looking at some of the

[52:32] units that are out there. There are a

[52:34] lot of smaller units and they seem to be

[52:36] pretty popular. The most popular of

[52:37] these ConXes is four is the 400 model.

[52:40] That's 400 ft. That's pretty popular.

[52:42] It's affordable. Even that one's 108,000

[52:44] without ground market stuff. Um so they

[52:48] get expensive as they get bigger,

[52:49] especially stick building them. Um, just

[52:52] as a as an example, uh, in West Jordan

[52:54] there are 12 total units and 10 of those

[52:58] 12 total units right now are under 1,000

[53:01] square ft. Four of them are 800s and

[53:03] then they go 700s down to four. I don't

[53:06] know that we need to go as high as

[53:08] that,000 ft. If people feel more

[53:10] comfortable about getting the ordinance

[53:12] done, I don't think we'd be hurting

[53:14] anybody by reducing the sizes that we

[53:16] proposed.

[53:17] >> What size do you think recommendation?

[53:20] >> Hard. It's hard to say.

[53:23] There are plenty of 300 unit 300 foot

[53:25] units. There are lots of 400 foot units.

[53:27] There's probably not as I look at if

[53:29] these are the kinds of setbacks that

[53:30] we're going to be looking at. Um, most

[53:33] of these would not need to accommodate

[53:36] more than 3 and 400 ft. 650 ft might

[53:39] start to feel big for an ADU. Um, 800 is

[53:42] certainly plenty big. I don't think

[53:44] there's any need to go into the

[53:45] thousands.

[53:45] >> Yeah. Um, if I could share an example,

[53:49] my first home in War was 800 ft on the

[53:51] main floor. Had two bedrooms, a

[53:53] bathroom, a front room, and a narrow

[53:55] kitchen. So, 800 ft is pretty good size.

[53:58] >> What do you think?

[53:59] >> Work. I mean, it works. Yeah,

[54:00] >> it worked.

[54:02] >> So, we could we could significantly

[54:03] reduce and I'm not seeing a whole bunch

[54:04] of ADUs that are larger um in in just

[54:08] the sort of limited spotty looking at

[54:11] it. we've done. Um,

[54:14] I don't really be hurting anything if we

[54:15] reduce that size. How does everybody

[54:17] feel about that? Is that a

[54:19] >> I don't know that they're designed to be

[54:20] really big. I think for a mother-in-law

[54:22] or for, you know, a young married couple

[54:24] or

[54:26] >> Yeah, we're not trying to house me and

[54:27] my six kids.

[54:30] >> I think my first house was like four.

[54:33] [laughter]

[54:34] >> Um, yeah. So, I'll I'll probably start

[54:37] looking at bringing those sizes down and

[54:39] uh we'll we'll we'll do that. So, we've

[54:41] got looking at vote on our agenda items

[54:44] coming this this evening and we've got

[54:46] two more city council meetings before

[54:49] this ordinance needs to be adopted

[54:53] council. Just so you know, we have

[54:55] meetings two meetings in September the

[54:56] 8th and the 22nd.

[54:59] So, are we are we working is this going

[55:02] to be another on the work session on the

[55:04] 25th as well?

[55:05] >> It's up to you. Um, I can bring back I

[55:08] need to um

[55:11] >> we need to corral you in on the setbacks

[55:14] a little.

[55:14] >> The setbacks feel like we're I think

[55:16] we're probably going to be okay in

[55:17] heights as a as a group.

[55:19] >> As a group, I I'm not I'm struggling

[55:22] with the size of those setbacks a bit.

[55:24] Not a great reduction, but a reduction

[55:27] from that. So, I I understand and

[55:29] respect where brothers are coming from.

[55:32] >> Okay. on that just so you know.

[55:34] >> But specificity, the 25 foot for the

[55:38] rear or the 30?

[55:39] >> 30. The 30 foot.

[55:40] >> The 30 is bothering you from the sides.

[55:42] And I'm feeling like the 25 to the rear

[55:44] is bothering you.

[55:44] >> The 30 is bothering me and the 25.

[55:46] >> Both. Okay.

[55:48] >> Council members, other feedback.

[55:50] >> Yeah. Where's the rest of you?

[55:52] >> So, I'm the 30 from the side. Uh, I

[55:56] would be concerned with I I like the

[55:59] 8 ft or 10 ft in the 10 ft in

[56:03] sights.

[56:06] » If this rear lot setback that we're

[56:10] proposing, if we kept the 10s on the

[56:13] interiors and if we dropped the 30 from

[56:16] the sides, but kept the 20. So, sorry,

[56:19] this is going to sound complicated. I'll

[56:20] be I'll

[56:22] if we dropped the 30 ft from the

[56:24] buildable area but kept at least 20 ft

[56:28] from anybody else's home existing home

[56:31] or whatever and then gave an exception

[56:32] to people that let's say I own this home

[56:36] somebody builds their ADU right here and

[56:37] now when I put my addition on that I

[56:39] want to build by right I can't because

[56:41] I'm going to be closer to their ADU than

[56:42] I'm supposed to be if we wrote in an

[56:44] exception so they weren't penalized by

[56:45] that proximity would that be

[56:47] >> then you're creating legal nonconformity

[56:49] I I don't think that's good planning.

[56:51] >> Well, specifically would be trying to

[56:52] avoid creating legal non-conforming by

[56:54] doing that. I think

[56:55] >> Well, cuz you're then you have an ADU

[56:57] that's too close to a house. They go and

[56:59] they build on you. The house was the ADU

[57:01] was there first.

[57:02] >> Well, except that the exception it

[57:04] wouldn't technically be legal

[57:05] non-conforming because the exception

[57:07] would make it allowable. So, it wasn't

[57:09] >> Well, but yeah, we're giving them an

[57:11] exception.

[57:12] >> Right. Right. That's what I'm saying is

[57:14] if it to protect the rights of a person

[57:17] to build to their line without impinging

[57:20] and in most cases it won't matter. Most

[57:22] cases the 20ft separation and 10 ft on

[57:25] the interior keep them outside of where

[57:28] that buildable line is. But there are

[57:29] cases where it wouldn't. So that's got

[57:32] to be I'll keep thinking about that. And

[57:34] then that's why I like the simplicity of

[57:36] that is if you've got 10 feet on both

[57:38] sides then feet

[57:41] wide keeps it simple

[57:43] >> in is when you have a not side by side

[57:47] houses

[57:48] >> the culde-sacs the rear is on that side

[57:52] so you may have 10 on one but then

[57:54] you're up to the rear of another person.

[57:56] So when that person had an expectation

[57:58] of the house behind them being 25 ft,

[58:01] they now have something 10 ft.

[58:04] >> It's also when you have the corner house

[58:06] and one's oriented facing this way and

[58:08] then the next house is oriented facing

[58:10] this way and one's a sideyard and one's

[58:11] a I don't know. It gets complicated.

[58:14] >> Could you do could you do projections

[58:15] for that?

[58:17] >> Try. I'll come up with something. Look

[58:19] at that. So, if we can I'll keep the 20

[58:22] foot separation and see if we can work

[58:24] some way of

[58:26] making sure that there'll always be at

[58:28] least 20 ft between somebody's house and

[58:30] an ADU on another lot. That we can do

[58:33] without that's what we're learning today

[58:36] that we can do. This rear setback if the

[58:40] 25 is too much. Um, we can I just need

[58:45] to know if we should reduce that all the

[58:47] way to 10 like we have it or if we need

[58:48] to increase it a little bit. There are

[58:49] some 20s out there. G Jen, you've looked

[58:52] at um some others. There's some 20s and

[58:54] 15s. And if there is a difference in

[58:56] interiors, it's usually for the rear.

[58:58] Like the interiors will be 10 all around

[59:00] and the rear will be 15 or 20 or

[59:02] something like um or they'll just be the

[59:05] same.

[59:11] Yeah, the 30 was a little bit much. Uh

[59:13] on the rear, I don't think a lot of

[59:15] change, but possibly a 20 because of u

[59:19] the buildable and then you'd still be a

[59:22] long ways away from anybody else.

[59:23] >> In the case of this one,

[59:24] >> a lot of them have have on a current

[59:26] home already that has some kind of an

[59:28] awning for a little patio or something,

[59:30] they already have that 10 ft basically

[59:32] anyway. So that doesn't bother me. If

[59:34] this were 25, for example, if this 25

[59:38] were a 20 foot setback, it would open

[59:39] that area up a lot more. My feet can

[59:42] make a big difference.

[59:43] >> That's all I'm saying.

[59:44] >> That's my thoughts.

[59:45] >> Are you guys more comfortable 20 then?

[59:49] >> I would be more comfortable with 15.

[59:53] >> We can we can

[59:55] >> completely against that.

[59:56] >> And Quinn, what's Quinn? Do you have

[59:58] thoughts on this setbacks?

[1:00:01] >> Um, I do. I I think this is a productive

[1:00:03] discussion. Uh and thanks Jared for

[1:00:06] showing those visuals as well. Uh when

[1:00:09] you showed the visuals, I did have

[1:00:10] concerns that we were really

[1:00:12] constraining uh space for the sample of lots that you had. So uh I I do think

[1:00:19] that what you showed us was uh the

[1:00:21] setbacks were too too large. I'm also

[1:00:24] very sympathetic to Len's uh desire to

[1:00:27] protect the neighbors and I think it's

[1:00:30] just a balance. I just I think if we aim

[1:00:33] for 20 feet between buildings, maybe 15

[1:00:36] to 20 ft in terms of the rear setback, I

[1:00:38] would be comfortable.

[1:00:40] >> So, we're going back to the 20 from a

[1:00:42] dwelling instead of using property lines

[1:00:45] >> instead of 20 from a dwelling. The

[1:00:46] property lines are still there. 20 from

[1:00:48] a dwelling instead of going 30 ft off of

[1:00:50] the buildable, the build to line. Um I I

[1:00:53] will point out this just to make

[1:00:55] everybody feel better as we're not if

[1:00:57] we're not um reducing a long way from 25

[1:01:00] if we're going to 20 or to 15. This was

[1:01:03] not a lot that we had done originally.

[1:01:04] It's not a sample that we pulled

[1:01:05] originally. It it didn't take a lot to

[1:01:08] find this one. And you can see the ones

[1:01:09] around it would be similar in their

[1:01:10] allowances. So there there are you know

[1:01:13] the ones that we had had pulled randomly

[1:01:15] before. Yeah, they they looked a little

[1:01:16] more restricted. Uh, but I had Emma pull

[1:01:19] two more that were it wasn't hard to

[1:01:20] find two lots that made it pretty simple

[1:01:23] to do. Um, so there's there there going

[1:01:27] to be lots out there. It'll stay fairly

[1:01:30] open, I think, at 20 or 15 feet for a

[1:01:32] setback. Not a not a big deal. Um, but

[1:01:35] you know, again, it's got to be it's got

[1:01:37] to be something that can be acceptable

[1:01:40] to everybody. So,

[1:01:41] >> and unintended consequences. Basically,

[1:01:43] all you're doing is you're increasing

[1:01:45] density without having it go through the

[1:01:47] city council.

[1:01:49] >> It's Yeah. But uh pay to use do increase

[1:01:52] the density

[1:01:54] that this ordinate you're right that

[1:01:57] this ordinance would be the increase in

[1:02:00] the density.

[1:02:00] >> Yeah. So if something like that, how big

[1:02:02] of a are limiting the [clears throat]

[1:02:04] ADUs then to 850 max. Could we could

[1:02:07] even live with them lower than that. If

[1:02:09] the goal is to if the goal is to is to

[1:02:12] keep them unobtrusive, then maybe that's

[1:02:13] the better way. They still

[1:02:16] >> require.

[1:02:17] >> And for me, there's two things here. For

[1:02:19] me, it's the unobtrusive and the the

[1:02:22] because I saw there's some

[1:02:23] municipalities they're talking about

[1:02:25] once they get this passed, then they get a law that they can subdivide

[1:02:29] and then you have a house behind a

[1:02:30] house. So you you the unintended

[1:02:32] consequence is I could have double the

[1:02:35] density on both sides of me, my

[1:02:37] neighbors without my having any control

[1:02:39] or any ability to to to do

[1:02:41] [clears throat] that. that and then also

[1:02:43] the um protections of the expectation of

[1:02:47] where you know unobtrusive and then my

[1:02:51] expectation of the setbacks in my

[1:02:54] neighborhood being consistent and fair

[1:02:56] to everyone every house on the block

[1:03:00] and I can see reducing the size you know

[1:03:02] saying look 850 max because I don't

[1:03:04] think the goal is to put more people

[1:03:05] there it's just given more flexibility

[1:03:06] where to put it

[1:03:07] >> okay let's let's definitely reduce the

[1:03:10] size allowance and pull pull that back

[1:03:12] far enough that the setbacks feel more

[1:03:14] comfortable.

[1:03:15] >> Yeah. But once again, the big thing is

[1:03:16] the impact on the neighbor.

[1:03:17] >> Yeah.

[1:03:18] >> You know, I and this is the thing I've

[1:03:19] said. This is kind of what's in my

[1:03:21] crawl, right? So, you guys all know

[1:03:22] this, but you know, I don't want it

[1:03:24] close to my house. I'm going to put it

[1:03:25] in the farthest corner possible. Then my

[1:03:27] neighbor feels the impact and not me. To

[1:03:29] me, that's just not fair to do that, you

[1:03:33] know, and if we're facilitating that by

[1:03:35] creating this setback from a dwelling

[1:03:38] instead of from a property line, if

[1:03:40] we're not um, you know, referencing and

[1:03:42] maintaining the property rights of the

[1:03:44] property lines, we're setting up an

[1:03:46] opportunity

[1:03:48] impinging upon other people's property

[1:03:50] rights.

[1:03:52] >> So, privacy. It's a good point and and

[1:03:55] that's still the goal is to make this

[1:03:57] not violate state code requirements but

[1:03:59] also keep the uh of those existing

[1:04:03] people around and keep the character of

[1:04:04] the neighborhood

[1:04:06] very residential. So looking at the

[1:04:08] height as a as a smaller allowance at

[1:04:11] the bare setback and then getting bigger

[1:04:13] as you go incentivize people to go

[1:04:15] further in and then if we have greater

[1:04:18] setback for the rear that'll help and if

[1:04:19] we keep that 20 foot separation from

[1:04:21] anybody else's home

[1:04:24] um we'll we'll take a stab at it for the

[1:04:26] next meeting.

[1:04:26] >> I just don't agree the 20ft separation

[1:04:28] from a home. I think we should be using

[1:04:30] property lines for our metric. I don't

[1:04:31] know why we're using the property both

[1:04:34] someone else's the next

[1:04:35] >> this or whatever is greater. community.

[1:04:37] >> Yeah, it's it's a greater of the two.

[1:04:39] The 20 the 20 ft from anybody else's

[1:04:41] home is a fail safe in case the 10 feet

[1:04:43] on an interior or the 15t on a rear does

[1:04:45] not get you 20 in case somebody has an

[1:04:48] existing condition. It's different than

[1:04:49] normal. The normal situation like like

[1:04:51] Chris was saying 20 ft no matter what.

[1:04:53] There are those cases where less and the

[1:04:56] 20 foot building to building separation

[1:04:59] instead of just property lines is a fail

[1:05:00] safe. That's all it is.

[1:05:02] I don't think I would want the rear set

[1:05:04] back to be any less than 20.

[1:05:07] >> Let me get some graphics done at 20 and

[1:05:09] 50.

[1:05:10] >> See what that looks like.

[1:05:12] >> So, nobody wants 25. Nobody wants to

[1:05:13] keep this the setbacks that we have in

[1:05:15] place right now in our zoning

[1:05:18] 25.

[1:05:19] >> I want to keep the 25.

[1:05:20] >> That

[1:05:23] I'm 20. I mean, I'd like to see 20 from

[1:05:25] the property line.

[1:05:28] And I just think of my kids playing in

[1:05:30] the backyard and there's now a house

[1:05:32] right there in the neighbor's yard.

[1:05:35] That's

[1:05:38] that just doesn't feel great.

[1:05:40] I wouldn't like that as a parent. So, I

[1:05:42] would rather it be closer to

[1:05:46] the house of the property that it's on

[1:05:49] than

[1:05:51] >> I I agree with that completely.

[1:05:54] I'm just saying that I I feel like 20

[1:05:56] foot property line is a is a that's a

[1:06:01] >> maybe

[1:06:01] >> it's a good distance. Um

[1:06:05] we kind of look at both sides of the

[1:06:06] pancake here. Um but I I agree

[1:06:10] completely that we want to keep it as

[1:06:12] close to the the home

[1:06:15] impact should be on the home on which

[1:06:17] the property resides, not on the

[1:06:19] surrounding home. And

[1:06:21] >> the more we move that set back, the more

[1:06:23] we're pushing that

[1:06:25] >> on the neighbors. And and if that were

[1:06:27] me living there, now I now have people

[1:06:30] living

[1:06:31] on in that property in that, you know,

[1:06:34] DADU behind my house. that feels a lot

[1:06:38] more obtrusive to me and my kids playing

[1:06:42] in the backyard, right? So that that's

[1:06:44] the thing that I don't want to see

[1:06:46] happen.

[1:06:46] >> Could you do a combination of um 20 25

[1:06:50] step back in

[1:06:53] coordinated with a how close it is to

[1:06:57] the home

[1:07:01] » coordinated with how close

[1:07:02] >> Yeah. So you can you um you have to be

[1:07:06] within 10 ft of your house

[1:07:10] if you

[1:07:12] if your rear setback. So in other words,

[1:07:14] I'm trying to say, can we get them to

[1:07:16] have the impact be next to their house

[1:07:18] is

[1:07:18] >> scooch them up closer.

[1:07:20] >> Yeah. Instead of next

[1:07:21] >> right right in the river the neighbors,

[1:07:25] keep it close to you for your

[1:07:27] >> most of an internal

[1:07:28] >> because that kind of helps me with this

[1:07:30] impact on the neighbors issue. I mean, I look at my backyard and I think I'm

[1:07:34] probably my backdoor neighbor is

[1:07:36] probably 20 ft.

[1:07:39] >> Mhm.

[1:07:40] >> And you know, that's

[1:07:43] >> I think you're 25. [laughter]

[1:07:48] » 24.

[1:07:49] >> I've honestly never thought about it,

[1:07:51] but you know, as I think of myself

[1:07:54] coming out and saying, "Hey, neighbor,

[1:07:56] you know, it's it's not that far, but

[1:07:59] it's far enough.

[1:08:02] I don't feel

[1:08:04] and and I'm sure that she would say

[1:08:05] something completely different. She say

[1:08:06] those lamesons are so [laughter]

[1:08:09] you say keep it

[1:08:10] >> 100 feet away.

[1:08:12] >> And I get that.

[1:08:16] >> All right. Do you have the direction you

[1:08:17] feel comfortable with?

[1:08:18] >> Enough to get to the next meeting.

[1:08:20] >> Okay. You want to talk about this again?

[1:08:23] >> No problem. Thank you. No, thank you all

[1:08:24] very much. I appreciate it. It's very

[1:08:25] helpful.

[1:08:26] >> All right. Um, dinner's ready. I've

[1:08:27] asked Council Member Lamson if you would

[1:08:29] offer a blessing on the

[1:08:34] » Our Father in heaven, we humbly bow our

[1:08:36] heads in humility and gratitude before

[1:08:38] thee this evening. We're so grateful,

[1:08:40] heavenly father, for the many blessings

[1:08:43] that we enjoy each and every day because

[1:08:45] of thy greatness and thy glory.

[1:08:49] We're especially grateful, heavenly

[1:08:50] father, to live in this community. And

[1:08:52] we're grateful to be able to

[1:08:54] serve in the various capacities that we

[1:08:58] do and pray that that would bless those

[1:09:02] in our community who are hurting at this

[1:09:04] time or who are going through personal

[1:09:05] struggles. We pray that that would bless

[1:09:08] them and comfort them and help us to

[1:09:09] know as neighbors how we can lift and

[1:09:11] share their burdens.

[1:09:14] We are grateful this evening, heavenly

[1:09:17] father, for this meal and pray that

[1:09:18] would bless it. We pray that we would

[1:09:21] use it to strengthen and nourishment to

[1:09:23] do good. And again, we just want to

[1:09:26] express our gratitude to thee for all of

[1:09:29] the blessings that we share.

[1:09:31] [snorts] And we say these things in the

[1:09:33] name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

[1:09:50] of me. Nobody

[1:21:47] And before we go to Mr. McInn and his

[1:21:52] presentation,

[1:21:53] I'm going to turn the time over to Mr.

[1:21:55] Carile here for just a couple of

[1:21:58] minutes.

[1:21:58] >> I know this is unusual and some of you

[1:22:00] can see me here, but I want to give some

[1:22:02] gratitude. On May 1st, I had five bypass

[1:22:06] open heart surgery and changed my whole

[1:22:09] life. I was in the hospital for about 8

[1:22:12] days. I came home for three days. I

[1:22:15] started losing consciousness, getting

[1:22:17] really sick. My wife and daughter are

[1:22:20] saying

[1:22:21] all the paramed.

[1:22:23] Long story short, two minutes later,

[1:22:25] paramedics were at my door. I live

[1:22:27] between Mountain View High School and

[1:22:28] Lakers Junior High. All I remember, they

[1:22:31] came downstairs, Mr. Carl and Mr. Carl

[1:22:34] in the paramedics vehicle. Next day I

[1:22:37] was in ICU. Evidently they got me here

[1:22:40] so fast down to Utah Valley or city

[1:22:43] paramedics.

[1:22:45] And after about half hour doctors say

[1:22:48] he's not going to make it because they

[1:22:51] got me quickly. They worked on me and

[1:22:54] did make it a lot of big time is because

[1:22:57] of Orange City paramedics.

[1:23:00] So I don't want to hear on my thing

[1:23:03] about how we shouldn't police or

[1:23:05] whatever that going. So I thank you very much for that and some blessings

[1:23:11] and prayers. A quick thing I'm home

[1:23:14] about two weeks later. Remember we had

[1:23:16] rain had rain in May. We had rain in May

[1:23:20] and in front of my house the sewer drops

[1:23:23] about this far away. You know the manual

[1:23:25] cover. I called Danny at Om city say hey

[1:23:29] we got a problem here. Kids are walking

[1:23:30] around here. They're going to fall. Been

[1:23:32] about three days. Danny's out. Looks at

[1:23:35] it. Within about four or five days, a

[1:23:38] big city crew. I mean, it's this big.

[1:23:40] They come, they raise it up. It's

[1:23:43] beautiful. Then maybe in another four or

[1:23:45] five days, become an asphalt. So, I love

[1:23:49] Orange City. Appreciate you guys. You

[1:23:52] guys,

[1:23:53] >> thank you.

[1:23:54] >> I'm glad it all all turned out for you.

[1:23:57] >> I'm alive. We're glad to have you here

[1:24:00] back at our council meeting.

[1:24:02] >> Thank you for the time. I appreciate it.

[1:24:04] America.

[1:24:05] >> All right. Our next item on the agenda

[1:24:08] is a presentation on the community

[1:24:09] development code update. 10 minutes.

[1:24:13] >> Uh hopefully it won't be anywhere near

[1:24:15] 10 minutes. As as you know, community

[1:24:18] development is the department that we

[1:24:22] have here. Uh however, our code calls

[1:24:26] the community development department

[1:24:28] development services. We did a little

[1:24:31] rebranding from development services and

[1:24:34] renamed the department community

[1:24:36] development. And I think uh the reason

[1:24:39] for that was to send the message that

[1:24:41] we're focusing on the community uh the

[1:24:46] residents who live here uh but also

[1:24:49] developers and businesses. you know,

[1:24:51] it's developing the community. It's not

[1:24:54] development services. And it makes it

[1:24:56] almost sound like we're we're there for

[1:25:00] developers and and the residents aren't

[1:25:03] involved. So because of that rebrand, we

[1:25:06] do technically in the code say a lot of

[1:25:09] things like uh the development services

[1:25:12] department shall do something and we

[1:25:16] just need to change all of that to be

[1:25:19] community development. So it's it's a

[1:25:23] massive change. There's well over 400

[1:25:26] individual changes and we'll have to

[1:25:29] take some of these to the planning

[1:25:31] commission because they're in the zoning

[1:25:32] code. So it'll go there and we'll just

[1:25:37] be renaming

[1:25:40] development services and correcting it

[1:25:42] to what the name of the department is

[1:25:44] which is community. So don't be

[1:25:47] surprised here in the future when we

[1:25:49] come back and you go, "Oh my gosh, what

[1:25:52] is this 400page document for a second?"

[1:25:55] >> That's really what it is. And uh so feel

[1:25:59] free to read it,

[1:26:01] >> but hope but

[1:26:03] >> you're going to do red lines, right?

[1:26:04] >> Yeah.

[1:26:05] >> Okay. Thank you. I'll ask.

[1:26:07] >> We'll do red lines and

[1:26:08] >> count. [laughter]

[1:26:13] And I have hidden in there somewhere a

[1:26:15] secret code. And if you call me with

[1:26:18] that code, [laughter] you get ice cream.

[1:26:21] >> It'll be and and no using AI.

[1:26:26] » So just be aware that this is on the

[1:26:29] horizon to come to you. Just wanted to

[1:26:31] give you a heads up. We haven't taken it

[1:26:34] anywhere to planning commission or

[1:26:35] anybody yet. Just to make sure you're

[1:26:37] aware and feel comfortable with that

[1:26:40] change. We've uh if you're not, we need

[1:26:44] to redo some signage because

[1:26:47] you come here and it says community

[1:26:49] development and that's what we're doing.

[1:26:52] >> That makes sense.

[1:26:53] >> Yeah.

[1:26:55] >> I I think it's a great rebrand for us to

[1:26:57] really send the message. We're trying to

[1:27:00] build the community, not just provide

[1:27:02] services for developers.

[1:27:04] >> I agree.

[1:27:07] » Thank you.

[1:27:09] Our next item is a city council report

[1:27:13] from council member Gail. So, I'll turn

[1:27:15] the time over to you. Fabulous.

[1:27:19] >> Okay. Um I'm just going to update you on

[1:27:21] all of my commissions and there are a

[1:27:22] few. Um America 250 is kind of wrapping

[1:27:25] up and we are celebrating with lunch

[1:27:27] with all of our volunteers on that

[1:27:29] commission next week. That's been fun.

[1:27:32] Um the care commission also has wrapped

[1:27:34] up for most of their things, but we did

[1:27:35] get some lovely thank you notes from

[1:27:36] some organizations that participated and

[1:27:39] we're looking towards next year to maybe

[1:27:41] just further solidify how we make this

[1:27:43] rather than feeling a little bit

[1:27:45] arbitrary to some of them. Um IHC

[1:27:48] outreach we toured along with Crystal

[1:27:50] and Mayor we toured the new hospital

[1:27:53] edition at um Orum Community Hospital.

[1:27:56] They added a new MRI machine, a new

[1:27:57] fancy MRI machine and that was really

[1:27:59] cool. Um, so it's a great great to have

[1:28:01] them as a part of our community and they

[1:28:02] really give back a lot. Um, and it's a

[1:28:05] great offering. So if you an MRI, weight

[1:28:07] times are shorter and the time it takes

[1:28:09] to get in is shorter. So go to or

[1:28:11] community. Um, the natural resources

[1:28:14] advisory commission is doing all kinds

[1:28:16] of fun things. They're having some

[1:28:17] community events and education. They're

[1:28:19] doing an event in October that looks at

[1:28:21] Utah Lake restoration and maybe and

[1:28:24] education and role in it and how there's

[1:28:26] this Utah lake advisory commission and

[1:28:28] educating our residents about that. Um

[1:28:30] then October 12th we're going to have a

[1:28:32] leaf themed greenhouse event in our new

[1:28:35] greenhouse is the arts and crafts with

[1:28:38] leafs and then we're having a library

[1:28:40] seed swap in February ready to do their

[1:28:43] garden. So that'll be fun. Um the tree

[1:28:46] initi the tree planting initiative is

[1:28:48] called rooted in orum. That's the name

[1:28:49] that they decided on and uh the goal is

[1:28:53] 10,000 trees over five years. Um and

[1:28:57] we're doing uh the initial distribution

[1:28:59] or sale of about 50 trees is in early

[1:29:02] September. So they've ordered them and

[1:29:04] they're going to be distributing at a

[1:29:05] deep discount to residents who want them

[1:29:07] be gone. and other things. We're looking

[1:29:11] at doing a recycling tour of the

[1:29:13] facility and then helping with the

[1:29:15] farmers market bike ballet. Um, so

[1:29:18] they're active and busy doing great and

[1:29:19] fun things and Brad and Caitlyn have

[1:29:21] been so they're doing a great job. Um,

[1:29:25] Utopia passed a budget just recently

[1:29:29] that will allow the cities to get even

[1:29:31] more money. So I think we're about

[1:29:33] $95,000 more this school year.

[1:29:36] this facility often because they also

[1:29:38] were able to hire several employees to

[1:29:40] help keep um service operating. Um and

[1:29:44] they are currently we just got a check

[1:29:46] from them from about

[1:29:48] the number what's the number was in June

[1:29:50] it was 1 million98,000

[1:29:54] 1 mill98,950.

[1:29:58] Does that sound right?

[1:29:59] >> I'll drag and say 1.1. Yes.

[1:30:02] >> Oh 1.1. [laughter]

[1:30:04] >> Okay. Um, and they are adding about 640

[1:30:09] new subscribers every month. So, that's

[1:30:10] good for us and helps the whole uh of us

[1:30:13] be successful. So, that's good. And then

[1:30:16] the Utah Valley University/Orum Business

[1:30:19] Resource Center. We had a great meeting

[1:30:21] with Brian and Garrett, our new

[1:30:25] person. We met with Steve those who Josh

[1:30:28] Barlo who is the new director of the ORM

[1:30:30] business resource center and Seth Jensen

[1:30:33] um who is the director of the uh

[1:30:35] entrepreneurship at Utah Valley

[1:30:37] University and he's now responsible for

[1:30:39] that center and then who is who is the

[1:30:41] other do you remember the lady was she

[1:30:43] responsible for curriculum at UVU in the

[1:30:45] business program?

[1:30:45] >> Oh, she's Seth's number two.

[1:30:47] >> Yeah, we met with her too. Anyway, it

[1:30:49] was a great meeting. Um we talked about

[1:30:50] the direction it's going. I feel like

[1:30:51] there's a lot of new energy there. I

[1:30:53] feel like Seth, especially with him

[1:30:54] being responsible for entrepreneurship

[1:30:56] at UVU, has a really vested interest in

[1:30:58] making this successful and our staff is

[1:30:59] currently working on a new agreement

[1:31:01] with them. So, we'll see as that takes

[1:31:03] shape over the next little while what

[1:31:04] that looks like.

[1:31:08] Thank you. Any questions for Jen?

[1:31:11] Appreciate you representing us.

[1:31:15] Right. Next item is just quickly

[1:31:19] reviewing our agenda for today.

[1:31:23] We have a presentation from the public

[1:31:26] works advisory commission and the

[1:31:30] presenters are going to be Chris Shery

[1:31:33] and then Mike Wimpby who's on the

[1:31:36] advisory commission the chair he's

[1:31:39] >> oh is he the chair okay great

[1:31:42] then we have a presentation by Chief

[1:31:44] Sanderson citizen life saving and then

[1:31:48] we will have some time for personal

[1:31:50] appearances

[1:31:52] And then we have a consent item on um

[1:31:55] our city council meeting schedule and

[1:31:57] it's adding

[1:31:59] excuse me a work session

[1:32:02] only on August 25th. So that will be our

[1:32:06] next meeting will be the 25th. It'll be

[1:32:08] work session only. And then on Thursday,

[1:32:11] August 27th,

[1:32:13] I uh where we'll be having our truth in

[1:32:16] taxation

[1:32:18] hearing on on that date. And then

[1:32:23] our scheduled item is a resolution

[1:32:26] appointing to the uh appointments to the

[1:32:29] Justice Court nominating commission,

[1:32:31] excuse me. and talked a little bit about

[1:32:35] that in the in the work session earlier

[1:32:38] in the work session. Uh financial items

[1:32:40] and then uh city manager items and we

[1:32:42] adjourn. It looks like we do not have a

[1:32:45] closed door meeting um this evening. Any

[1:32:48] questions? Anything you want to discuss

[1:32:50] in here before

[1:32:53] uh on anything with the agenda or the

[1:32:55] work session? I have one question. We've

[1:32:57] seen the few two few times I think

[1:33:00] lately that we've had people sign people

[1:33:02] up to speak during the public comment

[1:33:05] and I mean multiply people and those

[1:33:08] people aren't present. I know in the

[1:33:10] past we've always had kind of the you

[1:33:12] need to be here. You need to sign up for

[1:33:14] yourself. I mean, you know, maybe if

[1:33:17] they signed for her husband or

[1:33:19] something, we could say, but I feel

[1:33:20] like, you know, what we've seen happen,

[1:33:23] not sure if we should make that clear

[1:33:27] that that's really not the way we want

[1:33:30] to. What do you think?

[1:33:32] >> Yeah, that's

[1:33:33] >> May I also to address that? Would it

[1:33:37] help to possibly have a member of the

[1:33:38] city staff verify who you are as you

[1:33:41] sign up? Does that would that help or

[1:33:43] would you

[1:33:43] >> Yeah. Well, and I don't want to be too,

[1:33:45] you know, I don't want to be too anal

[1:33:47] about it, but I just felt like, you

[1:33:48] know, we had what, four people, three

[1:33:50] people, I can't remember that you called

[1:33:51] up and they weren't here and they

[1:33:52] weren't here and then they rushed in.

[1:33:55] Oh, you missed me. And I'm like, they

[1:33:58] she didn't find her,

[1:34:00] >> you know. And the other thing would be,

[1:34:02] I mean, I'd like discuss that, but then

[1:34:04] the next thing would be is maybe in a

[1:34:06] way to make it go a little smoother is

[1:34:07] we could like do what you do, have the

[1:34:09] name, say the names of who's next, but

[1:34:11] have them come sit on the front row so

[1:34:12] we're not waiting for people to talk up

[1:34:14] again. I think next

[1:34:16] >> the 27th we're going to have a lot of

[1:34:19] comments. So maybe if we have like seats

[1:34:22] where people can, you know, come and

[1:34:25] >> that's what the mic

[1:34:27] >> regarding the 27th. In fact, today I

[1:34:30] talked to Brent about this is that I

[1:34:31] would like to have have our protocol for

[1:34:34] that public comment outlined and ready

[1:34:38] pro before just soon.

[1:34:39] >> Yeah.

[1:34:40] >> And just because if you're not aware,

[1:34:42] it's a meeting where we're required by

[1:34:44] law not just to have the comments of

[1:34:48] people present in the room, but we are

[1:34:51] required to allow online comments. So

[1:34:54] someone can attend virtually, which is

[1:34:56] fine. It's just that we don't have any

[1:34:58] protocol for that. One thing as I've as

[1:35:01] I've asked Bren to look at it is my my

[1:35:03] intention is not to give everybody three

[1:35:06] minutes. So we're trying to work out

[1:35:07] what is the time that's appropriate for

[1:35:10] someone can feel comfortable sharing

[1:35:12] their thoughts but yet also recognizing

[1:35:15] that there going to be many pe I

[1:35:17] anticipate many people wanting to give

[1:35:20] comments. So that's what I've tasked

[1:35:23] Bren to do is to come up with some ideas

[1:35:26] for that. But like you said, sitting be

[1:35:28] able to sit up front or or whatever it

[1:35:30] is. And it's and also if I like I said

[1:35:35] I'm I'm comfortable going less than 3

[1:35:37] minutes and I don't know unless any of

[1:35:38] you are really wanting to go have three

[1:35:41] minutes per person. Um I I don't know

[1:35:44] like I guess I don't know what number

[1:35:45] we'll land on and then discussing at

[1:35:47] what point do we give out the

[1:35:49] information about how the public hearing

[1:35:50] will be run. I would I would appreciate

[1:35:53] having that information available so we

[1:35:55] can give it to the public days before

[1:35:57] and even before they even show up at the

[1:35:58] meeting so they understand when they

[1:36:00] come to the meeting this is how it's

[1:36:02] going to be run. So there's a level of

[1:36:03] expectation.

[1:36:06] So would you anticipate something like

[1:36:08] you'll have five in person

[1:36:10] followed by five online followed by

[1:36:14] >> something some just whatever that's what

[1:36:17] >> some nature word

[1:36:18] >> so bread brand

[1:36:20] >> yeah some some way of doing that so I I

[1:36:23] don't want to have everybody waiting

[1:36:24] online and everybody waiting here it's

[1:36:28] >> Bren Bren gets to do that

[1:36:30] >> I'll come up with some suggestions on

[1:36:31] how to organize it

[1:36:32] >> how to organize it

[1:36:32] >> with the intent to have it be as for

[1:36:35] sure

[1:36:37] still, you know, uh make sure we're well

[1:36:39] within the law

[1:36:41] >> and make we we hear from our our

[1:36:44] residents.

[1:36:44] >> Yeah.

[1:36:45] >> And regarding the be during the meeting,

[1:36:48] yeah, I would I can reiterate at the

[1:36:50] beginning or

[1:36:53] whether or not, you know, just reiterate

[1:36:55] again that they have to be present to

[1:36:57] win or whatever [laughter]

[1:36:59] must be present.

[1:37:00] >> They need to sign their own paper. you

[1:37:02] sign your own paperwork because

[1:37:05] >> we are getting in particular on on on

[1:37:08] certain topics that we're getting people

[1:37:10] someone coming and signing up a bunch of

[1:37:11] people and then they're not here or

[1:37:16] >> show therapy. Do you know do we say

[1:37:18] anything like that on the paper?

[1:37:20] >> Yeah,

[1:37:21] >> I think you do. Don't you on there?

[1:37:23] >> They're not supposed to or not sign up

[1:37:25] for therapy,

[1:37:28] >> but no one's guarding it. So,

[1:37:33] » well, but then you as mayor and council

[1:37:37] knowing that know that that that gives

[1:37:39] you a little bit more

[1:37:41] standing to say

[1:37:44] as it says on the signup sheet

[1:37:48] sign up, [clears throat]

[1:37:50] >> you know,

[1:37:50] >> and I think to your point of I in my

[1:37:53] prior life before I was on the city

[1:37:55] council, I did have issues in my

[1:37:56] neighborhood and I did come and speak

[1:37:58] before the city council. It's and it's

[1:38:00] quite nerve-wracking. And I spent the

[1:38:02] whole day preparing what I was going to

[1:38:04] say and timing it. [clears throat] And

[1:38:06] so I can empathize with people who have

[1:38:08] a three minute speech plan and then

[1:38:10] they're told they need to cut it to two.

[1:38:12] That just adds more stress and defining

[1:38:14] that before I think is a broken idea

[1:38:17] because then I think it will just create

[1:38:19] a better environment and atmosphere too.

[1:38:23] >> Yeah. And so I that's what I hope to do

[1:38:25] is to let them know that we are

[1:38:27] interested in hearing what they have to

[1:38:29] say, what people have to say, give their

[1:38:31] thoughts and be respectful of that. And

[1:38:34] I think giving them setting the

[1:38:35] expectations as early as possible is an

[1:38:38] important way to do that.

[1:38:39] >> Thank you.

[1:38:41] There's anything else? I entertain a

[1:38:43] motion to adjurnn. Second. All right. All those

[1:38:50] in favor? Hi.

[1:38:51] >> Hi.

[1:38:54] >> And we'll reconvene at 6.

[1:40:27] So funny.

[1:40:31] » No, I mean I heard in front of me heard

[1:40:33] progressive. It was like the student

[1:40:35] last video.

[1:40:50] Every experience.

[1:40:52] >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Every experience

[1:40:56] including

[1:41:00] this school

[1:41:07] one I grew up

[1:41:17] near

[1:41:20] bodies of water. I've never been

[1:41:29] » they're teaching

[1:41:50] started an instrument. Feels

[1:41:53] president

[1:41:57] to avoid losing his he

[1:42:03] » rules that he would be in a different

[1:42:17] » like like the scarlet

[1:42:19] They get you with a little red dot.

[1:42:22] That's not

[1:42:27] » I mean the whole school body terrible.

[1:42:31] >> They're like you haven't heard.

[1:42:32] >> No, I haven't heard.

[1:42:37] » It is. It is pretty. It's always I think

[1:42:40] the power dynamic is always grow and

[1:42:42] then especially when it's a church

[1:42:43] school that power dynamic is

[1:42:45] accentuated.

[1:42:51] » Yeah.

[1:42:55] feeling the craziest.

[1:42:59] >> No, I don't know what I'd say.

[1:43:08] » What is it? watching

[1:43:10] >> homogeneous

[1:43:22] » like baby fish because I've seen guys

[1:43:27] like

[1:43:30] and they're really cool and then they go

[1:43:33] to like either university or they leave

[1:43:35] university so much data here I'm like,

[1:43:38] "Yeah, cuz you're interesting."

[1:43:41] But in this dating pool, you're

[1:43:43] interesting just by virtue of being a

[1:43:45] relish, a decently attractive guy who's

[1:43:47] in the church who has a pulse.

[1:43:50] >> Yeah.

[1:43:53] >> Like you go and you have a personality.

[1:43:55] I'm sorry, but you know, man,

[1:43:57] >> we're to have

[1:44:01] » if not all your life. I'm saying you

[1:44:03] don't have a person, but I'm saying the

[1:44:05] likelihood of it being less developed.

[1:44:12] You developed uh checkpoints, you

[1:44:15] develop police checkpoints.

[1:44:22] » Got to find you learn. You learn what a type of attractiveness is good

[1:44:26] and then you develop a sense of it is

[1:44:28] it's like super attractive is not oh

[1:44:32] >> it's like no I realiz this person is

[1:44:35] attractive but in a way that is

[1:44:37] interesting not like they're dry

[1:44:41] >> what is it

[1:44:42] >> and they have a more interesting

[1:44:45] >> like

[1:44:48] ugly

[1:44:50] that's correct

[1:44:52] >> I think

[1:44:53] Not sure. Yeah, Adrian.

[1:44:56] >> Yeah,

[1:44:56] >> I'm bad at recognizing celebrities. Um,

[1:45:11] » Oh, yeah.

[1:45:12] >> He's got like a little weasel man face,

[1:45:14] but also he's But he's fashionable.

[1:45:19] >> He had very high cheekbone.

[1:45:21] >> Okay. Yeah. Yeah, that's that's

[1:45:24] >> but it's like with the interesting

[1:45:28] >> but I always

[1:45:31] like

[1:45:36] [laughter]

[1:45:42] people Test test.

[1:46:01] Last time I went to one of these, it was

[1:46:03] 25 days a week. Not really, but a young

[1:46:06] kid. He was like,

[1:46:08] >> he was just so like overwhelmed. That

[1:46:10] was the case.

[1:46:24] Love it.

[1:46:32] » Test one, two. Test. Test.

[1:46:35] That's it right there. And then the

[1:46:38] flags right there.

[1:46:40] And the best. Pretty simple. Just break

[1:46:43] it in front and soon as we're finished.

[1:47:07] Father,

[1:47:43] I think she said ghost.

[1:47:51] Nice

[1:48:08] job. All right.

[1:48:39] I know there's

[1:48:45] is not

[1:48:48] your

[1:49:10] son

[1:49:13] again. my sun. So

[1:49:26] yeah,

[1:49:29] that's why

[1:49:40] I

[1:50:00] You're alone.

[1:50:16] Yes.

[1:50:21] Yeah.

[1:50:32] Good.

[1:51:36] finish.

[1:53:44] Council

[1:53:55] member Mikum, are you do we have you

[1:53:57] online?

[1:54:00] >> Yes, indeed I am here.

[1:54:01] >> All right.

[1:54:08] Good evening. I'd like to welcome you to

[1:54:10] the August 11th, 2026 ORM city council

[1:54:14] meeting and I'll call the meeting to

[1:54:16] order. Our invoca invocation and inspir

[1:54:20] or inspirational thought will be given

[1:54:21] by Amy Walker and the pledge of

[1:54:24] allegiance will be led by Greywalker.

[1:54:33] Dear heavenly father, we are so so

[1:54:35] thankful for

[1:54:37] um this time of year and season that we

[1:54:39] can um enjoy all of the many luxuries

[1:54:43] and um bounty of our city and our

[1:54:47] nation. We are thankful to be gathered

[1:54:49] together to

[1:54:53] unite our um opinions and hearts. We

[1:54:57] pray for patience and kindness to

[1:55:07] be present in our communication and in

[1:55:10] our thoughts as we strive to find unity

[1:55:14] um in seeing the point of view of

[1:55:16] others. We are thankful for this great

[1:55:19] nation that we live in. grateful for the

[1:55:21] community and the camaraderie that we

[1:55:23] share with our neighbors and

[1:55:26] um the great families that we enjoy

[1:55:29] here. We are so thankful for our

[1:55:32] blessings and grateful for

[1:55:36] the safety of our community. We pray

[1:55:38] that thou will be with those who are

[1:55:41] enduring the wildfires and the tragedies

[1:55:45] that are happening in Utah. We pray that

[1:55:47] thou will be with the firefighters and

[1:55:51] their families and the people who have

[1:55:54] suffered. We pray that they will

[1:55:56] continually watch over

[1:55:59] our nation and help us to find peace and

[1:56:02] safety and continue to strive for

[1:56:04] greatness and to choose to step forward

[1:56:08] with our best selves and

[1:56:12] to

[1:56:14] brave the humanity and the kindness that

[1:56:16] we can offer this great nation. We are

[1:56:19] grateful to thee and pray for these

[1:56:21] things. And we say these things in the

[1:56:22] name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

[1:56:24] Thank you.

[1:56:37] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the

[1:56:40] United States of America and to the

[1:56:43] republic for which it stands, one nation

[1:56:47] under God, indivisible, with liberty and

[1:56:50] justice for all.

[1:56:55] Thank you for the prayer and for leading

[1:56:58] us in the pledge of allegiance.

[1:57:01] Right. Next item on the agenda is 7.1.

[1:57:03] It's a presentation by the public works

[1:57:06] advisory commission. So I'm going to

[1:57:07] turn the time over to our public works

[1:57:09] director Chris Schey and our public

[1:57:13] works advisory commission chair Mike

[1:57:14] Wimpy.

[1:57:21] Do you want me if if he's not here, do

[1:57:23] you want me to go on to the next item?

[1:57:26] Okay, why don't we do that? Because I

[1:57:27] think the next item we've got people

[1:57:29] here.

[1:57:30] I see them all over in the back.

[1:57:33] [laughter]

[1:57:35] [gasps]

[1:57:35] All right. What we'll do is then we're

[1:57:38] going to wait on that and go to our next

[1:57:40] item which is a presentation a citizen

[1:57:44] life saving and our presenter is our

[1:57:46] fire chief Mark Sanderson and we welcome

[1:57:50] the your colleagues here this evening as

[1:57:52] well.

[1:57:53] >> Thank you mayor and councel. I just want

[1:57:55] to first start off publicly thanking

[1:57:57] Chief Swinson and the members of our a

[1:57:59] platoon for joining us tonight. A lot of

[1:58:01] the things I'm going to discuss tonight

[1:58:03] are closely related, if not very

[1:58:06] specific names of individuals in this

[1:58:08] room who have received recognition and

[1:58:11] provided life-saving um care to multiple

[1:58:16] citizens throughout all three

[1:58:18] communities we serve. Um

[1:58:22] I would challenge you to over the next

[1:58:24] couple of weeks a shift most recently

[1:58:27] yesterday have had a rash of very

[1:58:31] traumatic calls. Um I don't want to

[1:58:34] share the details. However, I will share

[1:58:37] that based off of the level of

[1:58:39] expertise, not only in our critical care

[1:58:42] program and our critical care

[1:58:43] paramedics, but from our captain, our

[1:58:46] battalion chiefs down to our very brand

[1:58:48] new EMTs, the level of service that

[1:58:51] they've provided yesterday to two

[1:58:53] specific patients definitely made a

[1:58:56] difference and provided an opportunity

[1:58:58] for the very best outcome for their

[1:59:00] circumstances. And so you'd have to reach out to these guys

[1:59:05] the next time you see them. We

[1:59:07] definitely have uh photographs because

[1:59:10] they're used for training. They're

[1:59:12] appropriate. Um doesn't disclose any

[1:59:15] personal or private information, but it

[1:59:18] would give you a better taste of what

[1:59:20] these guys and gals do on a regular

[1:59:22] basis. And so I'm very appreciative for

[1:59:25] the things that they've done over the

[1:59:26] course of the week. If we could just go

[1:59:29] to the next slide. I've shared with you

[1:59:31] this packet. I'm gonna cover. Oh, I got

[1:59:34] a clicker.

[1:59:35] >> There's the clicker.

[1:59:41] » Maybe.

[1:59:49] » Thank you.

[1:59:51] I have people that turn my clickers on

[1:59:52] for me.

[1:59:56] I wanted to just start out. Many of you

[1:59:58] have had the opportunity to attend our

[2:00:00] quarterly recognition and and several of

[2:00:03] you have got other obligations. We just

[2:00:06] I just know that the crews appreciate

[2:00:08] your involvement, your attendance, um

[2:00:10] and your continued support. So, I'm just

[2:00:13] going to highlight I'm not going to read

[2:00:14] them all, but you can see. But I but for

[2:00:17] the people in the back, I would I really

[2:00:20] when you see your name up here, I would

[2:00:21] like you to stand up. I'm going to go

[2:00:22] through this really quickly, so you

[2:00:24] won't have to stand up very long, but I

[2:00:26] want you to at least have the ability to

[2:00:28] recognize those in the room that have

[2:00:31] made a difference on most of these

[2:00:33] calls. But this first category of

[2:00:35] operational excellence and medical

[2:00:37] calls,

[2:00:38] multiple cardiac arrest patients, and we

[2:00:41] even heard it in our work session today

[2:00:43] that wasn't a cardiac arrest, but easily

[2:00:45] could have led to that. Um and based on

[2:00:47] the care of our people that the our

[2:00:50] people provide, we see really positive

[2:00:52] outcomes. Um even as recently as last

[2:00:56] year, we've received recognition through

[2:00:58] Tempenogus Hospital of uh achieving

[2:01:02] national records with our spontaneous

[2:01:06] return of circulation

[2:01:08] uh across the across the country. And

[2:01:12] it's because how quickly we respond.

[2:01:14] It's because of the level of service

[2:01:15] that our people provide, the

[2:01:16] certifications and the additional

[2:01:18] training that um we have within our

[2:01:22] organization that make us truly amazing,

[2:01:25] the citizens that need us. Um along with

[2:01:28] these things, it's uh this recognition.

[2:01:31] I think it's so important that we

[2:01:32] identify the multiple citizens that

[2:01:35] actually call 911, start CPR, get help

[2:01:39] coming because in a lot of these

[2:01:41] circumstances,

[2:01:43] if somebody outside of the fire

[2:01:45] department hadn't initiated something,

[2:01:48] then we wouldn't see the positive

[2:01:49] outcomes that we do. And so the shout

[2:01:52] out goes to our community and the

[2:01:54] citizens who will step up when the time

[2:01:56] needs to help start life- saving efforts

[2:01:59] that we can then take over on. But you

[2:02:02] can see I mean most significantly an

[2:02:05] 8-year-old cardiac arrest. We have

[2:02:06] Captain Belnap and his crew in the back

[2:02:08] with our CCPs. We were fortunate enough

[2:02:12] Yeah, please.

[2:02:18] We were fortunate enough with this

[2:02:20] circumstance to have a bystandard start

[2:02:22] CPR, which then Captain Belnap and his

[2:02:25] crew were able to step in, transport

[2:02:28] this kid to Primary Children's, who

[2:02:30] walked out of their ICUs with no

[2:02:34] deficits. Just amazing results. That was

[2:02:37] Bailey Bird, who we've noticed with an

[2:02:39] award for that citizen heroism.

[2:02:41] Um, also Captain Hickman and his crew.

[2:02:45] You can see there was an MVA extrication

[2:02:47] down on Geneva Road that was significant

[2:02:50] and horrific injuries to a patient that

[2:02:53] because of their expertise, their quick

[2:02:55] response, their abilities to cut the car

[2:02:58] open and extricate that patient and get

[2:03:00] him to level two trauma center, Utah

[2:03:02] Valley

[2:03:04] is alive and doing much better than

[2:03:07] most. And so I just want to thank them

[2:03:10] for that. very impressive.

[2:03:16] I actually included this additional

[2:03:18] recognition.

[2:03:20] Um, but I want to point out that our

[2:03:22] people don't do this for recognition.

[2:03:24] You guys know that when you attend. Um,

[2:03:26] I beg them every meeting to please

[2:03:29] provide the things that we don't see

[2:03:31] from the office. We don't hear the

[2:03:33] calls. That's not why they do it. They

[2:03:35] do it because they love the community

[2:03:36] they serve. They love the job that they

[2:03:38] do. and they really do care and make a

[2:03:40] difference. And so highlighting these

[2:03:43] additional recognitions

[2:03:47] um

[2:03:49] they're significant when we identify 20

[2:03:52] years as an ORM city employee with

[2:03:54] assistant chief and chief Boehner all

[2:03:57] the way down to our 10 and five similar

[2:03:59] to what the city does on this month that

[2:04:01] are city recognition. Um,

[2:04:06] a couple of the other categories that I

[2:04:08] think are impressive, training,

[2:04:09] instruction, and the professional

[2:04:11] development. You can see, I mean, just

[2:04:14] quickly looking up there, we have I know

[2:04:16] Lieutenant Metaf in the back um that

[2:04:19] completed a heavy rescue school, part of

[2:04:21] our SRT countywide team. It was a

[2:04:24] six-week program where he comes off of

[2:04:26] shift and uh is working a 40-hour week

[2:04:28] Monday through Friday, which is not your

[2:04:30] normal firefighter schedule. disrupts

[2:04:32] your family life and that whole

[2:04:34] schedule. But but based off of

[2:04:36] completion of that heavy rescue school,

[2:04:39] it brings a whole new level of

[2:04:41] experience to our own organization that

[2:04:43] will continue to grow based off of their

[2:04:44] leadership.

[2:04:47] And then Utah Fire Officer Designation

[2:04:50] Award. This is this is something that

[2:04:53] EURA awards based off of a like a 60page

[2:04:57] packet of requirements. And we have

[2:05:00] several um employees who have earned

[2:05:03] that. Most recently, Scott Slater, one

[2:05:05] of our critical care paramedics.

[2:05:08] And then one other thing we just

[2:05:10] highlighted in trying to encompass all

[2:05:12] of these recognitions over the past two

[2:05:14] quarters is this leadership and

[2:05:16] mentorship and tactical support. The

[2:05:18] thing that I do appreciate and love is

[2:05:20] that it doesn't always these are these

[2:05:24] are recognitions for working with our

[2:05:25] own crews, working with a new employee.

[2:05:29] It's also citywide training. Uh Grant

[2:05:32] Mquist, he's in the back. He provides

[2:05:34] all of our city department specialized

[2:05:37] CPR training for our employees. It

[2:05:40] wasn't an assignment that he I think was

[2:05:42] signed up for originally, but based off

[2:05:44] of his abilities to connect and his his

[2:05:48] teaching and and connections he makes

[2:05:50] with our employees, he keeps getting

[2:05:52] calls and he keeps doing those classes.

[2:05:54] So, it's it's very important that he

[2:05:57] recognize the value that he brings to

[2:05:59] not only our fire department, but the

[2:06:00] city as a whole.

[2:06:03] And I this is also because the crews

[2:06:05] here uh Captain Hickman, firefighter

[2:06:08] Cole Hannon Rosequist, we had an

[2:06:10] incident. Um really quickly, a UHP

[2:06:13] officer, they've been chasing a

[2:06:14] motorcyclist all day long, multiple

[2:06:18] 1080s. They turn their lights on, takes

[2:06:20] off on the motorcycle. Well, it just so

[2:06:22] happened the highway patrolman happened

[2:06:24] to see the kid stopped at a light,

[2:06:26] parked his car, tackled the kid before

[2:06:29] he was able to leave the light. As our

[2:06:31] tiller was driving by, those three crew

[2:06:34] saw the officer fighting with the kid.

[2:06:36] Didn't look like he was winning and

[2:06:38] bailed out of the fire engine and helped

[2:06:40] subdue the the evader. And so you you

[2:06:45] just don't know the impact that has with

[2:06:48] any of our officers. They do it if it

[2:06:50] was an arm officer. They do it if it was

[2:06:51] a citizen and you just don't know if the

[2:06:54] guy gets the officer's gun. Our guys

[2:06:56] don't intervene. You have a totally

[2:06:58] different outcome. And so our fire

[2:07:00] department employees just don't do fire

[2:07:02] and EMS. I mean, they're they're amazing

[2:07:05] humans, amazing abilities, and they

[2:07:08] really do care about everybody within

[2:07:10] the cities.

[2:07:13] And then the then the last one that I

[2:07:15] just wanted to highlight from their

[2:07:17] recognition is this compassion and

[2:07:19] external recognition. and I kind of

[2:07:21] touched base on that things that Grant's

[2:07:23] done with other departments. Um,

[2:07:27] just looking really quickly to see.

[2:07:31] But when you read through these, I mean,

[2:07:33] we had the incident in Lynon.

[2:07:34] Everybody's aware of the family that

[2:07:36] lost a three-year-old daughter. As

[2:07:38] horrific as that type of call is, the

[2:07:41] benefit and the value and the compassion

[2:07:43] that our people bring to even worst case

[2:07:46] scenarios um make a huge difference. And

[2:07:50] so I want to leave you with that. I want

[2:07:51] to thank them again for all that they do

[2:07:53] and supporting our city and

[2:07:57] say thank you.

[2:08:16] Mayor, if you don't mind, I'd just like

[2:08:18] to give them the opportunity to be

[2:08:19] excused unless you guys had questions or

[2:08:22] comments.

[2:08:22] >> Oh, no. They have to sit through the

[2:08:23] whole No. No. Go ahead.

[2:08:25] >> So, they do, right?

[2:08:26] >> Yes. [laughter]

[2:08:27] No, you're welcome to be excused. You're

[2:08:29] welcome to stay. Whatever. Whatever you

[2:08:31] would like to do. Now, council members,

[2:08:33] that doesn't apply to you. So, or

[2:08:35] myself. So, [laughter]

[2:08:38] thank you. All right. Next item on the

[2:08:40] agenda, we'll go back to the

[2:08:42] presentation on the public works

[2:08:44] advisory commission. We have our public

[2:08:45] works director Chris Scherey and Mike

[2:08:47] Wimby who is our public works advisory

[2:08:51] commission chair. So welcome.

[2:08:58] Thank you mayor and council. It's a

[2:09:00] pleasure to be here tonight. Next year I

[2:09:03] vow to not follow police or fire. Okay.

[2:09:06] Because that is a hard act to follow.

[2:09:07] Every year I seem to be in this position

[2:09:10] between BJ and Mark. So anyway, we uh we

[2:09:13] love police and fire and all the

[2:09:15] outstanding uh services they provide for

[2:09:17] our community. Um I'd like to introduce

[2:09:20] Mr. Mike Wimpy who is our chairman of

[2:09:22] our public works advisory commission.

[2:09:23] We've been asked to provide our FY26

[2:09:26] annual report and I'll turn the time

[2:09:28] over to Mike.

[2:09:31] Thank you. It's a it's pleasure to be

[2:09:33] here tonight. Um I've enjoyed my

[2:09:35] opportunity that I've had to serve on

[2:09:37] the public works advisory commission. I

[2:09:39] think it's been three years now. Uh, I

[2:09:41] just received an email from April

[2:09:43] Nielson saying that I needed to reapply

[2:09:46] to uh to have so much fun. So, I gladly

[2:09:48] did so. Uh, thanks Chris. It's great to

[2:09:51] work with the public works group. I

[2:09:53] think the the thing that uh is just it's

[2:09:56] a pleasure to work with such

[2:09:58] professional people that care so much

[2:10:00] about the public and care about doing

[2:10:01] their jobs and doing a great job. And so

[2:10:03] we get an opportunity to meet with the

[2:10:06] um public works supervisors and

[2:10:08] departments every month. I know uh

[2:10:12] Councilwoman Millet has participated in

[2:10:14] that in the past and now Councilwoman

[2:10:16] Milstein and uh I think it's just very

[2:10:18] evident how much city staff care about

[2:10:20] their jobs and do a great job to keep us

[2:10:23] in great shape. So um [clears throat]

[2:10:26] like Chris said, my name is Mike Wimpy.

[2:10:28] I've uh had the opportunity to serve on

[2:10:30] the public works advisory commission

[2:10:32] going now into a second term and um my

[2:10:36] work outside of uh volunteering with the

[2:10:39] city is as assistant general manager at

[2:10:42] central Utah water conservancy district

[2:10:43] and so I'm lucky to have opportunity to

[2:10:46] work with city staff both in a volunteer

[2:10:48] capacity as well in my as well as in my

[2:10:50] professional capacity uh on a regular

[2:10:52] basis. Other uh council or other members

[2:10:56] of the commission include Gary Moley.

[2:10:59] He's a retired doctor. Uh Jim Michaelus,

[2:11:02] who I think was the prior chair and he's

[2:11:04] a retired UVU, uh was responsible for a

[2:11:08] lot of their facilities and buildings

[2:11:10] and did a great job leading the

[2:11:12] commission. Joseph Gordon, um linguistic

[2:11:16] project manager at Utah Translation

[2:11:17] Analysis Center. Rob Moore. And you'll

[2:11:20] note that Rob is uh also from Central

[2:11:23] Utah Water Conservancy District. That

[2:11:25] didn't happen. Uh he worked at the

[2:11:27] county in the county attorney's office

[2:11:29] and we were so impressed with him that

[2:11:31] we were lucky enough to convince him to

[2:11:33] come work with us at Central Utah Water.

[2:11:35] Uh but that he was he was appointed to

[2:11:37] the commission while he was still an

[2:11:38] attorney at the county. And then Brent

[2:11:40] Tobler, uh he works at West Engineering.

[2:11:43] We had a member of the commission uh

[2:11:45] Todd Hadley that just after nine years

[2:11:49] uh was was no, you know, probably

[2:11:52] willing but no longer uh able to serve

[2:11:55] on the commission. So, and then once again, like I mentioned,

[2:11:58] Councilwoman Mulestein is the liaison to

[2:12:01] the commission

[2:12:04] and I'm going to turn it back over to

[2:12:05] you, Chris. So, all right. Thank you,

[2:12:07] Mike.

[2:12:09] There's a there's a brief history I'll

[2:12:10] just share with you. we did last time,

[2:12:12] but um in 2014 is when we created this

[2:12:16] commission, the city council created

[2:12:18] this commission. Um we had uh I think uh

[2:12:23] Jim Michaels was on the original

[2:12:24] commission. Then he left for a period of

[2:12:26] time. He served a mission and then came

[2:12:28] back and we had a vacancy and he was

[2:12:30] able to to come back again. So um so we

[2:12:34] had originally seven members on the

[2:12:36] commission and then it was expanded in

[2:12:38] uh 2017 to accommodate the need to

[2:12:41] evaluate broadband and utopia and UIA

[2:12:44] and provide additional analyses. Uh we

[2:12:47] had two experts that came and joined us

[2:12:49] since we had nine members on the on the

[2:12:51] on our advisory commission at that time

[2:12:54] and we adjusted it back in 2021 to uh to

[2:12:58] back to seven members. So that's where

[2:12:59] we stand today. We do have one vacancy

[2:13:01] as Mike mentioned and we're looking for

[2:13:03] a replacement soon on that. Basically,

[2:13:06] the duties of and responsibilities of

[2:13:08] the commissioners are to uh to get more

[2:13:11] acquainted with our infrastructure, our

[2:13:12] facilities, the services we provide, uh

[2:13:16] help us to determine the level of

[2:13:17] service that we should provide to the

[2:13:19] community with regards to water, sewer,

[2:13:21] storm water, traffic, street lighting,

[2:13:23] um street conditions, and so forth. Um

[2:13:26] and then they they review uh studies

[2:13:29] that are made by professionals

[2:13:30] externally uh professional engineers and

[2:13:33] financial consultants and after much

[2:13:35] review and sometimes debate and analysis

[2:13:37] and so forth we go back and forth and

[2:13:39] then we bring recommendations to the

[2:13:41] council in this last fiscal year in

[2:13:44] FY26.

[2:13:46] Last year at this time we our meeting

[2:13:48] was to help prepare for this actual

[2:13:50] presentation the one from FY25. Uh we

[2:13:53] only met six times in the last uh 10

[2:13:55] months or so. October 25, we had a tour

[2:13:58] of the ORM city hall since this was

[2:14:00] pretty new and and nobody had been here

[2:14:03] uh pre previously to that. We also had

[2:14:04] our major project review that took place

[2:14:07] and we're going to update you on those

[2:14:08] projects here shortly. In January of

[2:14:11] this year, we had our annual public

[2:14:13] commission training much like uh what

[2:14:15] others do on commissions and boards and

[2:14:17] districts and and uh council members.

[2:14:20] they have those trainings that are

[2:14:21] required by the state regarding uh

[2:14:24] public meetings and and so forth. In

[2:14:26] March of 26, we then also had a review

[2:14:29] of our transportation utility fund and

[2:14:31] the state of our streets and condition

[2:14:33] of our streets were evaluated and

[2:14:35] presented at that time. In April of 26,

[2:14:38] we toured the uh the new or water reuse

[2:14:41] facility which the council toured I

[2:14:43] believe in in March or February of this

[2:14:46] year.

[2:14:47] So, our completed projects in the last

[2:14:49] fiscal year um include number one, our

[2:14:51] water reuse facility.

[2:14:53] Number two, our 10 million gallon water

[2:14:55] tank. It's not online right now, but

[2:14:57] it's it's um it's pending, and it's in

[2:15:00] tandem with the booster station and a

[2:15:03] new well that was drilled recently.

[2:15:05] Those we hope to have both of those

[2:15:06] completed next year. Uh number three, I

[2:15:10] would say substantially meaning 99% plus

[2:15:13] um the abandonment of the Provo bench

[2:15:16] and North Union canal companies. The

[2:15:18] Metropolitan Water District of ORM is a member of both of those companies

[2:15:23] and those companies uh for a variety of

[2:15:26] reasons have chosen to to aban be

[2:15:28] abandoned and uh and to dissolve. In uh

[2:15:33] number four, we have our northeast storm

[2:15:35] water improvements. I think sister or

[2:15:37] sorry um about that councilwoman Elen

[2:15:40] Millet mentioned in our work session

[2:15:43] that we had substantial uh storm water

[2:15:46] damages that occurred 2 years ago. After

[2:15:49] that, we met with uh the neighborhood

[2:15:51] and the community members in that area.

[2:15:52] We developed plans with our engineering

[2:15:54] staff and public works team and other

[2:15:57] engineers to develop improvements and we

[2:16:00] put in nearly a million dollars worth of

[2:16:02] work to help uh prevent that from

[2:16:04] happening in the future. Um this one

[2:16:07] item here I wanted to bring to your

[2:16:09] attention very specifically. Uh Jen

[2:16:12] Gail, Councilwoman Gail has been heavily

[2:16:14] involved with mountain biking and with

[2:16:18] um with the youth and m and mountain

[2:16:19] biking efforts. She's a coach I believe

[2:16:22] as well. And uh we have been working

[2:16:24] with her and others in our public works

[2:16:26] advisory commission and the recreation

[2:16:28] commission on the development of our

[2:16:30] bike skills park. We have three phases

[2:16:33] of that that are now completed. This one

[2:16:36] in particular is very uh challenging.

[2:16:40] I've not done it myself. I know I'd

[2:16:42] probably get hurt. I know for sure I

[2:16:43] would. Um maybe when I was a teenager I

[2:16:46] would go off some of these jumps and so

[2:16:47] forth. We have worked with uh Mike Wimpy

[2:16:50] and Kurt Beecher of Central Utah Water

[2:16:52] Conservancy in a very professional and

[2:16:55] team oriented solutionsoriented

[2:16:58] process to help us to accommodate that

[2:17:01] new bike skills facility or phase 3 is

[2:17:04] what we call it that was formerly on

[2:17:06] central Utah waters um property on the

[2:17:08] hillside. They felt like they probably

[2:17:11] didn't need that per se to have the

[2:17:13] title to that. And we worked out an

[2:17:15] arrangement where they needed some

[2:17:17] access through our park to build a

[2:17:19] sedimentation basin below their 10

[2:17:21] million gallon water tank just adjacent

[2:17:22] to our Mount Bonogus Park. And so we

[2:17:25] were very um I I appreciate Mike and

[2:17:28] Kirk Kirk and Beecher and and the effort

[2:17:31] that they put forward and the motivation

[2:17:34] that they had. I think this is a prime

[2:17:36] example of how public servants in

[2:17:39] different agencies can work together to

[2:17:41] solve mutual problems for the greater

[2:17:44] good of the community. I'm just really

[2:17:46] thrilled with that that project and the

[2:17:48] effort that went forward. We had uh

[2:17:50] others from our legal legal staff that

[2:17:52] were involved and and then including um

[2:17:56] Aaron Mcnite and Steve and uh our our um

[2:18:00] city manager and also Brenby and and

[2:18:04] Ryan, our assistant city manager, as

[2:18:06] well as Bryce, our rec uh recreation and

[2:18:09] library director. They were involved

[2:18:12] heavily and and Tyler Pay, I should

[2:18:13] mention him as well. Um, so it was it

[2:18:16] was a it was a fullcourt press on this

[2:18:18] effort to get this done in in a

[2:18:20] relatively short amount of time. It

[2:18:22] couldn't have happened without the

[2:18:23] cooperation of Central Utah. So, thank

[2:18:25] you for that. Um, we were also able to

[2:18:28] complete in the last year the Northridge

[2:18:29] Park playground and pickle ball and

[2:18:31] tennis courts as well as the Windsor

[2:18:34] Park um at Windsor Park the new jazz

[2:18:36] multiport court which is now underway

[2:18:39] for a new um a new four four pickle ball

[2:18:43] court facility at the recommendation of

[2:18:45] Councilwoman Millet from a couple of

[2:18:47] years ago uh in a council meeting that

[2:18:49] was added and that is uh now underway.

[2:18:53] um ongoing projects we have. Um

[2:18:56] I'll skip number one right now. We're

[2:18:58] going to come right back to that. I'll

[2:18:59] I'm going to go over these other ones

[2:19:00] quickly. Well number 10 is located at

[2:19:02] four south and fourth west. That's the

[2:19:04] well that I mentioned that is being uh

[2:19:06] has been drilled and developed. We now

[2:19:09] we need to put a wellhouse on top with a

[2:19:11] new pump and a new uh a new um a motor

[2:19:15] and so forth and and get that on

[2:19:17] operational. That'll take place over the

[2:19:19] next uh 12 uh 12 months. the booster

[2:19:22] station right next to it. Um you you

[2:19:24] noticed that there was a massive hole on

[2:19:26] the ground over there that's been filled

[2:19:27] in and that's all in preparation to take

[2:19:30] that water out of the new water tank

[2:19:31] which is a 10 million gallon water tank.

[2:19:33] Put it into our system. We're

[2:19:35] diversifying the location of our water

[2:19:37] sources in the event we do have

[2:19:39] emergencies. For example, on the on the

[2:19:41] hillside over here, we have the Wasatch

[2:19:43] fault. So that'll help to remedy any

[2:19:46] concerns that might arise as a a result

[2:19:48] of a a major seismic event. We've been

[2:19:53] also updating uh the commission

[2:19:55] regarding the UDOT Geneva Road widening

[2:19:58] and Lake View Parkway project. Most of

[2:20:00] that, if not all of that is done in

[2:20:02] Provo and then a good portion of it is

[2:20:05] underway right now. We've also been

[2:20:07] working with uh the parks and recreation

[2:20:09] department on developing entryway and

[2:20:11] city park monument signs. Um I don't

[2:20:15] know Mike if you would like to take a

[2:20:16] minute to address that first one. Uh the

[2:20:18] central Utah water reuse feasibility

[2:20:22] study.

[2:20:22] >> Sure. Um Central Utah [clears throat]

[2:20:24] Water about 20 years ago had the

[2:20:26] opportunity to acquire all of the former

[2:20:29] Geneva Steel water rights and water

[2:20:32] related infrastructure.

[2:20:34] And um when we acquired that water, we

[2:20:36] didn't have a customer for the water.

[2:20:38] And as we went out to the various cities

[2:20:41] and and gauged interest and demand for

[2:20:44] that water. Um it was a little bit slow.

[2:20:47] 2008 the the crash occurred and uh we we

[2:20:52] were wondering if we would ever sell all

[2:20:53] that water. Well, that water is long

[2:20:56] gone. Um, everybody is scrambling and

[2:20:58] coming in asking where is there more

[2:21:00] water that we can purchase to supply to

[2:21:02] our communities. And [clears throat] we

[2:21:06] approached Chris and Reed and as we

[2:21:09] became more aware of the reuse, many of

[2:21:12] you know that reuse in the state of

[2:21:14] Utah, throughout the country, reuse is

[2:21:15] occurring and being uh leaned on heavily

[2:21:18] to augment existing supplies in Utah. Um

[2:21:22] it you know 101 15 years ago it was seen

[2:21:24] that any drop of water that makes it to

[2:21:26] the Great Salt Lake is wasted and that

[2:21:28] mentality has shifted over the the last

[2:21:30] several years as we've recognized the

[2:21:32] importance the ecological importance of

[2:21:35] the Great Salt Lake and health

[2:21:36] importance for the community. And so uh

[2:21:38] reuse is no longer uh permitted within

[2:21:42] the state without an a makeup or a

[2:21:46] replacement water going to the Great

[2:21:48] Salt Lake. Fortunately, um, leaders here

[2:21:52] at the city 20 over 20 years ago, 2003,

[2:21:55] I believe, submitted an application to

[2:21:57] be able to have the right to reuse the

[2:21:59] water from ORM's wastewater uh

[2:22:02] reclamation facility. And so, as uh you

[2:22:05] all have have to facility, you're aware

[2:22:08] that ORM is applying that that water uh

[2:22:12] to city uh city parks and golf course.

[2:22:16] However, there's there's more supply

[2:22:18] down there than than I understand is is

[2:22:21] needed for the city um facilities. And

[2:22:24] so, Central Utah Water approached Chris

[2:22:26] and Reed and asked about the uh what the

[2:22:29] [clears throat] plans are for that water

[2:22:31] and how we might best, like Chris said,

[2:22:32] I think the biggest thing that the the

[2:22:34] relationship we've had has been able to

[2:22:36] look at what is in the best interest of

[2:22:38] the public. And so we've been working

[2:22:40] closely together with city staff looking

[2:22:43] at different options to potentially take

[2:22:46] that water and uh put it to to the best

[2:22:49] use of our community. So um and we're

[2:22:52] right in the middle of that. Probably

[2:22:53] don't have much to report yet, but we're we had a meeting today and we're

[2:22:58] looking at really good options uh to to

[2:23:00] be able to utilize that water. We're

[2:23:03] excited about what the potential is for

[2:23:05] that. It could be a variety of things.

[2:23:06] For example, it could be land applied

[2:23:08] for for water reuse. It could be used to

[2:23:10] augment the the water supply. It could

[2:23:12] be used to actually develop and put it

[2:23:14] back into our drinking water system. I

[2:23:17] know that doesn't sound very appetizing,

[2:23:18] but there are many communities in the

[2:23:20] Phoenix area that go direct potable

[2:23:22] water from the the end of the uh

[2:23:24] wastewater treatment plant. That water

[2:23:26] has a higher degree of water quality

[2:23:28] than the drinking water that we

[2:23:29] currently consume today. So, it's one of

[2:23:33] many opportunities or options that will

[2:23:35] be out there in the future. We couldn't

[2:23:37] do something like this without the

[2:23:38] partnership of someone like uh Central

[2:23:40] Utah Waters. We're grateful for that. We

[2:23:43] have some upcoming projects uh big

[2:23:45] projects that are coming on right now.

[2:23:47] We're in the m middle of working with

[2:23:49] our engineer uh firm Hansen on Loose to

[2:23:53] uh develop the new well number one. It's

[2:23:55] actually this well number one was

[2:23:58] drilled in 195758

[2:24:01] and developed. That's our first well in

[2:24:02] the city. However, we are abandoning

[2:24:04] that and we're going to be drilling a

[2:24:07] new well at the Hillrest Park and that

[2:24:09] is going to be starting in this coming

[2:24:12] fall. Uh number two is our city center

[2:24:15] 200 East City Center, excuse me, 200

[2:24:19] East Center Street over here. Um it's

[2:24:21] our city center well. we call it well

[2:24:23] number five that's been in place since

[2:24:25] the late uh or the mid mid60s

[2:24:29] that is in need of uh some major

[2:24:31] overhaul and replacement that'll be

[2:24:32] taking place this coming year west 16th

[2:24:36] north uh we've talked about this for

[2:24:37] some time but we're finally at this

[2:24:39] point where after we uh do some bonding

[2:24:42] uh coming up in this uh this fall we'll

[2:24:44] be able to start that and and and start

[2:24:46] drilling that well number 11 at west

[2:24:49] 16th north in conjunction with that

[2:24:51] there will be a pioneer

[2:24:52] children's memorial at that location.

[2:24:55] And in conjunction with that on number

[2:24:57] four, we're looking at also the family

[2:25:00] and children memorial garden at this

[2:25:01] orange uh city cemetery.

[2:25:04] So, um thank you. We uh we appreciate

[2:25:08] your support and uh we're excited about

[2:25:11] the work we do and what we do. uh

[2:25:13] providing for the community is uh is

[2:25:16] extremely important to us and we have

[2:25:18] great professionals uh in this in these

[2:25:22] areas of need and service that we're

[2:25:24] grateful and that we lean on quite

[2:25:26] heavily and we thank you for your

[2:25:28] support and and supporting these needs

[2:25:30] too. Are there any questions?

[2:25:32] >> Say thank you. I know that you said it's

[2:25:34] hard to follow the fire department, but

[2:25:37] your I would argue that that your port

[2:25:40] your department and what you do is very important as well for our health

[2:25:44] and safety of our our community just in

[2:25:46] a different way and appreciate that.

[2:25:49] >> Thank you.

[2:25:50] >> Council, do you have any questions or

[2:25:53] comments? Um, Council Member Gail.

[2:25:56] >> Well, first I want to say thank you. Um,

[2:25:58] and second, I want to just say how

[2:25:59] struck I am by the quality and

[2:26:02] professionalism of your sta, your

[2:26:04] commission. I mean, you have some really

[2:26:05] tip-top people in there with lots of

[2:26:06] experience, and I'm super impressed by

[2:26:08] that, and really grateful that they are

[2:26:10] behind these things that are so

[2:26:11] important to our infrastructure and, you

[2:26:12] know, our day-to-day life. So, thank you

[2:26:14] for the work you do.

[2:26:15] >> Thank you.

[2:26:17] >> Great. Anyone else? All right. Thank you

[2:26:20] so much. And I I love hearing about the

[2:26:22] cooperation and the partnerships that

[2:26:24] we're having. And so, thank you. Thank

[2:26:27] you.

[2:26:29] [gasps]

[2:26:30] >> All right. The next item on the agenda

[2:26:33] is time set aside for public

[2:26:35] appearances.

[2:26:36] Times been set aside for the public to

[2:26:38] express their ideas, concerns, and

[2:26:40] comments on items not scheduled as

[2:26:43] public hearings on the agenda. Those

[2:26:45] wishing to speak are encouraged to show

[2:26:47] respect for those who serve the city.

[2:26:50] Comments should focus on issues

[2:26:52] concerning the city. And those who will

[2:26:55] be invited to speak have already um I

[2:26:57] have the signup sheet will have signed

[2:26:59] in and you'll have the opportunity to

[2:27:02] have up to 3 minutes to to share your

[2:27:06] thoughts. So we'll go ahead and we will

[2:27:09] start. Let's see. Looks like we do have

[2:27:14] a note here that says please only sign

[2:27:15] up for yourself in order to be fair for

[2:27:17] those that want. So is everybody Well,

[2:27:19] you wouldn't know the answer. Everyone

[2:27:21] never mind. I was going to ask a

[2:27:22] question, but it doesn't make sense. All

[2:27:24] right. Milo,

[2:27:28] is Milo here?

[2:27:31] All right. I don't see him. I guess I

[2:27:32] could have asked that question, but

[2:27:34] never mind. All right. He's Is it Teo

[2:27:37] Teao?

[2:27:39] Uh, Buckingham.

[2:27:42] And then it's up. And then after Mr.

[2:27:44] Buckingham, it's Kathy Ambrose. Welcome.

[2:27:48] [snorts]

[2:27:49] >> Thank you, council person.

[2:27:53] >> [clears throat]

[2:27:54] >> Good evening, Oramm City Council. My

[2:27:56] name is Teao Buckingham. I've lived in

[2:27:58] Orum for six years. My son has lived

[2:28:01] here his whole life. He loves our

[2:28:03] neighbors like I love our neighbors,

[2:28:05] many of whom are fathers like me. It is

[2:28:08] for this reason that I am making a

[2:28:10] request to this council to issue an

[2:28:12] executive order or formal resolution

[2:28:15] barring ICE agents and those working in

[2:28:17] cooperation with them from using

[2:28:19] city-owned property for immigration

[2:28:22] enforcement activities. This includes

[2:28:24] parks, schools, libraries, and public

[2:28:27] buildings and their parking lots. These

[2:28:30] places where we gather as families and

[2:28:32] neighbors and community cannot become an

[2:28:35] operations ground for masked agents who

[2:28:37] have killed multiple people this year

[2:28:39] who have been seen to operate with

[2:28:40] impunity. My immigrant neighbors are

[2:28:44] equally entitled to and deserving of

[2:28:46] safety and protection from these racist

[2:28:48] deportation operations. Regardless of

[2:28:51] documentation status, they are mothers,

[2:28:54] fathers, aunties, uncles, cousins,

[2:28:57] lovers, and friends. all of whom belong

[2:28:59] here in Family City, USA. That is all I

[2:29:02] have for public comment. Thank you.

[2:29:05] >> Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it. All

[2:29:07] right, Kathy Ambrose. And then after

[2:29:12] Miss Ambrose, we have Ally Ac.

[2:29:15] >> Thank you. And I want to thank the

[2:29:17] council for their uh long days during

[2:29:20] city council meetings for uh serving the

[2:29:22] city. Um, for the last seven years I've

[2:29:25] served as the executive director of Hope

[2:29:27] for ORM. It's a self-funded zero

[2:29:30] solicitation suicide prevention

[2:29:32] nonprofit that serves the city. Every

[2:29:36] year we provide zerocost mental health

[2:29:38] resources to our community. We fund

[2:29:40] higher education scholarships for

[2:29:42] graduating seniors at all three high

[2:29:44] schools. Over 15,000 to date have been

[2:29:47] donated. We provide free CPR crisis

[2:29:51] training to any entity that requests our

[2:29:53] service. We also entirely fund an annual

[2:29:56] mental wellness resource fair at no cost

[2:29:59] to ORM, the city, and surrounding

[2:30:02] communities.

[2:30:03] Despite our history with the city and

[2:30:06] the previously signed contract and

[2:30:07] months of preparation,

[2:30:10] um administrative restructuring

[2:30:11] surrounding this year's Armfest resulted

[2:30:13] in Hope form being asked not to

[2:30:15] participate.

[2:30:17] We were grouped together with commercial

[2:30:20] vendors and transactional nonprofits.

[2:30:24] That classification does not accurately

[2:30:26] reflect how hope for ORM operates. We

[2:30:30] use zero transaction, zero on onboarding

[2:30:34] model. We don't sell programs. We don't

[2:30:36] collect data. We don't pitch

[2:30:38] subscriptions or service for services.

[2:30:41] We exist solely as a public safety and

[2:30:44] community resource. And hope for ORM

[2:30:47] belongs at ORMFest. In previous years,

[2:30:49] Hope Forum's footprint has been located

[2:30:51] in the municipal public safety quarter

[2:30:54] by police, fire, and public utilities.

[2:30:57] We believe that that is the most

[2:30:59] appropriate location for our suicide

[2:31:01] prevention and mental wellness

[2:31:02] resources.

[2:31:04] Placing our station directly alongside

[2:31:06] the city emergency services creates a

[2:31:09] centralized care and resource zone for

[2:31:11] residents. It keeps crisis and mental

[2:31:13] health resources logically connected

[2:31:15] with the city's first responders. It

[2:31:17] also keeps our nonprofit footprint

[2:31:19] separate from commercial traffic and

[2:31:21] related activities.

[2:31:23] I am proposing to protect

[2:31:28] our community and provide administrative

[2:31:30] clarity for city staff. We have

[2:31:32] submitted a formal proposal to the city

[2:31:34] manager. We are requesting a formal

[2:31:37] memorandum of understanding. The purpose

[2:31:39] would be to officially recognize Hope

[2:31:41] Forum's inkind scholarship contributions

[2:31:43] to ORM students to establish us in the

[2:31:47] permanent public safety and community

[2:31:49] resource category and protect our booth

[2:31:52] footprint from blanket commercial roll

[2:31:54] backs in future years. Um I've provided

[2:31:57] copies of our proposal um and an

[2:31:59] executive summary to the city recorder.

[2:32:02] Um, and I'm asking the council to direct

[2:32:05] the city manager to schedule a brief

[2:32:07] meeting with hope for ORM during the off

[2:32:09] season for from Ormfest.

[2:32:12] Um, our goal is to work together to

[2:32:13] finalize a clear framework that will

[2:32:15] avoid this issue in future years. I

[2:32:17] would like to personally invite each of

[2:32:19] you also to come to the mental wellness

[2:32:22] resource fair on Monday, August 31st at

[2:32:24] Oram Library Hall. It's completely free.

[2:32:28] It's entirely funded by hope for ORM.

[2:32:30] It's open to everyone and it features

[2:32:34] community providers, resources, music,

[2:32:37] keynote address. Um I couldn't get Cosmo

[2:32:40] or Willie because they're going to be

[2:32:42] playing a game against each other. So

[2:32:43] they said no. But besides that um we

[2:32:46] would love to see um this community

[2:32:48] network in action and I will email a

[2:32:51] copy of all the documents also. Thank

[2:32:52] you.

[2:32:53] >> Thank you. And just so you know, we all

[2:32:55] have I think we all have copies.

[2:32:57] >> Are there any questions for me? So,

[2:32:59] we'll go ahead and u we've got your

[2:33:01] contact information and All right. Thank

[2:33:03] you.

[2:33:04] All right. Next, we have Ally AC. And

[2:33:07] then after Miss AC, we have Ethan Staer.

[2:33:12] It's so nice you said AC right. Everyone

[2:33:13] else mispronounces it. So, thank you.

[2:33:15] >> Oh, I've got one of those last names,

[2:33:16] too. That [laughter]

[2:33:18] >> Well, um I'm up here also to talk about

[2:33:20] ICE in ORM. Um, right now ICE is held

[2:33:25] very unaccountable by the American

[2:33:28] government and so I'm hoping to ask my

[2:33:29] city to be better. Um, I am asking that

[2:33:33] ORM city pass a formal policy directing

[2:33:35] local law enforcement not to honor ICE

[2:33:38] civil immigration detainers without a

[2:33:40] jur judicial warrant signed by a judge,

[2:33:42] not an administrative warrant signed by

[2:33:44] ICE alone. Uh this ability for ICE to

[2:33:48] basically determine itself that they can

[2:33:50] grab someone is a strict violation of

[2:33:52] the fourth amendment which declares that

[2:33:55] um people are protected from

[2:33:57] unreasonable searches and seizures. And

[2:33:59] I know a lot of people might say, well,

[2:34:00] they're not citizens. They don't get to

[2:34:01] have the rights or whatever. First of

[2:34:03] all, we said we say liberty and justice

[2:34:05] for all at the end of the um at the end

[2:34:07] of the Declaration of Independence. But

[2:34:09] also without these laws being applied to

[2:34:14] um to all people then it gives law

[2:34:16] enforcement the ability to grab people

[2:34:18] and act say that they didn't think they

[2:34:20] were a citizen without having being able

[2:34:22] to prove it. It is a very dangerous

[2:34:24] thing to allow groups especially groups

[2:34:27] like ICE that are famously unaccountable

[2:34:29] right now being held unaccountable right

[2:34:31] now um to be able to do whatever they

[2:34:33] want and then say oh no we didn't we

[2:34:36] didn't [clears throat] check. Um, people

[2:34:37] are I have many friends who are here

[2:34:40] legally or and they're they're

[2:34:41] documented. They were born here and

[2:34:42] they're scared they're going to be

[2:34:43] snatched off on the road because of

[2:34:46] their way they look. I mean, just

[2:34:47] because the Supreme Court says they can

[2:34:49] racially uh they can be um racially

[2:34:53] profiled uh ICE is allowed to do that

[2:34:55] doesn't mean it's right. Um I was

[2:34:57] recently visiting what an old um

[2:34:59] Japanese internment camp and just

[2:35:01] because something is legal doesn't mean

[2:35:03] it's right. And I think we have a place

[2:35:05] in our legal power to prevent these

[2:35:07] harmful inhumane treatments that are

[2:35:09] being happening to our neighbors

[2:35:11] documented or not. And I think that ORM

[2:35:14] should has the ability to be held to a

[2:35:16] higher standard and standard and hold

[2:35:18] our federal officers to a higher

[2:35:20] standard as well. So again, pass a

[2:35:22] formal policy directing local law

[2:35:24] enforcement not to honor ICE civil

[2:35:26] immigration detainers without a judicial

[2:35:28] warrant signed by a judge, not an

[2:35:30] administrative warrant signed by ICE

[2:35:31] alone. Thank you so much.

[2:35:33] >> Thank you.

[2:35:36] All right, we have um Ethan Ster

[2:35:40] and then after after him we have um Judy

[2:35:44] Christensen.

[2:35:47] Hello mayor and city council people. I'm

[2:35:49] sure by now my face has become a tired

[2:35:51] one to see, but I have spent the last

[2:35:54] this is my third city council meeting

[2:35:56] now in a row that I will be talking

[2:35:57] about the flock cameras that are around

[2:35:59] the city. Um, I've already talked about

[2:36:01] the privacy concerns I think they pose

[2:36:03] as well as the ways that ICE can abuse

[2:36:04] them. Um, but today I would like to talk

[2:36:07] about some real stories of real people.

[2:36:09] Now, these stories will involve uh

[2:36:11] political buzzwords that I'm sure you

[2:36:12] will have your own opinions about. I

[2:36:14] urge you to look past these buzzwords

[2:36:16] because they aren't the point of the

[2:36:17] story, whether you are in favor or

[2:36:19] against them, and to look at the actual

[2:36:21] story itself and what's actually

[2:36:22] happening.

[2:36:23] >> [gasps]

[2:36:23] >> There's a woman from Texas who left her

[2:36:26] home state, where abortion is illegal,

[2:36:28] to get an abortion in the state of

[2:36:29] Illinois. She was tracked down using the

[2:36:32] flock system by police officers in her

[2:36:34] home state of Texas and arrested for

[2:36:37] getting this abortion despite doing it

[2:36:39] in a state where it is legal. In Utah,

[2:36:43] abortions are legal until the 18th week.

[2:36:45] She could have come here to do this. And

[2:36:48] if she did, she would have still been

[2:36:49] tracked down and arrested by her own

[2:36:52] state police officers in her city. I'm

[2:36:55] not asking whether you think that the

[2:36:56] abortion is right or if you think that

[2:36:58] she shouldn't have done that. I am

[2:37:00] asking if you think that police officers

[2:37:01] have the right to overrule city laws and

[2:37:04] track people outside of their

[2:37:05] jurisdictions using this system that has

[2:37:08] little to no oversight. Now, the woman

[2:37:10] was released. She did not get any

[2:37:12] criminal charges, but this is a

[2:37:15] situation that shouldn't have been able

[2:37:16] to happen in the first place. She

[2:37:18] shouldn't have been arrested to begin

[2:37:20] with. She didn't break any law and she

[2:37:23] adhered to every law in every

[2:37:25] jurisdiction that she was in. There is

[2:37:27] another man in a similar situation. He

[2:37:30] left his state where it was illegal to

[2:37:31] have recreational marijuana and bought

[2:37:34] one in a state where it is legal to buy

[2:37:36] it. He was arrested similarly by police

[2:37:39] officers who used flock to track him

[2:37:41] down. Again, I am not asking your

[2:37:43] opinions on the use of recreational

[2:37:45] marijuana. Whether you are in favor of

[2:37:47] that or against that is not relevant. It

[2:37:50] is whether you think that police

[2:37:51] officers should be able to use this

[2:37:53] system, this international private

[2:37:55] system with no oversight to track down

[2:37:58] people outside of their jurisdictions

[2:38:00] and arrest them for crimes that aren't

[2:38:02] illegal where they committed them. I

[2:38:04] think that this system is highly corrupt

[2:38:06] and it is highly dangerous beyond all

[2:38:08] the other issues that I've already

[2:38:10] raised with you all. I hope that you

[2:38:12] guys are listening to my words and you

[2:38:13] guys will do what you can to terminate

[2:38:15] any flock contracts that the city has

[2:38:18] and be able to take these cameras down

[2:38:20] because I do not see any way that they

[2:38:22] truly benefit the people of ORM or the

[2:38:24] people around the nation who have to use

[2:38:26] this national database. Thank you.

[2:38:30] >> Thank you.

[2:38:31] And our final personal appearance this

[2:38:34] evening is um Judy Christensen. Welcome

[2:38:42] to our honorable mayor and ORM city

[2:38:46] council. Like was said, I'm Judy

[2:38:48] Christensen. I've had the privilege of

[2:38:51] calling ORM home for 35 years. I've

[2:38:54] raised all five of my children here and

[2:38:56] I'm really proud to live here. I love

[2:38:59] it. I think it's a beautiful place. I'm

[2:39:01] grateful for all of my

[2:39:06] all the many residents, including

[2:39:08] yourselves, who help to keep and

[2:39:11] safeguard our city. I have actually

[2:39:15] wasn't planning to say this, but I do

[2:39:17] have firsthand experience with hope um

[2:39:20] for ORM and I've seen a lot of good that

[2:39:23] it's done for kids who are um in really

[2:39:27] um hard situations [clears throat] and

[2:39:30] it's helped families as well. I am here

[2:39:32] to respectfully reiterate my request

[2:39:35] that this council pass a formal

[2:39:37] resolution prohibiting the use of

[2:39:39] municipal funds, staff, time,

[2:39:42] facilities, and um for federal

[2:39:44] immigration enforcement and to ensure

[2:39:46] the safety and trust of all our

[2:39:48] residents. I have friends and neighbors

[2:39:52] and close um

[2:39:56] acquaintances who are here legally but

[2:39:59] are scared. And I think it's very sad.

[2:40:02] Um I would like to have some p some

[2:40:06] transparency from our city knowing

[2:40:10] um that we I just would like to prohibit

[2:40:14] the voluntary disclosure of of our

[2:40:16] individuals here as far as their

[2:40:18] immigration status to federal

[2:40:20] authorities and to establish a

[2:40:22] requirement that our city publicly

[2:40:25] report any interactions that they have

[2:40:27] with federal immigration

[2:40:29] authorities. I think that we can be kind

[2:40:32] and respectful to all of our residents

[2:40:34] and and do things with um

[2:40:38] with taste and with compassion. That's

[2:40:40] all I have to say. Thank you.

[2:40:42] >> Thank you. Thank you to all of you who

[2:40:45] have come tonight to to share your

[2:40:48] thoughts. I I really appreciate it.

[2:40:51] Right. The next item on the agenda is a

[2:40:53] consent item and it's updating our city

[2:40:57] council meeting schedule. and council.

[2:40:59] You'll see [gasps] in that proposed

[2:41:01] schedule that our next meeting, August

[2:41:04] 25th, is going to be a work session

[2:41:07] only. And then we will on that Tuesday,

[2:41:11] we'll have that work session. And then

[2:41:13] you'll see on August 27th, that Thursday

[2:41:16] is going to be a another city council

[2:41:20] meeting. And that's going to be only

[2:41:22] truth and taxation hearing. So there's

[2:41:24] nothing else that will be on that

[2:41:25] agenda. We won't be doing personal

[2:41:26] appearances or any other other types of actions. We'll be focusing on that truth and taxation hearing on

[2:41:34] August 27th. And so the consent item is

[2:41:37] to um amend the calendar, update the

[2:41:42] calendar to um August 25th being a work

[2:41:45] session only. So if you're comfortable

[2:41:47] with that, I would entertain a motion to

[2:41:49] approve the consent item.

[2:41:51] >> Mayor, I'll make a motion to approve the

[2:41:53] consent item.

[2:41:54] >> All right. Have a motion. Is there a

[2:41:55] second?

[2:41:56] >> I second.

[2:41:57] >> All right. I'm going to start off voting

[2:41:59] and I'm going to go this way. I'm gonna

[2:42:02] vote I

[2:42:03] >> I I

[2:42:05] >> I.

[2:42:07] >> Quinn.

[2:42:08] >> I.

[2:42:10] >> All right. Motion carries. Thank you.

[2:42:13] Next item on the agenda is our scheduled

[2:42:16] item. It's a a resolution to uh for

[2:42:21] appointments to the Justice Court

[2:42:23] nominating commission. Now, uh Mr. Earl,

[2:42:27] do you have a presentation or are we

[2:42:28] just we're just doing the doing the

[2:42:31] nomination?

[2:42:32] >> Uh it depends on what information you'd

[2:42:35] like. We already discussed this in the

[2:42:36] work session. And so basically the uh

[2:42:39] the item to be acted upon is just the

[2:42:41] appointment of uh two individuals to

[2:42:43] serve on the justice court nominating

[2:42:45] commission. And I'm happy to uh give

[2:42:48] more information on that or if you're

[2:42:50] ready to move forward on a motion that

[2:42:52] would be fine too.

[2:42:53] >> Okay. I'll just for the for those in the

[2:42:55] audience just to so you know we ORM has

[2:42:58] a justice court and the justice court

[2:43:00] judge has given notice that he he would

[2:43:02] like to retire at the end of the year

[2:43:04] and since we thought somebody who's

[2:43:06] going to force somebody to stay he's

[2:43:09] going to retire at the end of the year

[2:43:11] and there is a process that's run

[2:43:13] through the state the court

[2:43:14] administrator's office on how to select

[2:43:17] a new justice court judge and there is a

[2:43:21] nominating commission that is the law

[2:43:24] spells out a group of different groups

[2:43:26] of people who are part of that

[2:43:28] nominating commission and two of those

[2:43:31] positions on that nominating commission

[2:43:34] uh are ones who are approved by the city

[2:43:38] council and that's what this item is

[2:43:40] this evening is to approve those two

[2:43:42] names. Uh we a couple two council

[2:43:45] members just so just have have expressed

[2:43:49] interest in representing ORM city in in

[2:43:53] that process. The commission will also

[2:43:55] have I think some from the bar

[2:43:56] association and someone from appointed

[2:43:58] by Mountland Association of Governments.

[2:44:00] I think the county commission.

[2:44:01] >> County Commission. Yes.

[2:44:02] >> County Commission. And so it's a variety

[2:44:04] of individuals who will be reviewing

[2:44:06] these applications to be a justice court

[2:44:08] judge here in Orman. And the decision is

[2:44:10] made by the city manager with the

[2:44:12] ratification of the city council. So

[2:44:15] council members Millet and Kilpac have

[2:44:18] expressed interest council as as though

[2:44:21] as ones who would like to represent the

[2:44:24] city of ORM on the justice court

[2:44:26] nominating commission. And if you're

[2:44:29] comfortable with that, I would entertain

[2:44:32] a motion to to appoint them unless you

[2:44:36] have some other discussion or anything

[2:44:37] you'd like to do beforehand.

[2:44:44] » Mayor, can I make a motion?

[2:44:46] >> Yes.

[2:44:47] >> Um, I move to approve the appointment of

[2:44:50] council member uh Len Millet and council

[2:44:52] member Chris Kilpack to the justice

[2:44:53] court nominating commission. Right.

[2:44:56] Thank you. Have a motion. Is there a

[2:44:57] second?

[2:45:00] I'll second that.

[2:45:00] >> All right. Thank you, Council Member

[2:45:02] Molstein. Okay, we'll go ahead and start

[2:45:04] uh the vote with you, Council Member

[2:45:05] Millet.

[2:45:07] >> I I

[2:45:08] >> I Council Member Mikum.

[2:45:13] >> I

[2:45:14] >> All right. Thank you. The motion carries

[2:45:16] unanimously.

[2:45:18] All right. Next item on our agenda is

[2:45:20] financial items. There were no items in

[2:45:22] the packet. just um Teresa wanted me to

[2:45:25] just make a note of that for the

[2:45:27] meeting. And then we'll go to number 12.

[2:45:30] Um we have the city manager information

[2:45:32] items. So I'll turn the time over to our

[2:45:34] city manager, um Brenby.

[2:45:37] >> Thank you, mayor and council. Just two

[2:45:39] items wanted to highlight. Um I don't

[2:45:42] normally mention these, but uh this

[2:45:44] Thursday there is a uh a retirement

[2:45:47] party for Lane Gray. And so I just

[2:45:51] wanted to publicly not only invite you

[2:45:54] to to come to that, it'll be at the

[2:45:55] library hall from 11:30 to 1:30, but but

[2:45:58] also just to uh publicly recognize Lane.

[2:46:01] He is he's had a phenomenal 37year

[2:46:05] career here at the city. And sometimes

[2:46:07] when uh an individual is getting close

[2:46:10] to retirement, they maybe are coming in

[2:46:12] for a landing, but that has never been

[2:46:14] the case for Lane. He is just always

[2:46:17] such an incredible doer and um 37 years

[2:46:22] of being such a a hardworking

[2:46:24] individual. Um and and dealing with very

[2:46:28] critical projects, you'd think that

[2:46:30] maybe on occasion you might come away,

[2:46:33] you know, stressed or worried or or even

[2:46:36] a little bit overwhelmed. Never with

[2:46:38] Lane. He he is uh just the consumate

[2:46:42] humble, hungry, smart uh employee and he

[2:46:45] has great catchphrases like get her done

[2:46:48] and keep smiling and uh I just I love

[2:46:52] the guy and and so wanted to publicly

[2:46:55] recognize him and and invite you to his

[2:46:57] uh retirement party at the end of this

[2:46:59] week.

[2:47:00] Uh there are several uh and well

[2:47:05] technically all of our employees who we

[2:47:07] will be recognizing at the end of next

[2:47:09] week on Thursday at our building a

[2:47:12] better ORUM employee appreciation party

[2:47:15] and would love your continued help and

[2:47:17] support in that uh event and we'll be

[2:47:20] able to uh speak to the specific details

[2:47:23] of some incredible accomplishments that

[2:47:26] uh uh many of our employees have engaged

[2:47:28] in over the course of the last year. And

[2:47:31] um that'll just be here at uh City

[2:47:33] Center Park as per usual at at the

[2:47:36] stage. So um with that, that that's all

[2:47:39] I have. Thank you.

[2:47:41] >> All right. Thank you. I had the

[2:47:42] opportunity to sign some awards today

[2:47:45] and there's some pretty amazing things

[2:47:47] that are our employees, which we we knew

[2:47:50] they were all amazing, but it just it

[2:47:52] was fun to see those

[2:47:54] um in person. So, um, if there's nothing

[2:47:57] else, I would entertain a motion to

[2:47:59] adjurnn.

[2:48:03] » I motion that we adjourn.

[2:48:05] >> Second.

[2:48:05] >> A motion and a second. All those in

[2:48:07] favor, please say I.

[2:48:08] >> I.

[2:48:09] >> And we are adjourned before 7 p.m.

[2:48:16] » Nice work, Mary.

Orem City Council Meeting | 8.11.2026

Transcript