[0:02] It's about 20 seconds
[0:04] >> in progress
[0:05] >> to six. So, welcome to the PA city
[0:09] council meeting for August 19th,
[0:12] 2026. And again, the time is well,
[0:15] according to that clock, the end at the
[0:17] other end of the room at 6:00.
[0:21] Uh, I will go ahead and and open this
[0:23] meeting with word of prayer.
[0:27] Our
[0:31] father in heaven, as we come before thee
[0:33] at this time as a group of citizens and
[0:36] city council, we're so very thankful for
[0:38] thy involvement in our lives and in the
[0:41] lives of the PAC city citizens and those
[0:47] in the surrounding areas. We're thankful
[0:50] for the opportunity we have of planning
[0:51] our future and would ask thee to please
[0:53] be part of that plan as we are
[0:57] struggling to make sure we do the right
[1:00] thing for the right reason. Thankful for
[1:02] the the water that thou hast seen fit to
[1:05] bestow us with. Please help us to get
[1:10] more water for our our uses. Please
[1:13] don't overwhelm us with the water but
[1:15] help us to
[1:17] uh use that water
[1:20] uh sensibly. And we say these things
[1:22] father in the name of thy son Jesus
[1:24] Christ. Amen.
[1:25] >> Amen.
[1:27] >> And a moss council moss will lead us in
[1:29] the pledge.
[1:31] >> Please stand.
[1:34] >> Repeat after me. I aliance to the flag
[1:38] of the United States of America and to
[1:41] the republic for which it stands. One
[1:44] nation under God, indivisible, with
[1:47] liberty and justice for all.
[1:50] >> Thank you, Anne.
[1:54] » Okay, we'll go ahead and proceed uh see
[1:56] the consent agenda. Approval of the
[2:00] August 5th, 2026 city council meeting
[2:03] minutes. Number two, confirmation of the
[2:06] monthly financial information. Number
[2:08] three, resolution approving agreement
[2:09] for construction services for the short
[2:12] course at the Glad Stand Golf Course.
[2:15] Unless there's any uh uh discussion, I'm
[2:19] ready for a motion.
[2:20] >> Mayor, I motion that we approve the
[2:22] consent agenda.
[2:23] >> I'll second that.
[2:24] >> Okay, we have a motion been seconded. Uh
[2:26] roll call vote starting with Council
[2:29] Smith.
[2:29] >> Yes.
[2:30] >> Council Roelly,
[2:31] >> yes.
[2:31] >> Council Moss,
[2:32] >> yes. Council Progard.
[2:34] >> Yes.
[2:34] >> Okay. The motion carries. That gives me
[2:36] an opportunity to let people know that
[2:38] uh Council Hulet is going to be a little
[2:41] late. He's had some responsibilities on a meeting earlier today, but he will
[2:46] be here.
[2:47] Okay. We'll move on to D petitions.
[2:52] Uh and uh number one is I5 interchange
[2:56] report. Stephen, are you with us?
[2:59] Come on up, Stephen.
[3:01] the man of the hour.
[3:03] >> Yeah. Thank you for being here.
[3:05] We're anxious for your report.
[3:11] » Uh this is my first time. I'm I'm Steven
[3:13] Loveland. I'm the new project manager
[3:16] for the I-15 PAC interchange project.
[3:19] Eric Krasband uh is retiring or retired.
[3:22] Um so I'm taking over for him. Um our design team is currently pursuing
[3:29] 90% design plans. Um we got that
[3:32] scheduled in September. Um we anticipate
[3:36] to advertise
[3:38] uh at the beginning of next year with
[3:41] construction planned for spring summer
[3:44] of 2027. Um we're currently working with
[3:48] uh UTA and the railroad. Um we're
[3:51] preparing agreements um and those will
[3:53] need to be um approved in order to get
[3:56] construction rolling. So we're working
[3:58] through that. Um and we're also working
[4:00] through right away um that's kind of
[4:03] ongoing rightway acquisition. So um
[4:07] that's kind of pretty simple update, but
[4:09] like I said, we're getting close to um
[4:12] getting the package ready to advertise.
[4:13] So
[4:14] >> that's a major segment of that update.
[4:17] So no, we appreciate that information.
[4:20] And does uh does the rightway include
[4:22] going over the tracks with with new
[4:24] offramps?
[4:26] >> Uh you're talking about tracks. Yeah. To
[4:28] the north.
[4:32] » The
[4:33] >> So going over not only
[4:35] >> to the to the west or where?
[4:38] >> Yeah, to the west.
[4:39] >> You can kind of kind of northwest
[4:40] >> kind of northwest.
[4:42] >> Yeah. So
[4:42] >> going over the tracks.
[4:45] I brought my
[4:48] » Come on up if you would please.
[4:54] » Appreciate you being here.
[4:59] So, yes, as part of the project, we're
[5:01] acquiring all the rideway that would be
[5:03] necessary for those future ramps on the
[5:05] southern side of the interchange as well
[5:07] as that extension on the west end to
[5:09] connect over to 3200 West or Main
[5:11] Street. Mhm.
[5:13] >> That piece won't be built yet, but the
[5:15] rightway will be there for future
[5:17] expansion.
[5:18] >> Awesome. Thank you.
[5:19] >> Appreciate it. And
[5:21] >> you guys haven't found any surprise
[5:22] funding to to make the road real big,
[5:24] right?
[5:26] >> The PAC Parkway
[5:27] >> money hasn't fallen out of the sky yet.
[5:29] Darn it. We're working on it.
[5:30] >> We're working on it.
[5:32] >> Appreciate that.
[5:33] >> Thank you.
[5:34] >> Okay.
[5:34] >> Thanks for the update.
[5:36] >> Yes.
[5:37] >> Thanks.
[5:39] >> Okay, moving on. Uh, number two, annual
[5:42] report for 4B committee. Matthew,
[5:45] come on up.
[6:00] See if I can pull up the pictures for
[6:23] I'm going to neglect the pictures cuz
[6:25] >> that's fine.
[6:25] >> Don't know how to work Zoom.
[6:29] » All right.
[6:31] to our council members and people of
[6:35] PAC. Over the past year, the Forbay
[6:38] Committee has continued its efforts to
[6:39] improve, preserve, and promote the
[6:41] Forbay Trail System. Below, we have a
[6:44] summary of our key accomplishments.
[6:47] We hosted a conver conservation easement
[6:50] celebration at the Forbay trails
[6:53] recognizing the successful con
[6:55] conservation partnership and honoring
[6:58] individuals and organizations whose
[7:00] efforts helped preserve the forbay area
[7:02] for the future generations and that was
[7:05] the Lehigh City Council that joined us.
[7:08] We secured a park grant funding for a
[7:10] new trail head, kiosk, and interpretive
[7:12] signage, which will improve visitor
[7:14] education, navigation, and overall trail
[7:16] experience.
[7:18] Continued community outreach and
[7:20] education by participating participating
[7:24] in adventure days, promoting the 4 bay
[7:26] trail system, conversation, conservation
[7:28] efforts, trail stewardship, and
[7:30] volunteer opportunities to residents and
[7:32] visitors. We coordinated multiple trail
[7:35] maintenance projects in partnership with
[7:37] local community groups leading 55
[7:39] volunteers across 200 plus hour services
[7:42] to restore trail conditions and prepare
[7:45] the system increased public use. We
[7:48] continued planning for future
[7:49] improvements including the gravel
[7:51] parking lot project which is currently
[7:53] on hold with the coordinated with Utah
[7:56] County Trail Engineering.
[7:59] We expanded trail am amenities,
[8:01] accessibility enhancements such as an
[8:04] all abilities trail wheelchair and
[8:07] ongoing conservation initiatives. The
[8:11] Forbay committee appreciates the
[8:13] continued support of the PAC city
[8:14] council. We remain committed to
[8:17] protecting the Forbay area while
[8:19] expanding opportunities for outdoor
[8:21] recreation and look forward to another
[8:23] successful year in collaboration.
[8:25] Sincerely, the Forbay committee.
[8:29] Thank you so much.
[8:30] >> Thank you.
[8:33] >> Okay. And we'll go ahead and do go to
[8:37] number three. Uh open the public forum.
[8:40] There's a little bit of an of a nuance
[8:44] here. I'm sure that some of you folks
[8:46] are here to to talk about the Manglesson
[8:49] annexation and uh also the uh general
[8:53] plan for the east side.
[8:55] Uh what uh what I would like to do since
[8:58] that's on the the agenda that doesn't
[9:01] allow you to do this in in the public
[9:03] forum. So uh please do not use the
[9:05] public forum at this point in time for
[9:07] that. Although this is not going to be a
[9:09] public hearing that's already happened.
[9:12] Uh when it comes to number item number
[9:14] four and number five, uh we'll have uh
[9:17] Michael present those to us and then
[9:21] we'll maybe even have a little bit of
[9:23] council discussions if any, but then we would like to hear from uh although
[9:29] we don't have time enough to have to
[9:30] hear every one of you, I'd like if you
[9:33] would uh those that to that are against
[9:36] this, please have a spokesman for you uh
[9:40] and and then we'd come up and and have
[9:42] you come up and talk to the the council
[9:44] and the others here in attendance. We'll do that for roughly three to five
[9:49] minutes and if there's anybody that is
[9:51] for that then we'll afford them the same
[9:53] opportunity.
[9:55] This this is a little bit out of the
[9:57] ordinary because we've already had a
[9:59] public hearing but willing to go ahead
[10:01] and and do that to to make sure that
[10:03] your concerns are heard. So, we'll go
[10:06] ahead and uh with that disclaimer for
[10:08] the uh uh public forum, we'll like to
[10:11] hear from those other than the concerns
[10:13] about the annexation and the zone
[10:15] change.
[10:18] Is there anyone would like to address
[10:20] this in the public forum?
[10:23] >> Tristan.
[10:34] Uh, good evening. My name is Tristan
[10:35] Porter. Um, I am, uh, I was invited here
[10:39] by Connie Ericson to, uh, talk to you
[10:41] about participating in something called
[10:43] the Mayor's Monarch Program. Um, it is a
[10:47] program that is, uh, run by the National
[10:50] Wildlife Federation that helps uh, local
[10:53] governments and communities uh,
[10:55] participate in uh, butterfly and
[10:57] pollinator conservation. Um,
[11:02] sorry, a little bit nervous. Um,
[11:07] so what it is is, um, you pick three
[11:10] action items from a list of about 90
[11:12] items that, um, fit with, uh, the city
[11:16] goals or policies that you may have. Um,
[11:19] and then you pledge to, uh, take action
[11:22] with these three items. Um, and they can
[11:25] range from anything from
[11:27] um, like removing milkweed as a noxious
[11:31] plant if that is in your city
[11:32] ordinances. It can be creating
[11:35] pollinator habitat. Um,
[11:38] which it sounds like you're kind of
[11:39] already doing with your with your
[11:41] forbase trail program. Um, it can be uh
[11:44] just like announcing to the public that
[11:47] um, monarchs are in danger. They've lost
[11:49] 99% of their population since the '9s.
[11:53] Um, and there are ways that they can
[11:55] help. Um, I discovered this program
[11:59] after I put a bunch of wild flowers in a
[12:02] dirt patch in my backyard. Um, and I've
[12:04] just been like talking to my friends
[12:06] about it, hence uh how I ended up here.
[12:10] Um, but there are a lot of benefits
[12:11] beyond just uh preserving a keystone
[12:14] species. Um about 80 87% of the people
[12:19] I've talked to have told me that seeing
[12:21] butterflies uh would improve their
[12:23] mental health. It would make them
[12:24] happier. Uh they would be more likely to
[12:27] spend more time outside and therefore be
[12:29] more active if there were pollinators
[12:31] and butterflies around for them to
[12:33] observe and interact with. um creating
[12:36] habitat for pollinators um actually can
[12:40] help um reduce the amount of water a
[12:43] city uses if you uh plant native plants
[12:46] that are drought tolerant which um most
[12:48] of the ones that monarchs require in
[12:50] Utah um will do that for you. Um
[12:55] it can have other economic benefits.
[12:57] Butterflies are actually very um big in
[13:00] like tourism can if you have enough
[13:05] Um
[13:06] and uh involving the community in this
[13:10] because it is a community project um can
[13:13] help uh create community cohesion and
[13:15] give people a sense of pride in the
[13:17] place that they live as well. Um,
[13:20] so
[13:22] I would just uh invite you to learn
[13:25] about the mayor's monarch program um and
[13:28] to see if there are any action items
[13:31] that would fit with uh the city of PAC's
[13:34] vision for the future. Um and take the
[13:36] pledge if you are able. Thank you,
[13:38] >> Tristan. Thank you. Uh Robert or Dave,
[13:41] could you get her contact info and we
[13:42] just follow up and see if that's
[13:44] something we want to put on our radar?
[13:47] Okay. Anyone else like to come up and
[13:50] speak with us? So,
[13:52] Teresa, you wanted to, right?
[14:04] » Good evening. My name is Teresa Howie
[14:07] and I represent the Betnique Company of
[14:10] the Daughters of Utah Pioneers in this
[14:12] area. And um we have a presentation we'd
[14:17] like to make to you as the city and a
[14:20] little bit of history if you don't mind.
[14:23] Um
[14:24] I represent my great great great
[14:28] greatgrandfather
[14:31] James Pace who founded this city of PAC.
[14:36] And I did not know that until I moved
[14:38] here. And it took me a couple years
[14:40] before I found that out. So, I've done a
[14:42] lot of research on him and I feel like
[14:46] we need to let new people coming into
[14:48] our city know what is the foundation of
[14:51] our city. So, I'd like to give you just
[14:53] a very brief history of what he did and
[14:55] why he deserves to be a little more
[14:59] publicized.
[15:01] So, um, James Pace served as a
[15:04] lieutenant commander in the Mormon
[15:06] Battalion, and when he got done with
[15:08] that, he led 50 families and wagons here
[15:11] to Salt Lake. He had only just res
[15:15] arrived in Salt Lake in September of 18
[15:18] um, 51 when Brigham Young said, "Don't
[15:21] stop here. you're going to go 60 miles
[15:23] south and you're going to settle on the
[15:25] Petite Nate Creek and start a community
[15:28] there because there's this beautiful
[15:30] valley. So when he arrived, he saw a
[15:34] valley that was filled with sunflowers,
[15:36] cottonwoods, aspens, lots of grass, and
[15:39] it was a very fertile valley and
[15:41] everyone was so happy to be there after
[15:43] their long journey.
[15:45] So they continued to uh settle. They had
[15:48] 16 settlers in that first party that
[15:50] came. One of them was AJ Stewart and JC
[15:54] Surl and there with them there were just
[15:58] 16. But Brigham Young continued to send
[16:00] other settlers to Petite Neat. In March
[16:03] of 1852, less than a few months later,
[16:07] Brighgam came and made James Pace
[16:09] president and Benjamin Cross Bishop. It
[16:13] was then that Brigham named the
[16:15] settlement Pac
[16:17] and his son William. They changed the
[16:20] spelling from P A C E N to P A Y S O N
[16:25] because they thought people would
[16:26] remember it easier.
[16:29] A petition was sent to the Utah
[16:31] territory to be recognized as a city.
[16:34] However, it was not granted until
[16:36] January 21st of 1853.
[16:41] At that time, just a few months later,
[16:43] um James was called on a mission to
[16:45] England in September of 1852.
[16:48] And he was gone for three years and
[16:50] three months, leaving his wife, Lucinda,
[16:53] who became the first female post
[16:57] mistress in Utah. And she did that the
[17:00] entire time that he was gone. After he
[17:03] came back, um he was a marshall for a
[17:05] while for PAC and then he had the
[17:08] opportunity to go to Spring Lake and he
[17:10] helped build the dam for Spring Lake and
[17:12] then he later bought land there and
[17:15] started to farm there. So he rented out
[17:18] his property here in PAC. Um later after
[17:22] he just got that all built, he built a
[17:24] 40 room adobe house on Spring Lake which
[17:26] he shared with uh Benjamin Johnson later
[17:29] sold it to him and he worked in farming
[17:34] and businesses and did a lot of things
[17:36] around here. And then lo and behold,
[17:38] Brigham Y said, "You're really good in
[17:40] farming, but I need you to go down to
[17:41] St. George and start with with cotton
[17:44] and grapes and rice that we've never had
[17:47] grown in this land." So he moved to him
[17:51] his three wives and went down there. He
[17:54] had a total of 24 children with three
[17:56] wives. I am a direct descendant of his
[17:59] first wife, Lucinda Strickland, who was
[18:02] the first post mistress. Um there are
[18:05] several descendants that still live here
[18:07] in PAC with the last name of Pace. I'm
[18:09] sure you've heard that around. I find
[18:11] them every once in a while. But we would
[18:14] like to recognize all the efforts that
[18:16] started this community that were not
[18:18] only the sunflowers
[18:20] as far as you could see but have become
[18:23] the thriving city of PAC.
[18:26] This picture
[18:39] is James Pace and his wife Lucinda.
[18:43] I owe it to my dear friend Rose Nyman
[18:47] who works at the family history center
[18:49] for taking a very blurry black and white
[18:51] picture that I had and fixing it to be
[18:54] this beautiful picture that we could be
[18:56] proud to display in the lobby of the
[18:58] city building. Uh this is his wife
[19:00] Lucinda. U she's not in her right frame.
[19:03] They didn't get the framing done on
[19:05] that. [laughter] I'd like to say thank
[19:07] you to Kelly Morris for doing the
[19:08] framing on this picture down on Main
[19:11] Street and we are going to make a copy
[19:15] in our museum here. Um we'd like to put
[19:21] a sign underneath there which grading
[19:24] takes a little bit longer than framing
[19:26] so that is still in process. Um but we'd
[19:30] like something that would indicate who
[19:32] he was and what he did and where we
[19:34] could where people can find out a little
[19:36] bit more about our beginning history,
[19:38] which is down the hallway that nobody
[19:41] knows where it's at. So, we'd like a
[19:43] little sign maybe to go down the hallway
[19:46] so that people could come and learn more
[19:48] about our our our town in the early
[19:52] days. There's a lot of premium artifacts
[19:55] in there. And the second thing that we
[19:58] wanted to call to your attention was I
[20:01] get a lot of complaints about the
[20:02] condition of the little cabin out there
[20:04] on the city lot. It's ugly. Sorry, I
[20:07] have to say that. But um
[20:10] >> don't disagree with you.
[20:12] >> Salt Lake has asked us that we would
[20:14] find someone who was qualified in as a
[20:17] contractor. Hello. To evaluate it and
[20:20] see if it's even worth repairing and how
[20:23] much that cost would be for us because
[20:25] us old ladies, we don't know anything
[20:27] about that. Okay. And then plan B is one
[20:32] I came up with because uh there's a lot
[20:34] of wasps out there, but there is a nice
[20:36] plant and there's a nice stone
[20:39] fireplace.
[20:40] If the wood part cannot be fixed, we
[20:44] could use the rock fireplace to mount
[20:47] the plaque on and that would be a
[20:50] monument that would not require the
[20:52] upkeep that a wood cabin would. So, I'm
[20:56] we're just open to suggestions of what
[20:58] maybe the city could help us with. We
[21:00] plan on going around to all of the DUP
[21:03] monuments that are in the city, the ones
[21:05] in Memorial Park here, and wherever else
[21:08] they are around the outside. And we are
[21:11] going we're planning on cleaning them
[21:13] and making them presentable so that
[21:14] people can read about the history. Um, I
[21:19] have people every day that ask me if we
[21:21] have room in our museum to put more
[21:23] things they would like to donate. We
[21:25] don't if you've been down there, but if
[21:28] any of you haven't ever been to our
[21:29] museum, we'd like to invite you to come
[21:30] down for a tour because you really Salt
[21:33] Lake was very impressed with what we
[21:35] had. So, um that being said, um I'd like
[21:39] to give you a little memorial just to
[21:42] remind you of our Pioneer heritage. So,
[21:46] these are little um Pioneer dolls. Men
[21:49] won't like them, but give them to your
[21:50] kids.
[21:50] >> Thank you. Or kids, whatever.
[21:56] Thank you.
[21:58] >> Sorry. Anyway, these are handmade and
[22:00] they're very easy for children to make.
[22:04] » So, with that being said, I'd like to
[22:06] close with this final statement
[22:09] is preserve our past
[22:11] more forward so that we can move forward
[22:15] to our future. They don't know the past.
[22:17] They're not going to do very well in the
[22:20] future. So, I appreciate the time you
[22:22] gave to us.
[22:24] And if you could let us know about the
[22:26] cabin, we'd appreciate it. And I am
[22:29] leaving it up to Steve to mount this.
[22:32] It's ready to be mounted.
[22:33] >> Okay.
[22:34] >> This one we're going to finish framing
[22:36] it.
[22:38] >> Can you leave a copy of what you just
[22:40] read to us?
[22:41] >> Okay.
[22:43] >> Robert, will you get her contact
[22:45] information so I can get back?
[22:46] >> Thank you.
[22:49] >> Teresa, thank you so much. You've done
[22:51] so much work for this and we really appreciate it.
[22:55] >> You're exactly right. If we don't know
[22:56] our past, we our future's in question.
[22:59] >> And Teresa, you know what they say, the
[23:00] first wife's always the favorite. So,
[23:02] I'm glad you came from that line.
[23:05] [crying]
[23:08] » Is that a precursor, Ryan, of something
[23:09] to come? [laughter]
[23:11] >> Better not be. [clears throat]
[23:13] >> Thank you for your comments.
[23:15] >> Yes. Thank you so much. It's really neat
[23:17] to see that picture uh so updated. It's
[23:21] really cool.
[23:37] » Okay. Anyone else like to address this
[23:40] in this public forum?
[23:45] Okay. Not seeing anyone at this time.
[23:47] Anybody online, Emily?
[23:50] No. Okay, we'll move on number four to
[23:54] staff reports.
[24:00] Okay, Chief, come on up. Scott.
[24:03] >> Yep.
[24:05] >> Chief, what is he? Chief. Chief Scott.
[24:09] >> Chief Scott.
[24:11] >> Sounds good. Um, mayor and counselor was
[24:14] just one of the gave you a little report
[24:17] um on the fire station. Things are
[24:18] moving forward. Um we had the permit to
[24:22] do the grubbing and ground work. Um
[24:24] they've been bringing in fill to bring
[24:25] up the the site to a proper elevation.
[24:28] So we'll be just about a foot higher
[24:30] than the roads so we don't have to worry
[24:32] about any flooding or anything. Um
[24:34] they're going to be putting in starting
[24:35] Monday, Tuesday time frame, putting in
[24:37] geops will be quite a few of those. as
[24:39] we're working to get a pre-construction
[24:42] meeting um going. There's a couple of
[24:44] little things they've got to finish on
[24:45] the site plan um for corrections or
[24:48] clarifications, but things are moving
[24:49] forward. Seeing a lot of work um
[24:52] happening out there for both the station
[24:53] and also the park area. So things are
[24:56] looking good. So finally nice to see
[24:58] some work happening there. So thank you
[25:00] for all your help on it.
[25:02] >> So Chief, when when when do you
[25:03] anticipate expected completion? um once
[25:06] we get going about a year is what their
[25:08] time frame is.
[25:09] >> So, when are we getting going? So,
[25:11] what's what's your best guess?
[25:12] >> I'm I'm hoping it'll be done by Labor
[25:13] Day of next year, but we'll see.
[25:15] >> Labor Day of next year. Okay.
[25:17] >> I hope.
[25:18] >> Okay.
[25:19] >> Don't hold me to [laughter] it.
[25:20] >> Be nice to have an open house for
[25:22] >> It would during Labor Day.
[25:24] >> So, we're waiting for them to do the the
[25:26] uh uh site work and the peers and after
[25:28] they do that, then we'll we'll get a
[25:30] date for a groundbreaking. Um, but they
[25:33] want to get that stuff cleared and ready
[25:35] to go first. Um, we also have to uh cap
[25:38] a well that went with the home there.
[25:39] So, it's pretty costly to cap a well,
[25:42] but um we're getting that done too
[25:44] hopefully the Friday.
[25:45] >> Okay.
[25:46] >> So,
[25:46] >> thanks Chief.
[25:47] >> Thank you.
[25:55] I'll jump really quick and say um
[26:00] he might talk about this, but Council
[26:01] Member Rolley and I and uh Sean Black
[26:05] were able to go and see some really cool technology last week. um uh
[26:10] cutting edge uh power generation
[26:13] technology that uh there are very few
[26:16] times in my life when I felt like oh I I
[26:17] got to see something really cool that's
[26:19] going to change uh the way the way
[26:22] things work in this world and and I got
[26:24] that opportunity. So uh linear
[26:26] generation look it up and check it out.
[26:29] It's really cool. Um
[26:33] council public we are tminus two weeks
[26:37] to onion days. Uh, and I just wanted to give a quick plug. Uh, we've been
[26:42] working really hard to get our concert
[26:45] all in order. We had an update today and
[26:47] Aaron Watson will be coming. Uh, the
[26:49] show is going to be amazing. Um, band
[26:52] and singer, everything. So, uh, I'd
[26:55] encourage you all to to put that on your
[26:57] calendar to attend that at the petite
[26:58] meet. Uh and then um for those of you uh
[27:02] I know that Janine gave some marching
[27:04] orders to sign up for uh the onion days
[27:08] uh assignments. If you if you missed
[27:10] that or whatever, uh let me know and I
[27:13] will we have space for you. I promise.
[27:16] So uh we're just so excited uh for Onion
[27:19] Days this year and want to invite the
[27:21] community to participate in that. So
[27:23] thanks everybody.
[27:23] >> Will will the parade route be uh
[27:26] available? The parade route will be
[27:28] available. Uh it will be paved and then
[27:32] work will continue after Labor Day. So
[27:37] >> I think it's safe to say ho High Water
[27:39] is not going to stop that.
[27:41] >> Might be walking through wet asphalt,
[27:43] but we're doing it.
[27:46] >> Okay. Any other staff?
[27:53] having our first.
[27:56] >> Oh, good. Thank you. It's nice to know.
[28:00] Okay, we'll move off of staff reports
[28:03] and go to council reports. We'll start
[28:05] with council ris. Oh,
[28:08] >> I didn't see you.
[28:09] >> Donna's online.
[28:10] >> That was Donna. Well,
[28:11] >> Travis is gonna come up, too.
[28:12] >> Yeah,
[28:13] >> Donna.
[28:15] I guess you wait for Travis and then
[28:18] we'll we won't forget you. Oh, I don't
[28:20] want to wait for Travis. Just kidding.
[28:22] >> He's already He's already up to it.
[28:23] >> Oh,
[28:26] >> we'll get to you.
[28:28] >> Uh, mayor and council, it's my great
[28:30] privilege to introduce you to Joshua
[28:31] Reed Head. Josh, if you could stand up.
[28:34] Uh, so tonight we're having you appoint
[28:37] him as the city engineer. Robert Melanie
[28:39] and I interviewed him and we made the
[28:41] offer and he graciously accepted
[28:43] obviously with the contingent that you
[28:45] guys approve this position. So, um, he's
[28:49] a BYU graduate and I didn't hold that
[28:52] against him with Anders. [laughter]
[28:55] [clears throat]
[28:55] >> That's in his favor, tell you.
[28:56] >> But I don't know if you have any
[28:57] questions or you want him to come up and
[28:58] introduce himself. Whatever you guys
[29:00] want to do, but
[29:01] >> I know we have an action on him as well.
[29:04] So,
[29:05] >> I'd love if he'd come.
[29:06] >> Come on.
[29:06] >> Introduce yourself. That'd be awesome.
[29:08] >> Tell us about your family and who you
[29:10] are.
[29:11] Maybe
[29:14] » everybody has it. It's I have a family,
[29:18] but [laughter and clears throat] yeah.
[29:19] Um yeah, I uh born and raised here in
[29:22] Utah Valley, Springville, most my life.
[29:25] Um and married a wonderful woman from
[29:30] Arizona and live here with our four kids
[29:32] here in Springville. Well, in
[29:34] Springville, we're renting. We love it
[29:37] down here, though. and uh um super
[29:41] grateful for this opportunity. Uh Sean,
[29:44] one of your linemen, is my
[29:46] brother-in-law and he uh really
[29:48] encouraged me to to look into this
[29:51] position. I I wasn't necessarily
[29:53] looking, but I'm very grateful um that
[29:56] he he gave me a little nudge, a few
[29:58] nudges, and uh uh if it all works out, I
[30:04] think it'll be a wonderful opportunity
[30:05] to me to serve the city of Pace. I I'm
[30:07] in uh private consulting now and there's a whole lot more heart in uh
[30:14] working working with you guys for for
[30:17] Pacin City.
[30:19] >> Um
[30:20] but yeah, uh that that's me in a
[30:23] nutshell.
[30:24] >> Let's exchange that if it works out to
[30:26] when it works out. It will work out.
[30:28] >> Thank you.
[30:30] >> Thanks for being here. Remind us your
[30:32] name one more time. Uh
[30:33] >> Josh Reedhead.
[30:34] Yes, sir. Excellent.
[30:37] Okay. Thank you.
[30:38] >> Thank you.
[30:42] >> Okay.
[30:42] >> Hi, Mayor. I thought you'd moved on to
[30:43] the next item. So, that's
[30:45] >> it's okay. We when we come to that item,
[30:47] we'll just not worry about calling you
[30:50] up and we'll we'll make that action.
[30:53] Okay. Uh, Donna,
[30:57] >> hey. I just um wanted to let the council
[31:00] know that our Candace Hope, our um one
[31:05] of our librarians here, was awarded um
[31:08] librarian of the month through Bywater,
[31:10] which is our the support system. It's our system for our catalog and
[31:18] everything and our website. She um she's
[31:22] worked really close with them since we
[31:26] um what's the word? We migrated to them
[31:28] in 2016 and she was she's been um at the forefront of everything we've
[31:34] done here at the library technologically
[31:36] with help. I mean Dale obviously but um
[31:39] and Jason have been so great but Candace
[31:41] really carries the the weight of it here
[31:43] at the library. and she was awarded that
[31:45] through by water because they've also
[31:48] highlighted her website several times.
[31:50] She's just done a really good job and I
[31:51] just wanted to make sure she got
[31:53] recognized and she also does the onion
[31:55] day booklet for anybody who thinks how
[31:58] great the onion day booklet goes. That
[31:59] that's that's Candace also. So I just
[32:02] wanted to make sure she got highlighted
[32:04] for that. Thanks.
[32:07] >> Thank you, Donna. That that's wonderful
[32:09] news to to hear and glad you shared that
[32:11] with us.
[32:13] Okay. Any other staff?
[32:17] If not, we'll move on to council. As I
[32:20] was stating, we'll go to with council
[32:21] provos guard.
[32:23] >> Um
[32:25] yeah, I I've got a couple things
[32:27] exciting. Um, I've been working with a
[32:30] lot of department head, Robert and Dave,
[32:32] uh, with several projects, several
[32:35] items, and I'm just I'm just pleased
[32:38] with the positive,
[32:40] uh, the way they're willing to help, the
[32:42] way they're willing to make suggestions
[32:43] on resources and what have you. So,
[32:46] you'd pass that on to each of them.
[32:49] They're just wonderful. Um,
[32:52] beautifification committee continues to
[32:53] roll forward. Uh we have another project
[32:57] if you would like to join us on uh the
[33:00] 29th, Saturday the 29th at 7 a.m. We are
[33:04] going to tackle
[33:06] the north interchange
[33:08] uh weeds.
[33:12] [laughter] I know uh we're excited to jump in and get that
[33:17] ready for Labor Day. Uh there is
[33:19] initiative for all of you that are here
[33:22] with the beautifification committee that
[33:24] we are pushing through uh the different
[33:27] churches not only the LDS church but
[33:30] we've had contact with all five others
[33:35] if they reported at beautifification
[33:37] committee. So uh look for the future of
[33:40] some some projects uh that we've
[33:43] identified as a beautifification
[33:45] committee and as a city council. Uh
[33:48] we've also sent a letter out to several
[33:50] residents uh asking that they
[33:55] uh beautify their yards with with things
[33:58] that are not in ordinance such as too
[34:02] many parked cars, uh overgrown noxious
[34:05] weeds and what have you. We had a report
[34:08] by the chief that all of the letters
[34:10] that we sent to the businesses, probably
[34:13] about 90% of them have done uh something
[34:17] uh positive and even even the residents
[34:21] that we've sent letters to there's uh
[34:23] there's always one or two negative but
[34:25] for the most part they've been received
[34:27] very well. So excited to be part of the
[34:30] beautifification committee and the ideas
[34:31] and things that they're rolling forward
[34:34] on. Um
[34:36] thank you Moss.
[34:40] >> Um I have a couple things. Um, a couple
[34:44] weeks ago I had the opportunity to serve
[34:47] at my third salmon supper and it was
[34:49] amazing and it was so much fun and the
[34:52] salmon is the best in the world and met
[34:55] a ton of people. I even had somebody say
[34:57] they had just gotten back from Alaska
[35:00] and had salmon up there and our salmon
[35:02] was better. Um, just it was just
[35:06] amazing. It's always amazing to me to
[35:08] meet so many people that come to that have connection to Pacin in some
[35:14] way or another and it's an it's a great
[35:17] community event and I look forward to
[35:18] the next one. And Chief Spencer, did you
[35:20] ever find out how much salmon we served?
[35:28] » Wow. And how many people how many
[35:31] tickets did we sell?
[35:36] That's amazing.
[35:38] And I I just love this tradition. And on
[35:42] another note, another tradition, Onion
[35:44] Days, is coming up. And I'm so excited.
[35:45] And it's just so neat to have have our
[35:48] founders pictures right here. And I
[35:51] wonder if they ever even imagined
[35:54] how much influence Pacin would have and
[35:57] how how many people have a connection to
[36:00] PAC and go out into the world and then
[36:01] come back for things like the salmon
[36:03] supper or onion days. And it's just an
[36:05] amazing thing to honor our forebears. So
[36:09] thank you so much Teresa for doing that.
[36:12] And that's all I've got.
[36:13] >> I don't thanks. I don't generally say
[36:15] anything with when it comes to council
[36:17] reports, but this time I will because of
[36:19] our name Pac. Uh I had just happened to
[36:23] be downtown uh and noticed a husband and
[36:26] a wife and their daughter enjoying our
[36:28] main street. Uh and so I approached
[36:31] them, asked them how how they liked what
[36:33] we done. They absolutely loved it. They
[36:35] were from Springville. They had never
[36:37] been down Main Street before.
[36:40] And uh so I I talked to him about how
[36:43] Pacin got its name, James Pace and his
[36:47] son, and uh told him that story. And it
[36:50] just so happens,
[36:53] and I'm I'm glad I stopped and talk to
[36:54] him, their daughter's name is Pac. They
[36:57] named her Pac. And they they were glad
[37:01] to know the history of how that name
[37:03] came to be. So we are proud of uh our
[37:06] founder and and our name.
[37:09] Okay, go ahead.
[37:11] >> Thanks, Mayor. I want to thank uh all of
[37:13] the staff and especially the residents
[37:14] that are here tonight. It's so wonderful
[37:16] to see a packed house. This is
[37:17] beautiful. Thank you for coming, for
[37:19] caring enough about our community to
[37:21] show up. I'm so grateful for the
[37:22] Daughters of the Utah Pioneers and for
[37:24] your work. Uh my grandmother was a was a proud product and believer in that
[37:29] organization. And so I helped set up
[37:31] many of tables and chairs as a youth for lunches and dinners for the
[37:34] Daughters of the Utah Pioneers.
[37:37] grateful for our pioneer heritage in
[37:39] this in this valley in this area. Want
[37:41] to update the the the council and staff
[37:44] and mayor a little bit on on South Utah
[37:46] Valley Power Systems. Um we're about to
[37:49] complete our transmission line through
[37:51] Spanish Fork and uh just a little
[37:53] education everyone. We are we are one of
[37:55] the owners of the South Utah Valley
[37:56] Power Systems along with Spanish Fork,
[37:59] Salem, Springville, and Strawberry
[38:01] Electric District SCSD. Uh so we're having a lot of catching up to do
[38:06] to provide the needed power to to so
[38:08] many residents uh that comes from the overusage of uh of us charging
[38:14] everything now and uh and using so much
[38:16] power and I'm grateful to see that
[38:18] project moving forward. As Robert
[38:20] mentioned, we we traveled and went and
[38:21] saw some linear generators that uh
[38:23] Robert truly encapsulated how I felt
[38:25] too. That was that was one of those
[38:27] times you sit back and think, "Wow, this
[38:28] might change the world of of generation.
[38:31] It can run on any type of fuel without
[38:33] changing anything. The only there's only
[38:35] a few wearable parts on it and you could
[38:38] stand next to this generator and have a
[38:40] conversation. It was extremely quiet and
[38:43] uh and it's clean as well. So, this was
[38:45] a really really neat thing. And so,
[38:46] we're looking into this. And I will
[38:49] never promise residents something I I
[38:51] can't uphold. I I'm not going to sit and
[38:53] promise you that utility rates will
[38:54] never go up because that's a fallacy.
[38:56] But what I can promise you is that we're
[38:58] doing everything in conjunction with our
[38:59] power director to make sure that PAC
[39:01] city power produces enough for our
[39:03] residents at a very viable rate and and
[39:07] a rate that we can hopefully sustain and
[39:09] keep level for years to come as we have
[39:11] some short-term pain for hopefully some
[39:13] long-term gain to lever out these level
[39:15] out these prior these uh these power
[39:17] costs with this new technology.
[39:19] So thankful for the salmon supper.
[39:21] Chief, tell uh tell tell your
[39:23] firefighters thank you so much for
[39:24] serving us. That was a hot day. 100°
[39:27] outside plus the fires and them carting
[39:29] the fish back and forth. And I'm so
[39:31] bummed to hear that we sold all those
[39:33] tickets. They're so hard to get and then
[39:34] 200 people don't show up. Oh my
[39:37] goodness. We did run out of salmon so we
[39:39] started serving carp from Utah Lake.
[39:41] That was a big hit.
[39:43] >> Don't start that rumor.
[39:45] >> No, we we had plenty of salmon. It was a great event. as we continue to
[39:49] grow in pace and it's so important that
[39:51] we maintain those those kinds of events
[39:53] the band concerts the salmon supper
[39:55] onion days to keep our small town flavor
[39:58] and uh thank you chief for the update on
[40:00] the fire station and park that's also
[40:02] coming in next to it and then for bay
[40:04] committee I'm grateful for your
[40:06] presentation I love the forbay committee
[40:08] thanks to the mayor and council for for
[40:10] helping get that conservation easement
[40:11] across the line in a hundred years we
[40:13] can look back and that looks the same as
[40:15] it does now so thank you all so much
[40:18] that's all I have Mayor.
[40:19] >> Okay, Council Smith.
[40:21] >> Um, I'm going to reiterate some of what
[40:24] others have said, but this was my first
[40:27] salmon supper serving and attending.
[40:31] So, I've said that serving has actually
[40:34] gotten me more involved in the events of
[40:37] town. And so, um, but I have to give a
[40:40] shout out to Lieutenant CPPley of the
[40:42] police department. Hopefully, someone
[40:44] can pass it on to him.
[40:46] I almost passed out a few times. It was
[40:49] so hot. And he made sure I had plenty of
[40:53] water and he checked on me and he
[40:55] offered to come in in his uniform and
[40:56] serve for me. And so he was just
[40:59] incredibly awesome that he just made
[41:02] sure that I was okay. Um
[41:05] I am excited for onion days and I've
[41:08] already got my whole calendar full. So I
[41:10] hope everyone is excited for that.
[41:13] And then the two things I wanted to
[41:15] follow up on. Um, have we had any
[41:19] movement with the Tabitha wave bin
[41:22] request? Those mattresses outside are
[41:25] quite aesthetically pleasing.
[41:30] I would love to know who dropped them.
[41:33] Yeah. So, that was my first. If we could
[41:36] get a followup on that. Um, the second
[41:39] is kind of going back to Ryan's talking
[41:42] about the power. I am excited about the
[41:46] UAP's convention to learn more. Um, and
[41:50] Sean's great at answering things, but
[41:52] curious where we are of the
[41:56] information we were going to provide for
[41:58] residents to kind of break down
[42:00] everything cuz there was another thing
[42:02] that came up the other day and I had to
[42:04] reach out to Sean and we found an
[42:06] inconsistency of what it's called on the
[42:07] bills. So, just
[42:10] >> I think it was in regards to solar,
[42:12] correct?
[42:12] >> But then found out everyone's charged
[42:14] it's named something different on your
[42:16] bill. So, and then I didn't even it
[42:19] didn't even pull up on my bill, but it's
[42:20] built in. So,
[42:22] >> thanks for following up on that.
[42:24] >> Um, we've been compiling all all of that
[42:27] information.
[42:28] >> Okay.
[42:29] >> Trying to get all of it
[42:32] >> in a way that is actually
[42:33] representational, okay? An apples to
[42:35] apples comparison because some of the
[42:38] information that our other sister cities
[42:39] published maybe put them in a better
[42:42] light than they really are. So, we're read we're going through all of
[42:46] that and then we'll update all of you.
[42:47] >> Okay.
[42:48] >> Thanks for following up.
[42:49] >> Yeah. But that's it. So, just thanks to
[42:51] everyone.
[42:53] >> Thanks, Lacy.
[42:56] >> Okay.
[42:58] We'll go ahead and we'll we won't call
[43:00] you up, Travis, but this next is
[43:04] [laughter]
[43:04] >> okay.
[43:04] >> I'll apologize. I got you resolution.
[43:07] >> Two and a half months of doing both
[43:08] jobs. I got too excited.
[43:09] >> That's okay.
[43:11] uh appointment of a new city engineer.
[43:13] So Tra any any discussion council?
[43:17] I said not if when. So I I I'll stand
[43:20] with that.
[43:21] >> I'm excited for Travis to have another
[43:23] engineer to geek out with.
[43:25] >> Oh yeah, it'll be good.
[43:27] >> That's all.
[43:28] >> Okay. Unless there's any any more
[43:30] discussion regarding
[43:31] >> Just to be clear, this is this is
[43:32] filling a vacancy. This is not the
[43:34] creation of a new
[43:35] >> That's right. Exactly. Yep.
[43:38] >> Yeah. And a badly needed one. Yes. So,
[43:41] okay, then I'm ready for a motion on
[43:43] this item.
[43:45] >> Mayor, I motion that we approve the
[43:48] appointment of our new city engineer.
[43:51] >> Is there a second?
[43:52] >> I'll second that.
[43:53] >> Okay, it's been motioned and seconded.
[43:56] Roll call vote starting with council
[43:57] guard.
[43:58] >> Yes.
[43:59] >> Council Mos,
[43:59] >> yes.
[44:00] >> Council Rolley,
[44:00] >> yes.
[44:01] >> Council Smith,
[44:02] >> yes.
[44:03] >> Welcome.
[44:03] >> Yep.
[44:04] >> You're in.
[44:05] >> Do we need to get a picture? Did you
[44:06] mention somebody mentioned a picture?
[44:09] Love a picture. Let's do a picture.
[44:12] >> Josh, come on up.
[44:40] You won't be able to see your
[44:43] >> number
[44:49] one.
[45:10] Okay, we'll go on to number two.
[45:12] Ordinance amendment to the Pace City
[45:14] Code title 11 chapter 16 cemetery.
[45:18] Uh Tracy's now who's going to present
[45:20] that? Dave, you are?
[45:21] >> Yeah.
[45:23] >> Yes. Sorry. Tracy was planning on this,
[45:25] but he had some PGA meetings out of
[45:28] state, so he asked that we take care of
[45:31] it. I do have Derek here. Derek, why
[45:33] don't you come up? Derek's our sexton.
[45:36] He's put a lot of work into this since
[45:38] he was appointed uh to that position,
[45:40] and they've they've
[45:44] looked at several cities. They've talked
[45:46] to many of the mortuaries that we deal
[45:48] with and tried to make our ordinance uh
[45:54] better representative of how the how we
[45:55] do business down there. I don't know if
[45:57] you have anything to say on the
[45:59] contents, but and and you've had it in
[46:01] your your packet if you've had a chance
[46:04] to read it, but we're we're we're
[46:06] renaming a baby land to what was that? I
[46:10] just forgot.
[46:12] Um,
[46:13] >> Angelard,
[46:13] >> Angel Yeah,
[46:14] >> Angel Gardens.
[46:15] We're just updating how
[46:18] we do things. We're We're hoping in the
[46:20] next year or so to have a a cremation
[46:23] wall uh to to help um the residents that want to do that. So, so I feel like
[46:30] the biggest part of what we did here was
[46:32] there was a lot of of monument companies
[46:35] when they brought stones. There was
[46:37] issues of how and when and where they
[46:40] put them. We just made it simplified for
[46:42] them and we're trying to make it
[46:44] simplified for them of of paying online
[46:47] as well as like when when to meet and
[46:50] all that. So, a lot of the ordinance
[46:52] stuff change was more to like for the
[46:54] headstones and more for the the skirts
[46:57] of the headstones more for
[47:00] more to help the community as well.
[47:01] There was a few few times that like
[47:03] someone wanted to build a headstone and
[47:05] it wasn't up to what they wanted. So we
[47:08] expanded it a little bit, made it so
[47:10] that they could get what they wanted is
[47:12] basically what we did with with the
[47:13] ordinance. So
[47:17] >> yeah, and as I read through it, it
[47:18] looked good. And I I think it gives you
[47:19] some some autonomy to work with families
[47:21] as well, which is which is really good.
[47:23] And also streamlining of of making it
[47:25] simpler as these families are grieving
[47:27] already. I'd hate for the cemetery to be
[47:29] one more thing they have to worry about
[47:31] and stress out about. So I was glad to
[47:32] see this is streamlined, made easier for
[47:34] everybody. And we have we have updated
[47:38] Bobby has been working [snorts] hard.
[47:39] She's she's she works part-time in the
[47:41] front office. They would love to have
[47:43] her full-time, but she's been working on
[47:46] updating and and people can come in,
[47:49] take every get everything done. They
[47:51] they'll meet with Derek, but then all
[47:53] the payments are run through the front
[47:55] office here and Bobby and it just it
[47:57] streams like streams lineing things and
[47:59] makes sure that we don't have any issues
[48:01] that way. So, our recommendation, if the
[48:04] council's comfortable, is to adopt the
[48:06] amendments to the sanitary ordinance.
[48:09] >> Can I Oh, I was just going to say, is
[48:11] there any discussion?
[48:12] >> I was going to ask just really quick.
[48:14] Um, on the abandonment of rights, then I
[48:18] know it referenced a Utah code section.
[48:21] >> I'll be honest, I didn't look it up, so
[48:23] I just thought I'd ask really quick.
[48:25] >> Do we reach out to the people before
[48:28] like it's abandoned? So what I
[48:30] understand, so that that's our biggest
[48:31] thing is yes, we we aspect like all all
[48:35] resources to try to find who who it
[48:38] belongs to. And we've from what I from
[48:40] what I understand, we've never ever done
[48:43] that really.
[48:43] >> Okay.
[48:44] >> It hasn't ever really been done. There
[48:46] is some issues with the old section of
[48:48] the cemetery. There are there are some
[48:50] records that are lost. Um, that's where
[48:52] Bobby would be a huge benefit to our
[48:55] team is because there's there's old
[48:57] records that she's going through.
[48:59] There's unknowns out. [clears throat]
[49:01] We have names. It sounds bad, but
[49:03] they're out in the street and we're
[49:05] trying to bring them into the old
[49:07] section of the cemetery.
[49:08] >> Oh, wow.
[49:08] >> Because they are there. We just don't
[49:11] know where. And so, we've actually found
[49:13] some records through the county. So,
[49:17] we've been we've been working on a lot
[49:19] of that. So, there's there's some
[49:22] >> history with the the cemetery that that
[49:25] I don't want to mess with the old until
[49:27] we absolutely know 100% who's there,
[49:30] where they're at,
[49:32] >> and that. So,
[49:32] >> and and I'm guessing this is not a
[49:34] unique problem.
[49:35] >> It's not it's it's universal across all
[49:37] cemeteries because because the way that
[49:39] like I've talked to dozens of and back
[49:43] in the day, their record keeping wasn't
[49:45] great, wasn't perfect. Um, during the
[49:48] Great Depression, people would put
[49:50] people into the ground and they would
[49:53] accidentally dig them up because they
[49:54] didn't know they were there. So, there's things that happened in
[49:58] cemeteries that we're trying to do our
[50:00] best to find that.
[50:02] >> Okay.
[50:02] >> Where Bobby would be a huge asset to our
[50:06] team. So,
[50:07] >> okay,
[50:08] >> she is a huge asset.
[50:10] >> That's something we can consider.
[50:11] >> Yeah, we're looking at that with the the
[50:13] next budget year. But,
[50:14] >> yep. But under the state code, there's
[50:16] there are specific provisions you have
[50:18] to do. If if you can't locate them, you
[50:20] have to publish in the paper. And
[50:21] there's there's ways to try to give
[50:23] notice before you take action and take
[50:25] those back.
[50:26] >> Okay. That that was my biggest thing,
[50:28] especially when it came to like the
[50:29] family plot areas. And it just kind of
[50:32] popped in my head like,
[50:33] >> oh, that would be horrible if you
[50:36] someone bought it and then it's gone.
[50:38] And so, okay.
[50:41] >> Okay. Any other discussion?
[50:44] Okay.
[50:45] >> Okay. Lacking any other discussion, I'm ready for a motion on on this
[50:49] ordinance.
[50:49] >> Mayor, [clears throat] go ahead.
[50:51] >> Mayor I motion that we approve the
[50:53] amendment to the Pacin City Code Title
[50:55] 11 Chapter 16 City Cemetery.
[50:58] >> I'll second.
[50:59] >> I have a motion and seconded. Roll call
[51:01] vote. Starting with council Smith.
[51:02] >> Yes.
[51:03] >> Council Rowling.
[51:04] >> Yes.
[51:04] >> Council Moss.
[51:05] >> Yes.
[51:05] >> Council Postgard.
[51:07] >> Yes.
[51:07] >> Okay. Wonderful. Motion carries.
[51:11] Moving to number three, public hearing
[51:13] resolution adopting the amended pace and
[51:15] city fee schedule regarding cemetery
[51:17] fees.
[51:20] >> This part, this is a a proposal to amend
[51:23] uh the fees for the the sal lots. Um
[51:27] Tracy and Bobby
[51:29] um and and Derek
[51:32] I'm trying to move this just for the
[51:35] council's um information went through a
[51:38] lot of the cities in Utah County about
[51:40] what they charge. Um
[51:45] and so I don't know if you've had a ch
[51:47] Well, this wasn't in your packet but
[51:48] here's Pacin City in the blue for a
[51:50] single lot residence 800 non-residents
[51:53] 12. You go over to Santa Quinn, it's 8
[51:56] and 2,000. Salem is 1,00 to 2500.
[52:00] Spanish Forks anywhere from a,000 to,400
[52:03] up to 16 to 2,000. You go across
[52:06] Springville.
[52:07] Um, Pac and Mapleton are probably some
[52:10] of the lower ones. Um, but it's the one
[52:13] that stood out that that
[52:16] Derek and he can speak to this is the
[52:18] non-residents
[52:20] are very low compared to what other
[52:21] cities are doing. And it sounds like
[52:23] we're getting a lot of people
[52:24] non-residents coming here because it's
[52:26] so cheap.
[52:27] >> Yeah. So, it's a huge like since I've
[52:30] been in this position, I've kind of seen
[52:31] that the the non-residents fee is one of
[52:34] the lowest. And so, we do we get a lot
[52:36] of people that are from other cities,
[52:39] even Salt Lake, even somewhere like
[52:42] because their fees are so heavy up there
[52:44] that they come down here.
[52:47] I I I speak highly of the cemetery, but
[52:51] it's probably one of the most prettiest
[52:53] cemeteries in Utah County. If you if you
[52:55] travel cemeteries, it is one of the most
[52:58] pristine, well taken care of, maintained
[53:00] cemeteries. You can go to Spanish, you
[53:02] can go to Sanwin. We put a high standard
[53:05] on it. We really do. We care a lot. So,
[53:08] I I just feel like if if you want to be
[53:10] buried in PAC cemetery and you're a
[53:14] non-resident, you should probably pay
[53:16] equal or somewhat close to other cities
[53:18] non-resident.
[53:20] >> Y I I have one question about that. Uh
[53:23] as I looked at this uh my mind
[53:25] immediately went to people that were
[53:29] born and raised here in PAC were
[53:30] educated
[53:32] um through the school system and then
[53:34] moved away because of employment and now
[53:37] wants to come back here to be buried.
[53:40] Do we treat them as non-resident? Do we
[53:42] treat them as a resident?
[53:45] Good question.
[53:46] >> We we have treated them as non-resident
[53:48] if they've moved and that's that's
[53:50] tough. I I know when I've had discussion
[53:52] with Tracy and Derek, I don't know if
[53:53] you've had that discussion too. It's
[53:56] some cemeteries now a lot of you still
[53:58] do the resident non-resident. Some
[54:00] cemeteries are going away from that.
[54:02] Just put it like in the middle because
[54:04] so [clears throat] you don't have that
[54:06] argument. some people that have lived
[54:07] here their whole life but have to go to
[54:09] a a care center in another town
[54:12] >> or some that have never been a resident
[54:14] and all of a sudden come here. There's
[54:17] just
[54:19] he likes the idea of of just making it
[54:22] one rate for everybody, but I know that
[54:23] there's a there's a reason to have to
[54:26] have your residents have a better break.
[54:28] So, we didn't recommend that.
[54:30] >> I think it's important too we give the
[54:32] section that autonomy to make some of
[54:34] those calls. And also I think I think
[54:36] too with with someone that's lived here
[54:38] for years and years and only moved away
[54:40] to go to a care facility, I would
[54:42] absolutely call them a resident. And I
[54:44] hope we are.
[54:45] >> And we do.
[54:46] >> Um we do usually on those if they're at
[54:49] a care facility for x amount of years,
[54:51] we do. And they've been living here, we consider them a resident for sure.
[54:55] >> What I tell people is so I'm I'm a
[54:57] Spanish for boy raised in Spanish for
[55:00] guess what? I'll probably not be buried
[55:02] in Spanish for so I feel like I'll
[55:06] probably be buried in PAC because now I
[55:09] become a PAC resident. I married a girl
[55:10] from PAC. So I feel like the benefit of
[55:14] living here paying and you know if you
[55:17] move away like I moved away from Spanish
[55:19] for I I doubt I mean I spent my dad was
[55:22] a teacher there for 32 years. They're
[55:25] not going to give me a non-resident fee.
[55:27] I mean they will give me a non-resident
[55:29] fee. So I feel like to give the
[55:32] residents that live here that that's kind of where where I'm at.
[55:37] >> So
[55:38] >> well it's it's it's expensive to run a
[55:40] cemetery and when we have to replace you
[55:43] know add to the cemetery it costs a lot
[55:45] of money.
[55:46] >> Yeah.
[55:47] >> Can I ask why? Um I I understand the
[55:50] raising of prices. I get that. the one
[55:53] that kind of gave me a little like
[55:56] the increase on the infant one. I felt
[55:59] like it was
[56:02] >> it went up 250 versus others didn't go
[56:05] up as much. And also like I don't know
[56:08] anything about cemeteries other than
[56:10] what I you know going but I guess like
[56:12] to me I'm like it's a smaller plot like
[56:15] and I couldn't imagine having to go pay
[56:18] I guess
[56:20] >> it is negotiable. It is 100%. Um, I feel
[56:23] like most most of the time what happens
[56:25] with infants, so you're aware, is
[56:28] they're buried on top of grandparents.
[56:31] And so with that, all they pay is um an
[56:34] opening closing fee.
[56:36] >> Okay.
[56:37] >> So that's the majority of what I've
[56:38] seen. But yeah, like I said, it's
[56:40] negotiable because even the the
[56:41] veterans, it didn't it didn't move
[56:44] because when I got in there, I didn't
[56:46] understand why the veterans were paying
[56:47] $50 more. In my world, I'm like, they're
[56:50] veterans. they served our country. So, I
[56:52] left I left the veterans at 850. And as
[56:55] for infants, I I'm not opposed to to
[56:58] keeping that at the same price.
[57:00] >> I guess that was just my biggest is that
[57:02] I I I wouldn't want to add an extra fee
[57:06] to a family that I mean, any death is
[57:09] obviously
[57:11] not a great thing to go through, but an
[57:12] infant, I couldn't like that's just as a mom, I saw that and
[57:17] just thought, why is it so much more of
[57:18] an increase? And so
[57:20] >> yeah, I I thought the same thing, Lacy,
[57:22] and I'd like to see the infant cost
[57:23] right around $400 if we were going to
[57:25] raise it and no higher than that.
[57:27] >> Yeah.
[57:29] >> So, say that again.
[57:31] >> $400 on the infant fee rather than uh
[57:33] the 600.
[57:35] >> The 600 what's currently what it
[57:37] currently is. They want to
[57:39] >> Well, the 850 is the green. Yeah. Well,
[57:40] let's let's say go down then. Let's go.
[57:42] >> You want to leave it at 600 or
[57:43] >> 600 or even go less? Because if you look
[57:45] at the rate, we're we're increasing the
[57:47] uh the the the resident rate from 800 to
[57:50] a,000.
[57:51] >> You know, I that that's
[57:53] >> 20%.
[57:54] >> That's expensive, too.
[57:57] >> But I see the cost and we're still one
[57:58] of the cheaper, but
[57:59] >> yeah, I would just like to keep the
[58:00] infinite at least where it's at.
[58:02] Personally, it's
[58:04] >> I agree.
[58:04] >> Just a So, do you want to keep it at the
[58:07] 600? Is that what it is right now? I
[58:09] mean, I do like Ryan's thing, but I I
[58:11] think that the 600 is more is better
[58:14] than 850. So, yes, I that's fine.
[58:17] >> I thought the the previous slide showed
[58:19] that our infant rate was like 250.
[58:21] >> That's the open and close, I think.
[58:23] Right.
[58:24] >> That's the open and close.
[58:26] >> Okay.
[58:26] >> Yeah.
[58:27] >> And like I said, majority since I've
[58:29] been in the majority of the time,
[58:31] infants are usually buried on top of
[58:33] grandparents.
[58:35] >> So, they wouldn't have to buy a separate
[58:36] lot.
[58:36] >> They wouldn't have to buy a separate
[58:37] lot. pay the open and close.
[58:39] >> So that's if they buy the entire lot,
[58:41] the plot.
[58:41] >> So on this new one though, it crosses
[58:44] out the resident infant and just leaves
[58:47] it at the 550 and a,000. Can we
[58:52] not do that under the open and close
[58:55] single? It's crossed out.
[58:59] >> Oh, that's like
[59:00] >> is that you're trying to get rid of
[59:02] that? bury me really really deep so my
[59:05] grandkids and their spouses can be
[59:07] >> does that do you see that
[59:09] >> under under the open and close right
[59:10] there the resident infant and non-infant
[59:12] and the resident veteran is crossed out
[59:15] like it's with a line of through it
[59:18] >> so are we
[59:21] out
[59:23] >> yeah that's a good good thought
[59:25] >> okay because I didn't know if we were
[59:26] just
[59:26] >> I think Kathy that you've you've got
[59:28] something to add don't you
[59:30] >> I didn't know if we were making it all
[59:31] the same price for open and close.
[59:35] >> Sorry, I'm not trying to make it
[59:36] complicated.
[59:38] >> It's crossed out. That's old rate. It's
[59:41] either new language or we just
[59:43] eliminate.
[59:44] >> Okay, so it would be nothing because in
[59:46] the green it's nothing.
[59:47] >> 250 and 350 to open close, but we put
[59:50] zero here,
[59:51] >> right? We eliminated that.
[59:53] >> Okay. So,
[59:53] >> so if it's a infant open and close, they
[59:56] will not be charged,
[59:57] >> right? That's my understanding. Yeah. or
[1:00:00] would they be ch charged the same rate
[1:00:01] >> or are they going to be charged the same
[1:00:03] rate as an adult? That's what I was
[1:00:05] >> worried about.
[1:00:06] >> And I can't tell you on that.
[1:00:08] >> Can we verify that?
[1:00:09] >> Yeah, this was how it was handed to me.
[1:00:11] So, I'm assuming that they don't charge
[1:00:14] for that. Is that why
[1:00:16] >> question? I don't know. I maybe it's the total, but we can we can
[1:00:20] definitely look at that.
[1:00:20] >> Okay. So, if we approve this, can we
[1:00:22] like put that?
[1:00:23] >> Maybe uh if it's not too much trouble,
[1:00:25] maybe we just send this back and you
[1:00:26] guys
[1:00:27] >> You want to bring it back? Let's look
[1:00:29] through this.
[1:00:30] >> Keep the infant the same and then uh
[1:00:33] >> figure out the not the open and close.
[1:00:36] >> Okay. So, the direction is to to keep
[1:00:38] the
[1:00:39] >> the uh the same as it was and then we
[1:00:43] got to check on the
[1:00:44] >> figure out the resident veteran and the
[1:00:46] infant open and close. Yeah.
[1:00:48] >> Okay. I think that's a good table.
[1:00:51] >> Okay.
[1:00:51] >> I have one question really quick. So,
[1:00:54] when someone is cremated, where do we
[1:00:55] put them now?
[1:00:57] in a regular plot
[1:00:59] >> almost the same thing. So, so what we do
[1:01:01] with a regular plot is we sell it but we
[1:01:04] also allow them to divide it up into
[1:01:06] cremation has become more and more a
[1:01:07] popular thing.
[1:01:09] >> So like he said I we I would love to see
[1:01:12] niche walls put in.
[1:01:14] >> My goal is to get niche walls. Um, so as
[1:01:18] of right now, most of the time they will
[1:01:20] buy a full plot.
[1:01:21] >> Mhm.
[1:01:21] >> And then there's four places for four
[1:01:23] cremations as well as as an infant like
[1:01:26] so. So so we divide a plot into four,
[1:01:29] but I almost make people dedicate them
[1:01:31] to a cremation plot or I require a vault
[1:01:34] for the cremation in case a traditional
[1:01:36] because realistically a traditional can
[1:01:38] go in the ground
[1:01:39] >> and then three can go on tops.
[1:01:42] >> Okay,
[1:01:42] >> if that makes sense. Yeah.
[1:01:44] >> So that's that's what we're seeing a lot
[1:01:46] of is is people families, they all know
[1:01:49] that they're going to be cremated. So
[1:01:51] they'll buy one plot and then we've just
[1:01:53] been dividing it.
[1:01:55] >> If we have a wall, it'll it'll save save
[1:01:58] area.
[1:01:58] >> And they project by 2030 that like
[1:02:00] anywhere from about 30 to 40% of people
[1:02:04] are going towards cremations. So it's a
[1:02:07] huge thing. So with the with the infant
[1:02:10] one, I would like to also like I mean
[1:02:12] future planning, I would like to have
[1:02:14] like an infant area as well as the
[1:02:16] cremain's area because as as the
[1:02:18] cemetery sits now, there's an area in
[1:02:21] the old section where there was infants.
[1:02:23] It got full then we just moved it to
[1:02:25] another section. I would love to have a
[1:02:27] dedicated area just for infants,
[1:02:30] >> like an infant garden where it's
[1:02:31] beautified with the niche wall. That's
[1:02:34] that would be my my
[1:02:35] >> I say you come back with a with a
[1:02:37] proposal.
[1:02:38] >> A lot of cities have that. A lot of
[1:02:39] cities have like a designated area for
[1:02:42] infants and cremations and they're there
[1:02:45] kind of be put together and beautified
[1:02:47] and there it's
[1:02:48] >> there's benches there.
[1:02:50] >> Yeah, it looks really nice. So So my
[1:02:52] goal is a sexton that's that's
[1:02:54] >> as the future that's what I'm pushing.
[1:02:56] >> Bring us back your your design your idea
[1:02:58] and let's do it.
[1:03:00] >> And thank you for changing the name of
[1:03:01] where the infants are too. I I got a lot
[1:03:03] of push back from especially women in
[1:03:06] the city that they were like baby horns.
[1:03:08] >> Yeah. I don't like I didn't like that
[1:03:09] either.
[1:03:09] >> So So I I talked to a bunch of other
[1:03:12] cemeteries and just got some ideas of
[1:03:14] what they did. That's kind of the
[1:03:15] direction we went.
[1:03:17] >> Okay. So there's no need for us to do a
[1:03:18] public hearing at this point in time if
[1:03:20] it's going to come back up for tableing.
[1:03:21] >> We need a motion to take
[1:03:22] >> It is set as a public hearing. If you
[1:03:24] want to open a public hearing in case
[1:03:25] people want to
[1:03:26] >> Okay.
[1:03:27] >> Because it's scheduled for tonight.
[1:03:29] >> We'll go I'll I'll take a motion to open
[1:03:31] a public hearing. So moved.
[1:03:33] >> Second.
[1:03:34] >> Okay. Roll call vote starting with
[1:03:36] council
[1:03:37] >> Smith.
[1:03:37] >> Yes.
[1:03:38] >> Council Helet.
[1:03:38] >> Yes.
[1:03:39] >> Council Rolley.
[1:03:40] >> Yes.
[1:03:40] >> Council Moss.
[1:03:41] >> Yes.
[1:03:41] >> Council Pos.
[1:03:43] >> Okay. Uh the motion carries. Uh we'll
[1:03:45] open up a public hearing on this item.
[1:03:48] >> Please step to the mic if you'd like to
[1:03:49] talk with us and speak clearly. Remind
[1:03:52] your your time limit would be right
[1:03:54] around three minutes. Uh and whether you
[1:03:56] agree or disagree with the information
[1:03:58] that we've pre had presented to us. So
[1:04:01] we'll go ahead and and and the other
[1:04:02] thing is to identify yourself as well.
[1:04:05] So we'll go to that point.
[1:04:10] Not seeing anybody would like to take
[1:04:12] advantage of the public hearing. I'll
[1:04:14] accept a motion to close it.
[1:04:16] >> Hang on. Oh, no. We have Oh, come on up.
[1:04:17] I'm sorry.
[1:04:18] >> I looked down on my paper too quick.
[1:04:22] >> I just have a question. Um, I'm an
[1:04:24] archaeologist and much of our work has
[1:04:26] to do with cemeteries in understanding
[1:04:29] the culture of the people who inter
[1:04:30] their their loved ones. Are there
[1:04:33] different rates for the place in the
[1:04:35] cemetery where people purchase pots?
[1:04:38] >> No.
[1:04:39] >> Okay. Simple. Good
[1:04:41] >> name, too.
[1:04:44] >> Connie Ericson.
[1:04:46] Okay.
[1:04:46] >> Beloved Connie Ericson.
[1:04:49] >> Thank you, Connie.
[1:04:51] >> Anyone else?
[1:04:54] >> [clears throat]
[1:04:55] >> Okay, not seeing anyone. I'll accept a
[1:04:57] motion to close the public hearing. So
[1:04:59] moved.
[1:05:00] >> Second.
[1:05:01] >> Oh, we got two seconds. Okay.
[1:05:02] >> And can have it.
[1:05:04] >> And you've got it. Okay. Roll call vote.
[1:05:06] Council provos guard.
[1:05:07] >> Yes.
[1:05:08] >> Council Moss.
[1:05:08] >> Yes. Council
[1:05:09] >> Willie.
[1:05:09] >> Yes.
[1:05:10] >> Council Plet.
[1:05:10] >> Yes.
[1:05:11] >> Council Smith.
[1:05:12] >> Yes.
[1:05:12] >> Okay.
[1:05:12] >> And I make a motion to table it now
[1:05:14] until
[1:05:15] >> Please do. I would make a motion that we
[1:05:17] table the [snorts] adoption the the
[1:05:19] adoption to amend pace and city fee
[1:05:21] schedule regarding se cemetery fees uh
[1:05:25] until staff can review the proposed
[1:05:27] >> a second
[1:05:28] >> and you we have a motion been second
[1:05:29] >> and I'll second adding that yeah we look
[1:05:32] at um clarifying the fee schedule
[1:05:34] including for veterans and then also uh
[1:05:38] not raising the infant lot rate but
[1:05:41] >> okay with your motion it's great but
[1:05:44] will you defer
[1:05:46] Okay. [laughter]
[1:05:49] >> Oh, yeah. You don't have your microphone
[1:05:50] on. It's not real.
[1:05:51] >> I heard it.
[1:05:53] >> Okay. Good. We have a motion been
[1:05:55] seconded. Uh roll call vote starting with council
[1:05:59] Smith.
[1:06:00] >> Yes.
[1:06:00] >> Council, yes.
[1:06:01] >> Council Roelly,
[1:06:02] >> yes.
[1:06:02] >> Council Moss,
[1:06:03] >> yes.
[1:06:04] >> Council Provoscar,
[1:06:05] >> yes.
[1:06:05] >> Okay. Thank you. The motion.
[1:06:07] >> We'll bring it back to next the next
[1:06:08] meeting.
[1:06:09] >> Okay. These next two, ladies and
[1:06:12] gentlemen, have to do with the uh uh
[1:06:15] Manglesen zone change on the e east side
[1:06:18] comprehensive plan. So, what we will do,
[1:06:21] we'll have Michael come up and talk
[1:06:23] about both of them and then uh after he
[1:06:27] talks about both of them, then we would
[1:06:29] like to have uh what we had talked about
[1:06:32] some for or some against. Give you some
[1:06:35] time there. uh whether we do that before
[1:06:38] council discussion or after we can we
[1:06:40] can play with that a little bit but
[1:06:42] we'll go ahead and list then we'll have
[1:06:43] to do each one of these separate but go
[1:06:46] ahead Michael
[1:06:49] thanks mayor um
[1:06:52] so this is two requests tonight uh first
[1:06:55] is a general plan amendment to the east
[1:06:57] side comprehensive plan which is um a
[1:07:00] specific area plan of the city and
[1:07:02] thereby an addendum to our general plan.
[1:07:06] Second request is for a zone change if
[1:07:09] the general plan amendment is approved.
[1:07:13] And the zone change would be we'll
[1:07:15] discuss that in a few minutes. Uh to
[1:07:18] give you some context of the area, I
[1:07:20] think most everybody knows where we're
[1:07:21] talking about, but here's a little map
[1:07:23] zoom in of the area. You can see the uh
[1:07:26] mouse cursor there. That is uh just
[1:07:29] north of that. You can see it's 10300 in
[1:07:32] the county or 100 south in PAC and to
[1:07:36] the east of that that's 1300 east in PAC
[1:07:40] and I can't quite read that 2300 west.
[1:07:44] >> Um okay
[1:07:51] so um like I said there's two approvals
[1:07:55] being sought tonight. one for an
[1:07:57] amendment to the eastside comprehensive
[1:07:58] plan from the active living designation
[1:08:01] to the traditional designation. Um and
[1:08:05] then the second request is for the R19
[1:08:08] residential zone change. Uh so city
[1:08:11] council's role tonight would be either
[1:08:13] approval or denial of both of these
[1:08:15] requests. Uh this has formerly gone to
[1:08:18] the planning commission. They had a
[1:08:20] public hearing there. They uh received
[1:08:23] much public comment both in person and
[1:08:27] emailed and written. Uh we read those
[1:08:30] comments into that public hearing. Uh
[1:08:34] council, I believe you've seen those
[1:08:36] comments and you've probably uh
[1:08:38] witnessed and watched that um that
[1:08:41] public hearing. Uh staff's role in this
[1:08:44] situation would be if these approvals
[1:08:47] were granted tonight, then staff would
[1:08:49] do any of the subdivision and site plan
[1:08:52] processes associated with development in
[1:08:55] this area.
[1:08:58] So necessary approvals for for what's
[1:09:02] being asked tonight. The only thing
[1:09:04] that's being asked for is the amendment
[1:09:07] to the east side comprehensive plan and
[1:09:09] the zoning amendment. There's other
[1:09:11] possible approvals that have not yet
[1:09:14] been applied for. One of them including
[1:09:16] the uh RMO two family overlay. The other
[1:09:20] would be subdivision applications and
[1:09:22] building permits.
[1:09:27] A little bit about public comments. Uh
[1:09:29] as I said, they they were quite
[1:09:31] extensive. There's definitely a lot of
[1:09:32] interest in this area and a lot of uh
[1:09:35] concerned citizens. Um,
[1:09:39] I'm not going to read public comments. I
[1:09:42] do have the comments from the meeting
[1:09:44] minutes if you want to talk about any of
[1:09:46] them or if you have any questions of
[1:09:47] them. But for the most part, comments
[1:09:50] centered around these bulleted topics of
[1:09:53] growth, infrastructure, neighborhood
[1:09:55] stability, safety, parking, uh, property
[1:09:58] values, agricultural land taxes,
[1:10:01] wildlife, and
[1:10:04] things related to those topics.
[1:10:08] Uh, a little bit of history here. So,
[1:10:10] the initial application, the applicant
[1:10:13] requested an amendment to the ESI
[1:10:15] comprehensive plan. Essentially, they
[1:10:17] wanted to remove the active living
[1:10:19] designation from the east side
[1:10:20] comprehensive plan so that they wouldn't
[1:10:23] have that restriction of a 55 plus
[1:10:25] community, but they could build any kind
[1:10:27] of residential development. And then
[1:10:30] they requested a zone change to the R110
[1:10:33] zone and the uh RMF-15.
[1:10:38] uh staff recommendation after receiving
[1:10:40] this application from the applicant uh
[1:10:44] recommended the district designation in
[1:10:46] the east side comprehensive plan and a
[1:10:48] zone change to that R110
[1:10:51] with the RMF in the range of six to
[1:10:54] eight units to the acre. Uh planning
[1:10:57] commission held their public hearing and
[1:10:59] their u meeting. planning commission uh
[1:11:03] made the determination they felt as if
[1:11:05] the district would be a good
[1:11:07] designation. Um and this is a difficult
[1:11:09] situation because they had to vote on
[1:11:11] one before the other. So they voted on
[1:11:13] this this district and then they decided
[1:11:16] they felt as if the R19 zone would be an
[1:11:19] appropriate uh zone change. um coming
[1:11:23] back around. Uh staff and the applicant
[1:11:28] discussed after this planning commission
[1:11:30] meeting and felt as if um the
[1:11:33] traditional designation fits better with
[1:11:35] the R1 R19 zoning designation and so
[1:11:39] that's why we're differing in a
[1:11:41] recommendation on the plan. Uh and then
[1:11:44] the zone change recommendation is the
[1:11:46] same as what was proposed by planning
[1:11:48] commission.
[1:11:50] So now um we'll just talk a little bit
[1:11:53] about the east side comprehensive plan
[1:11:55] and the request to the traditional
[1:11:57] designation.
[1:12:00] Um so these are um this is language
[1:12:04] right out of the plan of what active
[1:12:07] living is and uh in blue that's in the
[1:12:12] general plan not the east side plan of
[1:12:14] what this area would entail if the
[1:12:17] general plan was followed. And then fi
[1:12:20] finally the last one is the district.
[1:12:22] This is in the east side comprehensive
[1:12:23] plan as well. Uh providing a kind of a
[1:12:26] definition of what that would entail for
[1:12:29] future development. So I'm not going to
[1:12:31] read those unless you have questions
[1:12:32] about them.
[1:12:33] >> Michael, can I ask a question? Uh on the
[1:12:35] east side comprehensive plan, the active
[1:12:37] living, no density is identified. That
[1:12:39] phrase is quite frightening. Um, if it
[1:12:42] stays active living, uh, could it be as
[1:12:44] dense as what we see, uh, not too far
[1:12:46] away from that of high-rise, um, 55 plus
[1:12:50] apartments?
[1:12:51] >> No. Uh, because that that needs a
[1:12:53] different zoning designation for that
[1:12:55] and then a different overlay designation
[1:12:57] for that. Um, it would be more like
[1:12:59] Heritage Village or I can't remember the
[1:13:02] name of the place across from 198, but
[1:13:04] there's Mountain View Estates.
[1:13:06] >> Yes, Mountain View. I believe there's
[1:13:08] twin homes and like some some single
[1:13:11] level town home type development there.
[1:13:13] >> It does say designed for singlestory,
[1:13:16] >> but then it says,
[1:13:19] >> right? It's kind of
[1:13:21] >> Yeah, there's there's some interesting
[1:13:23] language about the apartments.
[1:13:24] >> Yeah, that's some vague language that uh
[1:13:26] leaves uh some unanticipated loopholes I
[1:13:29] believe
[1:13:30] >> with density of active living itself.
[1:13:34] >> Other questions on this page?
[1:13:37] Well, the district includes it says
[1:13:39] tasteful multifamily developments will
[1:13:42] be available. So that can that has a
[1:13:45] wide range as well,
[1:13:46] >> right? And I think that's intentional in
[1:13:48] that case.
[1:13:50] >> But the the purpose of this is not to
[1:13:51] designate as district, correct? But
[1:13:53] rather traditional.
[1:13:54] >> The original the original recommendation
[1:13:57] of staff was the district based off of
[1:13:59] the what staff felt was uh a reasonable
[1:14:02] amount of density there. And so that's
[1:14:04] why we we said that because of the uh
[1:14:07] six to eight units of the acre plus the
[1:14:09] single family homes, they could all fit
[1:14:10] in a similar designation such as a
[1:14:13] district. But the recommended change for
[1:14:17] tonight is the traditional instead of
[1:14:19] the district.
[1:14:23] Uh here's the uh portion of the
[1:14:25] definition from traditional in the east
[1:14:27] side comprehensive plan and then the
[1:14:29] district's just shown here again to just
[1:14:31] kind of compare and contrast those two.
[1:14:34] So, um, traditional is is typically, um,
[1:14:39] I don't want to say large lot, but I
[1:14:41] would say medium-sized lot homes. Um,
[1:14:45] traditional sized homes, and it gives
[1:14:47] some neighborhoods here as kind of a
[1:14:50] reference of what those look like in
[1:14:52] size and and neighborhood appearance.
[1:14:55] Any thoughts or questions on this page?
[1:15:00] Okay.
[1:15:02] So staff recommended traditional
[1:15:05] to the planning and zoning planning and
[1:15:08] zoning.
[1:15:09] >> No. No. Staff recommended district
[1:15:13] and uh planning commission felt as if
[1:15:16] the R19 zone was more appropriate, but
[1:15:18] they voted on the plan before they voted
[1:15:21] on the zone change. And so they they
[1:15:23] voted on district first. So it's a
[1:15:26] little confusing, but yes, that's that's
[1:15:28] why there's a discrepancy there. So, in
[1:15:30] the traditional, we're voting
[1:15:33] to have it be traditional. Is that what
[1:15:36] we're
[1:15:36] >> That is That is the request tonight.
[1:15:37] Yes.
[1:15:38] >> Okay. And that would that include just
[1:15:40] the single family homes and twin homes?
[1:15:43] Would that allow twin homes or would
[1:15:44] that
[1:15:44] >> it it allows for an overlay?
[1:15:47] >> Well,
[1:15:49] it doesn't it doesn't get that specific.
[1:15:51] >> Okay.
[1:15:51] >> It traditional just talks about um
[1:15:55] traditional single family home
[1:15:57] development. Um, if the R19 zone was and
[1:16:02] zoning is different than these
[1:16:03] designations in the plan, that's kind of
[1:16:06] >> so zoning would allow for an overlay.
[1:16:08] >> But if the R19 was, and we'll get to
[1:16:10] that, if the R19 was approved, then that
[1:16:12] has another opportunity for an applicant
[1:16:15] to come in and request that twin homes.
[1:16:19] So I put in here a few suggested uh
[1:16:23] recommendations with staff's recommend
[1:16:26] recommendation for uh motions here. This
[1:16:30] and the next topic of the zone change.
[1:16:33] There can be any number of motions here.
[1:16:35] So don't feel like you're pigeonhold
[1:16:38] into any of these because these these
[1:16:40] are legislative actions and you've have
[1:16:43] a lot of broad authority of how you want
[1:16:45] to interpret and and make a decision
[1:16:47] here.
[1:16:48] So, I'll continue on. This is the end of
[1:16:50] the east side comprehensive stuff. We'll
[1:16:52] go into the zone change stuff and then
[1:16:54] we kind of summarize at the end.
[1:16:57] So, the second request, um, this is
[1:17:00] contingent upon the plan amendment is a
[1:17:04] zone change request to the R19
[1:17:06] residential zone.
[1:17:09] Giving you some context right now.
[1:17:11] >> Are you moving on to the the zoning now?
[1:17:14] So, we're not going to vote on these.
[1:17:15] I'm just giving you the whole
[1:17:16] presentation and then there'll be
[1:17:19] separate motions to to make but and we
[1:17:21] can
[1:17:22] >> I've got slides in here that you can
[1:17:24] just see the suggested motions of each
[1:17:25] one separately. So,
[1:17:26] >> okay. Thanks, Michael.
[1:17:28] >> Um, so currently right now that little
[1:17:31] uh red highlighted area is what the area
[1:17:34] is zoned the R1A. And it looks like I
[1:17:36] didn't put in all of the classification
[1:17:38] for R1A, but that's essentially a one
[1:17:41] acre lot uh intended for uh small
[1:17:45] agricultural uh purposes, things of that
[1:17:48] nature. And uh much bigger than what's
[1:17:52] anticipated both in the east side
[1:17:54] comprehensive plan and in the general
[1:17:57] plan. And so that's the current zoning
[1:17:59] for the area right now. Uh this is the
[1:18:02] recommendation is the R19 zoning for the
[1:18:06] entire parcel there.
[1:18:11] Uh talking about a little bit about R19
[1:18:13] versus R110 because I know a lot of the
[1:18:15] public uh voiced opinions about R110
[1:18:19] versus R19. And so that's what is here.
[1:18:22] Uh R19 is blue, R110 red. Uh essentially
[1:18:28] they're very very similar. Um R19 the
[1:18:32] minimum lot size is 9,000 whereas the
[1:18:34] R110 is 10,000 square feet. Uh the
[1:18:37] minimum frontage is 90 ft versus 100 ft.
[1:18:40] The setbacks are identical between the
[1:18:43] two. Um accessory apartments would be
[1:18:46] allowed in both zones. That's state law.
[1:18:50] Uh and we have a little bit of
[1:18:52] stipulation. And so our stipulation is
[1:18:53] they have to be a minimum of 6,500 foot
[1:18:56] lots to even be considered for an
[1:18:57] accessory apartment. The only
[1:19:00] significant difference in staff's
[1:19:01] opinion is the RM1 twin family overlay
[1:19:05] is possible in the R19 zone and not in
[1:19:08] the R110 zone. Any questions on this?
[1:19:11] >> So why did we pick the R19 instead of
[1:19:14] the R110?
[1:19:16] >> Uh planning commission made that
[1:19:18] recommendation.
[1:19:19] I think the idea was to leave the
[1:19:22] opportunity open for the applicant to
[1:19:24] consider the twin family overlay.
[1:19:30] » Legislatively, we we could go for the
[1:19:32] R19,
[1:19:34] but in the future, we could deny the
[1:19:37] overlay.
[1:19:38] >> Correct.
[1:19:39] >> Yep, that is correct. Y
[1:19:41] >> or we could just questions we could approve the R110
[1:19:48] and not worry about the overlay.
[1:19:50] >> You could do that as well.
[1:19:54] >> Um again some the staff recommended
[1:19:58] motion as well as u three other possible
[1:20:01] motions here.
[1:20:04] Few more slides here just to give you
[1:20:06] some context. So, other approvals,
[1:20:12] um, like I said, the R120
[1:20:15] two family overlay is a possibility with
[1:20:17] the R, uh, one N zone.
[1:20:23] Uh, the other approvals, they're grayed
[1:20:25] out because those are administrative and
[1:20:27] they have have not been applied for. So,
[1:20:30] they couldn't be applied for until
[1:20:33] these approvals have been granted,
[1:20:35] whether it's the RMO, whether it's the
[1:20:37] zone change, what have you. Um, if
[1:20:40] nothing is granted, then the only thing
[1:20:42] that could essentially be done at this
[1:20:43] time would be um oneacre lots. So, any
[1:20:49] questions on this?
[1:20:54] A little bit about the RMO uh one two
[1:20:57] family overlay. uh staff would recommend
[1:21:00] it be a separate application made um if
[1:21:03] there's any desire um by the applicant
[1:21:06] to consider that um if any RMO2 family
[1:21:09] overlay is considered now or in the
[1:21:12] future then staff would recommend only a
[1:21:14] portion of this area be uh designated
[1:21:18] with that RMO overlay and not the
[1:21:20] entirety of the parcel.
[1:21:25] Uh so this is kind of comes back around
[1:21:28] to final recommendations is uh the
[1:21:31] traditional designation in the east side
[1:21:32] comprehensive plan and then the zone
[1:21:34] change to the R19. So I'll just leave it
[1:21:37] at that. We do I do have at the end here
[1:21:41] um just those same recommended um
[1:21:44] possible motions. So
[1:21:46] >> Michael, can you go back to one of the
[1:21:48] maps that shows the bigger area
[1:21:53] » like this one? Yes,
[1:21:54] >> sure. Um, just so I can get a feel of
[1:21:57] what the rest of the area might look
[1:21:59] like in the future to the east, that big
[1:22:03] port, you know how there's that yellow
[1:22:04] square kind of juts out between the
[1:22:07] orange and that yellow next to the R,
[1:22:09] what's labeled R19? Do we know what
[1:22:12] that's going to be?
[1:22:13] >> Yeah, it's in the plan. Do you have the
[1:22:14] plan pulled up handy, Michael? That we
[1:22:16] >> I don't have the plan readily available.
[1:22:17] Which yellow are you talking about? So
[1:22:19] that that part that juts out.
[1:22:23] >> Oh, down here.
[1:22:24] >> Yeah, that
[1:22:25] >> so
[1:22:26] >> right above it.
[1:22:28] >> Right.
[1:22:29] about where this blue line is, it
[1:22:31] goes across to about where my text is.
[1:22:34] And that
[1:22:35] >> and that R1A portion, that's the light
[1:22:38] yellow. All of that is the active
[1:22:40] living.
[1:22:41] >> And then from there going eastward goes
[1:22:45] to um I can't remember the name. I think
[1:22:48] it's the district is what it goes to
[1:22:50] from there and it wraps around where
[1:22:53] 1500 East is
[1:22:54] >> going on both sides of 1500 East and
[1:22:56] then up toward 198.
[1:22:58] >> But that also could change where we're
[1:23:01] going to be re-evaluating the general
[1:23:03] plan.
[1:23:03] >> That could change with with the general
[1:23:05] plan amendment.
[1:23:06] >> But as of right now,
[1:23:07] >> as of right now, that's those are how
[1:23:08] those are. And and just keep in mind
[1:23:11] both the Eastside comprehensive plan and
[1:23:13] the general plan are advisory documents.
[1:23:15] we generally want to follow them but
[1:23:18] that it's not required to follow them.
[1:23:20] >> So basically that whole chunk between
[1:23:22] the orange and that yellow part jutting
[1:23:25] out is all active living or it just goes
[1:23:28] straight across from the
[1:23:29] >> just to about where my text starts in
[1:23:31] that white box.
[1:23:33] >> Does it touch that square that juts out?
[1:23:36] >> No, it's it's about from where this is
[1:23:39] right here and comes comes across like
[1:23:41] that.
[1:23:42] >> Okay.
[1:23:45] Do you have that?
[1:23:49] So, Robert has that east side plan if
[1:23:51] you want to see that.
[1:23:52] >> Yeah, that'd be good.
[1:24:05] » That hurts the eyes, but you can see so
[1:24:07] the light really light blue, that's the
[1:24:09] active living. Uh you can see the
[1:24:11] subdivision just to the south of it.
[1:24:12] That's kind of where the the edge of the
[1:24:16] applicant's request is is the very
[1:24:18] corner of that subdivision. So, there is
[1:24:21] the little bit of uh active living
[1:24:23] that's untouched with this request and
[1:24:26] then there's the rest of the active
[1:24:27] living that goes uh east of 1300 East
[1:24:31] there. Okay.
[1:24:38] » Some of these things are different
[1:24:39] obviously. For example, Nebo School
[1:24:41] District doesn't own all of that
[1:24:43] property anymore. It's a smaller
[1:24:45] portion. So,
[1:24:48] >> so obviously a lot of time and effort
[1:24:49] went into this East Side comprehensive
[1:24:52] plan and uh you know, we're always
[1:24:54] harping to to stick with the plan and so
[1:24:55] if we were going going to make a change,
[1:24:58] I think we need to make sure we make a
[1:24:59] change for the better. Uh this area does
[1:25:01] in fact have a lot of 55 and older uh
[1:25:04] housing already. Uh we just need to
[1:25:06] decide if uh if we want to continue to
[1:25:09] allow more of that. uh that that would
[1:25:12] be dense uh like by the temple the
[1:25:14] heritage village area um or if we want
[1:25:17] to allow for for something else
[1:25:21] and I've often talked about especially
[1:25:23] lately the need for
[1:25:26] single level single level living for our
[1:25:30] older community.
[1:25:33] Just thoughts just thinking out loud.
[1:25:36] >> Well, it also doesn't change all of it
[1:25:38] as of right now. like there still would
[1:25:40] be
[1:25:41] >> two sections. I mean,
[1:25:43] >> and and just just to make note, um 55
[1:25:46] plus communities can go anywhere anyway.
[1:25:50] >> This is just an area in this plan that
[1:25:52] was identified because of the proximity
[1:25:54] to doctor's offices and the hospital and
[1:25:56] things like that. So, it's not like it's
[1:25:58] it can only go here.
[1:26:02] I think it'd be advantageous though, if
[1:26:03] we're going to change that little
[1:26:04] sliver, it would leave those those two
[1:26:06] on each side. uh uh left the same. I
[1:26:10] think it would be nice to have one
[1:26:11] continuous zone there as we re-evaluate
[1:26:14] the east side comprehensive plan.
[1:26:20] » Okay. Is that your presentation on both
[1:26:22] of them? Michael?
[1:26:23] >> Yes. Unless you had any other questions.
[1:26:25] >> Any other questions, council? Because
[1:26:26] the next step will go is to have someone
[1:26:30] that is designated to to talk about for
[1:26:33] or against. So,
[1:26:34] >> I just have one question. And um if we
[1:26:38] so we talked maybe about expanding that
[1:26:40] to include all that area so you don't
[1:26:43] have 55 and older in that whole area.
[1:26:45] Would since it the public hearings for
[1:26:47] one those three parcels we'd have to
[1:26:49] have another public hearing to do that
[1:26:51] right.
[1:26:53] You're talking about for example that
[1:26:55] small piece that's R1A right there and
[1:26:57] the PE part to the west
[1:26:59] >> right. Um,
[1:27:01] >> yes, we would. We would
[1:27:02] >> I think it would I think it would be
[1:27:03] good form, but no, you don't actually
[1:27:05] have to have another hearing for that
[1:27:07] because council can make an amended
[1:27:09] motion so that you could, for example,
[1:27:11] say we're going to designate all of that
[1:27:14] 55 plus active living to something else.
[1:27:17] >> I think that'd be better to do with ju
[1:27:19] just worrying about the applicant
[1:27:21] tonight.
[1:27:22] >> Well, it just looks weird. Right. But as
[1:27:24] we reevaluate the east side
[1:27:26] comprehensive plan of of looking at that
[1:27:27] and holding the proper public hearing
[1:27:29] >> and just because it's not called for
[1:27:31] doesn't mean we don't have to do it.
[1:27:32] >> Right.
[1:27:34] >> Okay. That we good?
[1:27:38] >> I'll go ahead and uh there's a there's a
[1:27:40] few things I'd like to say prior to to
[1:27:42] go ahead and and let someone come up and
[1:27:44] talk.
[1:27:46] I guess maybe I'm I'm patting ourselves
[1:27:48] on the back. We don't have to do this,
[1:27:50] ladies and gentlemen. and we hear it all
[1:27:52] the time that we don't listen. I want
[1:27:54] that to go away because we do listen. We
[1:27:57] don't have to have that's this has
[1:27:59] already been uh discussed at the agnosia
[1:28:03] in some ways but uh and it's at a public
[1:28:06] hearing but uh we want to make sure that
[1:28:09] your your voices are heard. Uh, and the
[1:28:14] other the other thing I'd like to to
[1:28:15] mention here too is uh when it comes to
[1:28:21] subdivisions like this, we we do have
[1:28:24] the the power that uh we can do
[1:28:26] different zoning areas for the city,
[1:28:29] we've got to be very careful. don't want
[1:28:31] to be afraid of the state, but we got to
[1:28:33] be careful with the state because there
[1:28:35] are those in the state government that
[1:28:37] would like to take that power away from this the cities and do a statewide
[1:28:41] overlay and then they would control
[1:28:43] where it goes and the density that it
[1:28:45] goes to. Uh we've already been uh and it's really upset me and Robert
[1:28:51] because we're in the meeting. We've
[1:28:52] already been designated as a bad actor
[1:28:54] city because we didn't want some of the
[1:28:56] things that the state was really would
[1:28:58] like to push. So, and the reason I'm
[1:29:02] saying this is because we do listen to
[1:29:04] you. But that sometimes there's things
[1:29:06] that you don't understand or don't even
[1:29:08] know that we have to respond to. But uh
[1:29:12] I just wanted to uh to mention that uh
[1:29:16] as we as we sit here and listen to
[1:29:18] either pro or con, please keep their
[1:29:21] demeanor uh in the appropriate
[1:29:24] uh way. Uh as as we have someone come up
[1:29:28] here, whether it be for uh in favor of
[1:29:31] or against it, please don't after they
[1:29:34] get done, please don't clap. uh we kind
[1:29:38] of expect that when we like things, but
[1:29:39] this is a city meeting and that's part
[1:29:41] of the demeanor I'm talking about. If
[1:29:44] you if you would do that, please. So,
[1:29:46] what I would do at this point in time,
[1:29:49] if there's anyone uh and I would like to
[1:29:52] start with with for this uh u action, if
[1:29:57] there's anyone here that would like to
[1:29:58] speak for this action, please
[1:30:02] come up and and address us.
[1:30:08] doesn't surprise me. Well, come on up.
[1:30:11] Yeah.
[1:30:13] Good. Representative the planning
[1:30:16] commission.
[1:30:17] >> Yes.
[1:30:18] >> Kurt Beecher. Um, planning commission.
[1:30:21] But the reason the planning commission
[1:30:23] went with R19 versus the R110 and the
[1:30:27] RMF1 is that we didn't like the density
[1:30:30] of the RMF-1.
[1:30:32] And we wanted a buffer between the R110
[1:30:36] that's already to the south and west and
[1:30:39] the much higher density to the north and
[1:30:43] northeast. And so we went with something
[1:30:46] that was
[1:30:49] middle of the road. It wasn't it wasn't
[1:30:51] the higher density of the ARM F1 and it
[1:30:54] wasn't the
[1:30:55] um lower way low or lower density of the
[1:30:59] ARM R110. So that was part of the the
[1:31:02] discussion and that's the reason we went
[1:31:05] with R19.
[1:31:06] >> Can you
[1:31:07] >> we didn't know about the traditional or
[1:31:09] we would have gone that way. Okay.
[1:31:11] >> When we were talking so that that was we
[1:31:14] were given the district as the option
[1:31:16] and we didn't know the traditional.
[1:31:19] So,
[1:31:21] >> thank you for that.
[1:31:22] >> It was a very long meeting.
[1:31:23] >> It was a long meeting. We had quite a
[1:31:25] discussion with the rest.
[1:31:27] >> Understand. Thank you.
[1:31:30] >> Anyone else would like to
[1:31:35] pro or con?
[1:31:36] >> I'm pro.
[1:31:37] >> Okay, that's fine. I just wanted to make
[1:31:40] sure.
[1:31:41] >> Okay.
[1:31:41] >> I'm Jimmy Degraphen and I'm actually
[1:31:43] representing the the Manglesen property.
[1:31:47] Um I our whole intent on this really I
[1:31:53] guess should I address the um the change
[1:31:56] first or the zoning? I mean the
[1:31:58] >> well both go ahead and do it's just like
[1:32:00] it is presented to us.
[1:32:02] >> Okay. Uh our thinking on changing it
[1:32:04] from the 55 and older is just simply
[1:32:08] it's not really selling in that area.
[1:32:11] There's another subdivision that's been
[1:32:12] over there for a while. They've sold I
[1:32:14] don't even know if they've sold. They
[1:32:15] started two or three homes on it. Uh we
[1:32:18] feel like the one that was down by the
[1:32:20] temple did really well. Uh but it took a
[1:32:23] long time and it looked really nice. And
[1:32:26] then I look at what I do for a living,
[1:32:29] which is I mean I I have two different
[1:32:31] home companies, home building companies.
[1:32:33] One's upperend homes that does a million
[1:32:34] and a half plus and and one that does
[1:32:37] lowerend homes. Um, and in our lower-end
[1:32:41] homes, we actually have uh a lot of our
[1:32:45] second biggest customer in the lower-end
[1:32:47] homes is people that are in their 60s,
[1:32:50] and they're not wanting to live
[1:32:51] necessarily in a 55 and older community.
[1:32:54] And now that I'm 54, I don't want to
[1:32:55] live in a 55 and older community either.
[1:32:58] So, I mean, that used to seem old. Now,
[1:33:00] it doesn't. So, um, so that was really
[1:33:04] as simple as it was on that. We just
[1:33:06] felt it might be better for the um area
[1:33:09] in general. As far as the the uh zoning,
[1:33:14] we just looked at the hospital to the
[1:33:17] side. It's kind of a commercial area. We
[1:33:19] looked at the millions of homes. It
[1:33:22] feels like that's on the other side
[1:33:24] that's just uh uh that's sitting there.
[1:33:27] And we said we just want to create a
[1:33:29] transition. Uh and in every city that I work in, we we try to create
[1:33:34] transitions. We don't uh you know we
[1:33:37] don't go from zero to 100. You know it's
[1:33:40] just we go in there and we try to try to
[1:33:42] make it so everything fits. We uh um you
[1:33:46] know we found that we have a hard time
[1:33:48] selling single family homes, nicer
[1:33:50] single family homes right next to uh
[1:33:54] apartments, but the people that are
[1:33:57] going to buy the single family homes
[1:33:58] don't necessarily want to live right
[1:34:00] next to an apartment. But people who uh
[1:34:03] might be buying a town home or a twin
[1:34:05] home will do that. Also, people who will
[1:34:08] buy a town home uh I mean people will
[1:34:11] buy a twin home next to a town home and
[1:34:13] people will buy a single family home
[1:34:14] next to a twin home. And so it's just a simple transition that that
[1:34:18] we're trying to do. And we're not trying
[1:34:21] to be, you know, like greedy developers
[1:34:24] like we always get pegged as. We just
[1:34:27] looked at it and just like this is what
[1:34:29] we want to do and make a transition
[1:34:31] that's good for the community. So that's
[1:34:36] >> thank thank you that appreciate it. Adds
[1:34:38] to our discussion.
[1:34:40] >> Did you say your name?
[1:34:41] >> I did.
[1:34:43] >> I can state it again if you want. Brand
[1:34:46] >> you're you're good. You're good. Okay.
[1:34:50] We've had a clarification and uh someone
[1:34:53] to speak for the pro and so we're to the
[1:34:57] point where somebody would like to that
[1:35:00] hopefully you've picked a spokesperson
[1:35:01] that would be against it. Please come up
[1:35:04] now.
[1:35:12] I'm Jeremy Smith. I'm a resident. I live
[1:35:15] at 633 South 1400 East in PAC. Um, so
[1:35:20] not
[1:35:21] right next to this property, but I do
[1:35:24] have um
[1:35:27] interest in this how this property gets
[1:35:28] developed because there are other
[1:35:29] annexations closer to where I live that
[1:35:32] would follow suit with what happens
[1:35:35] here. Um,
[1:35:38] so in talking with
[1:35:41] a lot of the residents here tonight, um,
[1:35:45] their main concern is is with the
[1:35:48] overlay. Um,
[1:35:51] so a lot of people are happy with the
[1:35:53] R19. A lot of people would like to see
[1:35:56] the R110. That would eliminate the
[1:35:58] overlay. Um but if if it did pass as
[1:36:01] R19, then this the citizens would
[1:36:04] request that you deny any future overlay
[1:36:08] um in that area to eliminate the
[1:36:11] duplexes
[1:36:12] or twin homes.
[1:36:15] Um
[1:36:16] there's
[1:36:18] a lot of concerns that were highlighted
[1:36:20] in the presentation from the staff. Um
[1:36:25] road infrastructure
[1:36:27] um with with the current development of
[1:36:30] the those town houses and apartments
[1:36:32] near this property. Um I'm sure if you
[1:36:35] drove down there um I'm sure you
[1:36:37] probably have seen all the parking on
[1:36:39] the street. Um there's just no room for
[1:36:42] parking. uh in those developments and so
[1:36:45] the this the residents are parking along
[1:36:48] the street on 100 South
[1:36:51] and with Twin Homes um we don't want to
[1:36:55] see a similar parking issue in this
[1:36:57] neighborhood where it's just filled with
[1:36:59] cars on the streets. Um,
[1:37:04] let's see. Some of the concerns also
[1:37:07] were like with with that holdaway
[1:37:09] development where the apartments and
[1:37:11] town houses are. Um, is that um
[1:37:16] the original zoning that was approved
[1:37:19] for that when it was annexed in with one
[1:37:22] developer and then the developer I guess
[1:37:24] left and a new developer came in and
[1:37:27] requested changing changes to that. So
[1:37:29] that there are concerns with the
[1:37:31] residents of of possible changes from
[1:37:34] what gets decided tonight. Um
[1:37:38] there were a lot of um
[1:37:44] points brought up in the um planning
[1:37:47] commission public hearing about this
[1:37:50] property and there were lots of
[1:37:51] questions asked by the residents and a
[1:37:53] lot of residents feel that those
[1:37:55] questions have not been answered. um and they would like to um
[1:38:02] like refer to the minutes of of that
[1:38:04] commission meeting pages three and four
[1:38:06] where there was lots of comments made
[1:38:07] and questions and um answers were
[1:38:12] promised which haven't been answered
[1:38:13] yet.
[1:38:16] Um
[1:38:19] there's also concerns with with the high
[1:38:22] density of the town houses and
[1:38:23] apartments. the current residents have
[1:38:25] noticed a change in water pressure. Um
[1:38:28] so the demand on the water system in
[1:38:30] that area and so the higher density in
[1:38:32] this new development would put more
[1:38:34] strain um on the water system and and
[1:38:37] water pressures for everyone around.
[1:38:40] Um
[1:38:44] I think just one other thing here.
[1:38:59] Um
[1:39:01] all of us are here because we're
[1:39:02] concerned about our city and um our own
[1:39:07] investment in our own properties as
[1:39:09] well. Um,
[1:39:11] and what's decided here tonight can
[1:39:13] determine property values of the
[1:39:15] surrounding areas. Um, and that that's
[1:39:17] what we're looking out for. Um,
[1:39:21] [snorts]
[1:39:25] another concern was that the some some
[1:39:29] residents feel like the staff um may be
[1:39:32] leaning more favorably to the developer
[1:39:34] than to the citizens. And so we want um
[1:39:37] our concerns to be heard and and I know
[1:39:40] that you guys listen to um the citizens
[1:39:43] as well. Um
[1:39:49] so you know our request would be just to
[1:39:52] do pass the R110
[1:39:54] um eliminate any future possibility of
[1:39:56] the overlay from from just right now
[1:39:59] just deny that. Um some one other thing
[1:40:05] um that I also wanted to bring up is
[1:40:08] relating to the plans the general plan
[1:40:10] and the east side comprehensive plan. Um
[1:40:12] in in the general plan it states as the
[1:40:16] city grows there will be a need to
[1:40:18] prepare small area plans to provide
[1:40:20] additional guidance in land use
[1:40:22] transportation utilities and other
[1:40:24] services for new planning areas. Small
[1:40:27] area plans contain a set of specific
[1:40:29] strategies for a specific specific
[1:40:31] geography that often has a cohesive set
[1:40:34] of characteristics.
[1:40:36] So my my understanding of that is that
[1:40:40] the general plan is like a high level
[1:40:42] plan, right? And these small area plans
[1:40:44] dig deeper into the details of of what
[1:40:48] specific needs are for that that
[1:40:51] specific neighborhood.
[1:40:53] Um,
[1:40:56] one thing that hasn't been brought up
[1:40:58] yet tonight is the water. The water
[1:40:59] table in this area is really high. Um,
[1:41:06] you're not going to be able to put
[1:41:07] basements in these homes without sump
[1:41:09] pumps or, you know, pumps to to pump
[1:41:12] sewer out of the basement because
[1:41:13] they're going to be below the water table and sewer lines
[1:41:17] are going to have to be up higher um in
[1:41:21] the streets. So, you're going to need
[1:41:22] some pumps to get a sewer out of the
[1:41:23] houses up to the to that main line. Um,
[1:41:27] so this is a perfect area for places,
[1:41:30] you know, homes that don't have
[1:41:31] basements that are catered to senior
[1:41:33] citizens.
[1:41:35] Um, where it's flat one-story level
[1:41:39] dwellings that don't require B that
[1:41:41] don't need a basement. Um,
[1:41:47] and I think um that that's about it
[1:41:51] unless there's
[1:41:53] any points that I missed.
[1:41:56] I think Okay, I think everybody's pretty
[1:41:59] happy with what I've said. So, I we
[1:42:00] appreciate the opportunity to speak even
[1:42:03] though we're legally you don't have to
[1:42:05] let us speak here at this point, but we
[1:42:07] appreciate that this opportunity. Thank
[1:42:09] you. You're glad glad to provide it.
[1:42:13] Yeah, Jeremy, thank you. This the way
[1:42:15] it's supposed to work and uh we we don't
[1:42:17] want to unnecessarily cut anybody off,
[1:42:19] but we have hard decisions that we have
[1:42:21] to make based on the information that we
[1:42:24] get. And uh so please don't don't ever
[1:42:28] believe that we don't listen. We do. And
[1:42:32] uh sometimes we have to swab a little
[1:42:35] hard so that uh maybe we win the we win the uh the the the battle but
[1:42:42] lose the war. So uh so to speak, we
[1:42:45] don't want the state to to uh uh do a
[1:42:49] statewide overlay and uh that would not
[1:42:52] be something would be in my opinion a
[1:42:55] very good thing for the for any city to have the state control it.
[1:43:00] Okay. Any any other questions that you
[1:43:03] have at this time, council
[1:43:06] >> discussion? Go ahead, Lacy.
[1:43:07] >> Oh, I was just going to just just kind
[1:43:10] of not really questions. I mean, well, I
[1:43:13] guess one question was that um
[1:43:17] Jeremy, when you the 55 and up, you
[1:43:20] know, with no basement kind of thing, I
[1:43:22] do think it's a great spot. But if we if
[1:43:25] you do the R110,
[1:43:27] I don't think a lot of people,
[1:43:30] if they're in a 55 and older community,
[1:43:32] they usually do that because they don't
[1:43:34] want a large law like that. Um, but
[1:43:41] » yeah, that was just that was just the
[1:43:42] first thing that popped in my head, but
[1:43:44] um I don't know if right now we can just
[1:43:46] hurry and just kind of give our thoughts
[1:43:47] and whatever or what we're doing.
[1:43:49] >> Well, uh, if there's any any questions
[1:43:51] or and if you don't want to have some
[1:43:53] thoughts, we can do, but we need to get
[1:43:55] to a point where we we entertain an
[1:43:57] emotion.
[1:43:57] >> I think it's important to have two
[1:43:59] discussion items on this. This is a big
[1:44:01] decision. Sure. Um, uh, mayor, I
[1:44:03] appreciate you opening it up, uh, for
[1:44:04] residents, uh, to be able to to speak.
[1:44:07] And, uh, I I I thank the the staff and
[1:44:10] residents and planning commission that
[1:44:11] attended the planning commission meeting
[1:44:13] on this. I know it was long and
[1:44:14] confusing. It was about like me trying
[1:44:16] to figure out the the cemetery fee
[1:44:18] schedule. It just it was just a hard
[1:44:19] meeting, right? So, thank you for uh,
[1:44:22] for making your voices heard. I promise
[1:44:24] we do hear you. Uh, we work for you.
[1:44:27] That's what our job is. And so, thank
[1:44:29] you for so many that have that have
[1:44:30] submitted. so many quality datadriven uh remarks and comments on this
[1:44:36] particular item. Um I do want to uh call
[1:44:41] out uh a few things. The the parking on
[1:44:44] the street uh while that is a reality,
[1:44:46] it's almost irrelevant, darn it, because
[1:44:47] you drive down my street and I've got
[1:44:49] cars and and vehicles parked on my
[1:44:51] street, too. So, it doesn't matter what
[1:44:52] zoning we do, people park on the street,
[1:44:54] especially as families get older and
[1:44:56] they have multiple drivers
[1:44:57] >> this time of year. Trailer houses.
[1:44:59] >> Yes. Yep. Um, I I also want to mention
[1:45:02] too that uh sometimes if we fear if we
[1:45:05] fear the state so much uh Mr. Mayor that that it affects our decision,
[1:45:10] they've almost already taken away the
[1:45:12] power of that law.
[1:45:12] >> I don't want to be afraid of the state.
[1:45:14] I just don't want to be a bad actor and uh and suffer the wrath of some some
[1:45:19] of them. I'm I'm not I'm not afraid to
[1:45:21] push back in any way, shape, or form.
[1:45:23] But we need to know when to push and
[1:45:24] when not to.
[1:45:25] >> Absolutely. Yes. And I think for this
[1:45:27] area, uh, and I do I do want to disclose
[1:45:30] I do live in a neighborhood adjacent to
[1:45:32] this to this parcel. Um, I don't believe
[1:45:35] it creates conflict of interest, but I
[1:45:36] do want to disclose that I I live next
[1:45:38] to it. Um, I think with this area, um,
[1:45:41] you know, that it has hit its mark with
[1:45:43] density. Uh, we we have increased
[1:45:46] density in East Pac with zero amenities.
[1:45:48] There's no parks. There's no there's no
[1:45:51] retail in East PAC. And so we're either
[1:45:54] uh driving into the middle of PAC or
[1:45:55] heaven forbid giving our precious sales
[1:45:57] tax dollars to Salem to do it. And so uh
[1:46:00] per this plan that the the current
[1:46:02] developer has submitted, I don't see any
[1:46:05] benefit uh to PAC as a whole for
[1:46:08] increasing density in this area without
[1:46:10] any additional uh amenities for the for
[1:46:14] the surrounding residents. Uh I think
[1:46:16] too that we will have the opportunity
[1:46:18] for density along the pacin parkway. But
[1:46:21] I think in this area if we fall back to
[1:46:23] the east side comprehensive plan it says
[1:46:25] that we should uh respect the styles and
[1:46:27] densities of established neighborhoods.
[1:46:29] And there are a lot of established
[1:46:30] neighborhoods in East PAC and not very
[1:46:33] many of them are smaller than 10,000
[1:46:35] square foot lots. And so that's
[1:46:37] something important to to consider as we
[1:46:39] make this decision. And so I I I I have
[1:46:42] fear of of giving away the farm for
[1:46:45] nothing. sometimes. And just to to
[1:46:47] everyone here, East Pacin is going to
[1:46:48] change a lot. And so, darn it, the only
[1:46:51] way to control what happens next door to
[1:46:52] you is if you own it. And I think too,
[1:46:54] we set a precedence of what we do
[1:46:56] tonight. Uh, but I do have fears of East
[1:46:58] PAC as more of these annexes come in. I
[1:47:01] know this is not an annex, but I have
[1:47:02] fear of East PAC turning this
[1:47:04] conglomerate of neverending culde-sacs
[1:47:06] because none of these communities are
[1:47:07] intertwined or connected. uh we need to
[1:47:09] get serious about making some hard
[1:47:11] decisions to truly plan this area out to
[1:47:14] make it truly the gateway of our city
[1:47:16] along SR 198. And so if if if we're
[1:47:19] going to change the plan, if if we want
[1:47:22] to deviate from the plan, I think we
[1:47:23] should heir on the side of lower
[1:47:26] density.
[1:47:29] Um, I just wanted to say kind of a reer
[1:47:32] reiterating what Ryan said. I I take
[1:47:36] this position very very seriously. I
[1:47:39] think everyone that emailed the only
[1:47:41] person I did not email back is Lee
[1:47:43] Timothy and that was because I just ran
[1:47:46] out of time. But every single person I
[1:47:50] replied back to, I really care. I
[1:47:53] frequent the area. Um,
[1:47:56] and as I looked at it, um, I I do like
[1:48:00] the the idea just what Ryan was saying,
[1:48:03] but I know that you have to have that
[1:48:06] buffer, but I do feel if you just go a
[1:48:09] little to the south, showing that road
[1:48:12] size, that is a buffer from residential
[1:48:15] to the hospital, residential to a town
[1:48:17] home. I feel like the roadside is a is a
[1:48:20] great buffer. Um, so that's my feelings
[1:48:22] on that. And then um I know there was
[1:48:27] something else but oh I was just going
[1:48:30] to say
[1:48:32] I know that and I said this to every
[1:48:34] person that I replied to 0.02 does not
[1:48:37] seem like a ton and I listened to all
[1:48:39] the replies as to why you felt that it
[1:48:41] was a difference. Um, but my thing to
[1:48:46] the one of the the developer is I know
[1:48:49] that people don't want to
[1:48:51] buy a a nicer home as you say next to
[1:48:55] apartments and town homes.
[1:48:58] All of these residents I feel like that
[1:49:00] are sitting in here that are against it,
[1:49:02] they also built and purchased their home
[1:49:04] looking at a general plan, looking at
[1:49:06] the surrounding neighborhood
[1:49:08] and they don't they wouldn't have that
[1:49:10] choice. that's why they're here is to
[1:49:12] fight for that um as to why they chose
[1:49:15] their home. So that's just my feelings
[1:49:18] on it. So
[1:49:19] >> do you have anything to add?
[1:49:22] >> I just got a few things. Thanks
[1:49:24] everybody for um getting coming here and
[1:49:28] also voicing your opinions. Um one thing
[1:49:32] I look at is I like to look at the
[1:49:36] planning zoning. They've spent a lot of
[1:49:38] time making decisions about this. Uh
[1:49:41] staff's worked on this for a long time
[1:49:43] and I value their opinions also. And
[1:49:46] then I look at R19 versus R110.
[1:49:51] There are lots of fairly similar in
[1:49:53] size, but I think that um I don't want
[1:49:56] the multifamily the overlay, but the one
[1:49:59] R19 gives that opportunity, but we have
[1:50:02] the discretion here to deny that. And so
[1:50:06] I think this gives a little bit of
[1:50:08] compromise that that maybe they won't
[1:50:10] come back and want on the uh overlay and
[1:50:14] then they get a little bit smaller lots.
[1:50:16] So hopefully that will take care of
[1:50:19] that. They won't come back and but it'll
[1:50:21] still be nice size lots. 9,000 square
[1:50:24] feet is a nice size lot. So I'm fine
[1:50:27] with the staff recommendations.
[1:50:32] » Um I appreciate everything that everyone
[1:50:34] has said. We really do listen. I value
[1:50:36] this position very very much. And I've
[1:50:39] been in in similar situations as you
[1:50:43] where um my whole neighborhood came in
[1:50:47] uh years ago to make our voices heard.
[1:50:50] Um so I sympathize with you. I I know
[1:50:54] how you're feeling. Um I also
[1:50:58] uh I also agree with with what Ryan said
[1:51:02] about the state and calling us a bad
[1:51:03] actor. um not everybody up there feels
[1:51:06] that way towards us and I don't think we
[1:51:07] should cater to what a couple of people
[1:51:10] in power say. So um because this is our
[1:51:13] town, this is where we live and um how
[1:51:18] we feel and where we live um and where
[1:51:22] we live our lives matters more than what
[1:51:25] they say. So um
[1:51:29] just a second.
[1:51:32] So, so I value what the staff has done.
[1:51:36] They've done a lot of work. I value um
[1:51:41] all the emails and all the opinions that
[1:51:43] I've received. Um I live near the
[1:51:46] Heritage I think it's Heritage Fields
[1:51:48] over by Walmart. And um it took a long
[1:51:53] time because there was an owner and then
[1:51:57] the recession happened in 2007 and 2008.
[1:52:01] They couldn't get anything. No, nothing
[1:52:04] was selling. That's why it took so long.
[1:52:07] So when they switched owners and they
[1:52:10] switched plan, then it took off and the
[1:52:12] economy had changed. Then it took off
[1:52:14] and it was very well established and
[1:52:17] sold quickly and it's an excellent
[1:52:19] neighborhood for retirees. Um we do need
[1:52:23] more and and they're not single level. I
[1:52:25] mean there's single level single level
[1:52:27] living and then they have basements but
[1:52:30] um we do need to take care of our our
[1:52:33] retirees.
[1:52:35] But I just want I I I'm leaning towards
[1:52:39] um the R110
[1:52:41] because I don't like the overlay as
[1:52:43] well. I don't I prefer not to have mixed
[1:52:50] traditional homes with town homes or
[1:52:54] twin homes. Um but this project
[1:52:56] >> I'm
[1:53:00] sound okay.
[1:53:01] >> No.
[1:53:03] [laughter] Um, but I value everything,
[1:53:06] all the information. I'm really, really
[1:53:07] soaking it all in and I want to make the
[1:53:09] best decision possible for the people
[1:53:12] who live there already.
[1:53:15] >> Okay.
[1:53:18] I I uh I think there's a great
[1:53:21] compromise here, but I lean towards the
[1:53:24] R19
[1:53:26] very very strongly, but the possibility
[1:53:28] of the overlay sour me on this
[1:53:32] particular project. Uh I I just don't
[1:53:36] think that that is a that is a buffer
[1:53:39] between the hospital or wherever staff
[1:53:41] would recommend those be put. So, I I'm
[1:53:44] in favor of remanding this back to staff
[1:53:47] with the applicant and
[1:53:50] R19 would be my strong suggestion
[1:53:53] without any possibility of an overlay.
[1:53:57] >> Okay.
[1:53:59] >> Can we put that in the motion that we uh
[1:54:02] we're okay with R19 without any
[1:54:05] possibility of overlay?
[1:54:09] >> I don't I don't know that without like
[1:54:11] at a development agreement. I don't know
[1:54:12] that you could actually do that, but
[1:54:15] yeah,
[1:54:17] >> I know there was another comment, but
[1:54:19] we've had plenty of discussion on this
[1:54:21] item. So, I I would ask that
[1:54:30] » we we need to do one and then the other.
[1:54:33] >> Yes. So, the first one here is this East
[1:54:34] Side comprehensive plan. These are some
[1:54:36] suggested motions.
[1:54:38] >> Mayor, can you turn on your microphone?
[1:54:41] Mayor.
[1:54:42] >> Oh, sorry.
[1:54:43] >> It must have turned off by itself.
[1:54:45] Sorry.
[1:54:47] Okay. So, I'm ready for a motion on item
[1:54:50] number four.
[1:54:52] >> I
[1:54:55] don't mean I was going to do a motion to
[1:54:57] approval of a um different amendment of
[1:55:00] the east side comprehensive plan that
[1:55:02] the traditional
[1:55:04] designation as identified in the east
[1:55:06] side comprehensive the ESCP.
[1:55:11] Okay, we have a motion been seconded. Uh
[1:55:14] we'll go roll call vote starting with
[1:55:17] council provoscard.
[1:55:18] >> Yes.
[1:55:19] >> Council Moss,
[1:55:20] >> yes.
[1:55:21] >> Council Roelly,
[1:55:22] >> yes.
[1:55:22] >> Council Hillet,
[1:55:23] >> yes.
[1:55:24] >> Council Smith,
[1:55:25] >> yes.
[1:55:25] >> Okay, motion carries. Thank you. We'll
[1:55:28] go to number five, ordinance, uh
[1:55:31] Manglesen zone change request, uh R1A to
[1:55:35] R19.
[1:55:37] Okay. Uh, is there a motion for that
[1:55:40] item?
[1:55:41] >> Mayor, I motion that we amend the
[1:55:43] request and shown as Omegle's own
[1:55:45] request from R1A to R110.
[1:55:49] » Okay, we have a motion and been
[1:55:51] seconded. Roll call vote starting with
[1:55:54] council Smith.
[1:55:55] >> Yes.
[1:55:56] >> Council Hlet.
[1:55:57] >> Uh, no. And the reason is because um I
[1:56:00] know that if for multifamily it'd have
[1:56:03] to come back to us and we could deny
[1:56:05] that.
[1:56:06] >> Okay. Council Rolley,
[1:56:08] >> yes.
[1:56:08] >> Council Moss,
[1:56:10] >> yes.
[1:56:11] >> Council Postcar,
[1:56:12] >> yes.
[1:56:13] >> Okay, motion carries.
[1:56:14] >> And mine carries because
[1:56:16] it still leaves a
[1:56:19] >> if we Yep. with the overlay and I'm just
[1:56:21] not comfortable with that.
[1:56:23] >> Okay, ladies and gentlemen, it's been a
[1:56:25] pleasure to have you be here. I have
[1:56:27] been in meetings that have been a little
[1:56:29] bit ruckus and I don't like those
[1:56:31] meetings and I don't think any of you
[1:56:33] really would either. But my compliment
[1:56:35] is to you uh thank you for for being
[1:56:39] here number one and and doing it in in
[1:56:41] an orderly fashion.
[1:56:43] >> Thank you so much.
[1:56:48] » Absolutely. So we just we just changed
[1:56:49] the designation from active living to
[1:56:51] traditional uh with a minimum of 10,000
[1:56:54] square foot lots.
[1:56:55] >> So there is no possibility of
[1:56:56] >> no possibility of an overlay.
[1:56:58] >> Correct.
[1:57:02] No density single family homes.
[1:57:05] >> Yeah, go ahead and clap on that one.
[1:57:12] » Thank you.
[1:57:27] » A lot of these people don't
[1:57:33] Well,
[1:57:37] » that that's why that's why I felt like
[1:57:39] it's was very important to give some
[1:57:42] people an opportunity to talk.
[1:57:44] >> Thank you for explaining that.
[1:57:46] >> You bet. Thank you. Okay. Uh I'm ready
[1:57:50] for a motion to join to adjourn to a
[1:57:52] closed meeting.
[1:57:53] >> So moved.
[1:57:54] >> Second.
[1:57:55] >> Okay. All in favor say I.
[1:57:57] >> I.
[1:57:58] >> Good. Any oppose? Nope.
[1:58:04] » I do. You want me to do it?
[1:58:14] » Bob, turn on your microphone.
[1:58:17] >> They turned
[1:58:20] >> at 7:57
[1:58:22] uh to discuss the purchase, exchange,
[1:58:24] sale, or lease of real property. Okay.
[1:58:27] You missed
[1:58:29] >> better
[1:58:30] >> then. We we we we [laughter]
[1:58:32] got that.
[1:58:32] >> We have to have roll call.
[1:58:33] >> Yes, we do.
[1:58:36] >> Okay. Roll call.
[1:58:37] >> Yes.
[1:58:38] >> Roll call.
[1:58:39] >> Yes.
[1:58:41] >> Okay. Unanimous.
[1:58:44] >> I love my little doll.
[1:58:45] >> Me, too.
[1:58:46] >> Oh my gosh.
[1:58:47] >> I was scared it was a rude doll of us.
[1:58:50] I'll be stabbing it in the watching
[1:58:52] >> in the crowd.
[1:58:54] >> I haven't either. I have curious. The
[1:58:56] time.