[0:51] um

[1:25] okay well we'd like to welcome you here we apologize for being a few minutes

[1:28] late um

[1:30] i'll blame the long-windedness of who

[1:34] craig jensen oh the chief there we go yeah he's he'll he can shoulder that so

[1:40] anyway we we appreciate you being here tonight

[1:43] uh we'll call our meeting to order and ask uh councilmember crandall if she'd

[1:48] uh mind giving us an invocation after which a pledge by council members nelson

[1:55] our dear father in heaven we are so grateful that we can be here

[2:00] together as a city council and as members of our

[2:05] wonderful springville committee to discuss the events of this evening

[2:10] we are also grateful for this time of year that we get to

[2:14] celebrate our beautiful city through art city days

[2:19] and to enjoy the friendships that we have made

[2:22] over the years and to enjoy activities together we pray that

[2:26] as we go about this week that we will

[2:30] um be able to

[2:33] recognize and enjoy one another and that we will be safe as we go about our

[2:37] activities we are grateful for our city and our community

[2:42] and the things that we do for one another

[2:46] and and we

[2:48] again are grateful for where we live it in this beautiful city of springville

[2:52] and we say these things in the name of jesus christ amen amen

[2:55] we're going to all stand and repeat the pledge of allegiance

[3:00] i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the

[3:06] republic for which it stands one nation under god

[3:10] indivisible with liberty and justice for all

[3:20] okay council members uh you've had a chance

[3:23] to see the agenda i need approval for the meetings agenda as written

[3:28] the motion that we approve the agenda is written okay second i'll second it those

[3:32] in favor all right wonderful

[3:37] um well we're all here i mean this is an

[3:41] exciting week i don't know if any of you had a chance to participate with some of

[3:45] the activities but uh we tried really hard to see if we

[3:49] could have uh some of the council members ride the wild sheep down at the

[3:53] rodeo that didn't turn out very good so but it's uh turned out a lot uh i

[3:58] thought the kids on the sheep stayed a little longer

[4:03] well there's not much difference between a sheep and a bowl you know that's right

[4:06] but we appreciate uh the monies and all their uh tremendous

[4:11] effort and stacy with her crew and i'm going to start naming people and get in

[4:14] trouble but just a tremendous amount of work i think the comment that was made

[4:18] by some of the members of the youth council

[4:21] was when they attended some of those art city day meetings they were shocked at

[4:25] how much really is involved with putting some of

[4:28] the activities on all the activities on and how much effort goes into it so

[4:33] thanks to everyone else so okay we have opportunity for people to

[4:38] give public comment if you'd go over and see kim she has the sheets for you and

[4:42] we'll do that in just a little bit but we'd like to

[4:48] take a moment and do some recognition for the art city days so i'm not sure

[4:52] who i turn it to stacy okay

[4:58] thank you marin council we're actually going to turn the time over to heidi

[5:01] money who is our chairperson for our city days and she'll announce our

[5:05] dignitaries for this year's art city days thanks stacy

[5:11] hello mayor and council and would just like to present this year's our city

[5:14] dave's dignitaries and we will start with frank memory

[5:19] he is our grand marshal um long-time springville resident frank

[5:23] memory will serve as grand marshal of the 2022 art city days grand parade on

[5:28] saturday the para

[5:30] frank um sorry let me start over frank george memory was born

[5:35] in standardville utah on july 29 1923 to franklin and arlene minor memory

[5:42] frank's mother arlene died shortly after his younger brother's birth and frank

[5:45] was raised by his father and stepmother christine nelson memory

[5:49] frank's grandparents met med was it mad matt and ella miner lived on

[5:54] 400 south in springville frank graduated from carbon high school

[5:58] after he joined the navy and served in world war ii

[6:01] he served on a minesweeper and then was transferred to a submarine the uss gato

[6:06] for the balance of his enlistment the submarine went on many harrowing and

[6:10] dangerous missions destroying enemy targets

[6:13] frank returned home and married eileen brown they made their first home in

[6:16] springville they later moved to two other locations in springville then near

[6:20] the mouth of hubble creek canyon and finally to 200 west where frank has

[6:24] lived ever since frank first worked with jeff miner at

[6:27] miner's garage after he took a car there for new spark plugs and jeff offered to

[6:31] show him how to replace them this started a wonderful life as an

[6:34] autumn auto mechanic he learned quickly and enjoyed working on cars and trucks

[6:39] he worked for jeff for many years in two locations

[6:42] he later started a new venture in a building on the corner of maine and

[6:45] fourth called frank and kelly jensen's garage

[6:48] eventually frank bought the garage on center street from bill ruff he enjoyed

[6:52] working there for several years and retired at this location

[6:55] he gave his services many times for little or no charge to people in need

[7:00] frank was involved in civics and the church during most of his life he served

[7:04] on the city's planning committee he was also a springville city

[7:07] councilman during which time springville city purchased the land where the hobble

[7:11] creek golf course would eventually be built

[7:13] frank helped organize the springville ambulance he loved to help those in need

[7:18] frank enjoyed serving in many positions in the church of jesus christ of

[7:21] latter-day saints counselor bishop high councilman and counselor to the branch

[7:25] president of the missionary training center

[7:27] however his favorite calling was that of scoutmaster

[7:30] he took many young men on hikes in which they would be begging to stop while

[7:33] their 60 year old scout master frank wanted to keep going

[7:37] frank's family and friends always always called him the mountain goat

[7:41] frank has watched tens of thousands of miles during his lifetime

[7:45] frank and eileen enjoyed raising their five children in springville vaughn

[7:49] who's married to glenda sharon married to doug

[7:53] and married to dwayne gary mary to carla and richard married to sonny frank has

[7:58] 19 grandchildren and 32 great-grandchildren and he still lives

[8:01] at home at the grand old age of 98. frank's favorite saying is springville

[8:06] has been a good town to us we've had many wonderful family and friends here

[8:10] he's very humbled and honored to be chosen as the 2022 art city days parade

[8:14] grand marshal and we are happy to have him

[8:18] [Applause]

[8:31] yes

[8:48] as long as you don't tell things i told you

[9:00] let's have you look over here

[9:21] is

[10:10] okay now we will turn the time over to are you going to

[10:14] patrick money for um citizens of the year

[10:22] council mayor this year springville citizens of the

[10:27] year who have been chosen are lifetime springville residents

[10:32] cherlene and jim jordan so we could have an applause round of applause for them

[10:41] while they're coming up um jim is a third generation springville

[10:47] resident he met and married shirlene curtis in 1976.

[10:52] they started the fourth generation of jordans born and raised in springville

[10:55] shirley and jim have been married for 45 years and together they have seven

[10:59] children 13 grandchildren and four adorable

[11:04] great-grandchildren is that funny that adorable didn't show up until that

[11:07] great-grandchildren as well as their four-legged family

[11:12] members jack and addie jim and shirlene began fostering dogs four years ago and

[11:17] have enjoyed caring for all of them and helping them find their forever homes

[11:21] they have been successful in finding homes for most of them however they did

[11:25] have two foster fails that we're very happy to welcome jad and

[11:31] we're happy to welcome jack and addy into their home adding to their loving

[11:35] family jim loved springville and opened his

[11:38] flooring business custom carpets off 400 south in 1996 for 25 years he has

[11:44] provided solutions for all flooring needs for springville residents

[11:49] and the surrounding area he is an avid golfer he golfs every

[11:53] chance he gets and faithfully supports the springville mapleton chamber of

[11:56] commerce scholarship golf tournament each event each year

[12:00] last year jim retired and closed the doors to custom carpets in order to

[12:04] enjoy more time on the golf course and with cherlene and their family while jim

[12:09] ran their store streaming cared for their children and worked in several

[12:13] ventures in 19 or sorry in 2014 yeah 1914

[12:17] wouldn't work in 2014 charlene was hired as executive director of the springville

[12:23] mapleton chamber of commerce and at the time and and at the time of being hired

[12:28] there were two choices for the chamber closing the doors or bringing shilling

[12:32] on board to save it with her hard work and love for springville mapleton and

[12:36] the business community she grew the chamber into today's thriving

[12:40] organization she continued leading the chamber and serving the springville

[12:44] mapleton communities until her retirement at the end of 2020.

[12:48] even in retirement shilling continues to serve the community and is always

[12:51] willing to help in any capacity especially the chamber she's an avid

[12:56] shop local patron and contributes this added this and contributes this

[13:01] attitude to all the fantastic business owners she has met throughout the years

[13:05] when talking about her time with the chamber shirlene said once you're in the

[13:09] chamber it's in your blood once you've been there and made friends with the

[13:13] business owners there that's something you don't just walk away from

[13:17] that is still part of who you are shop local so jimmy cherlene thank you

[13:24] [Applause]

[13:56] mr

[14:09] okay now we'll turn the time over to emily larson from the art museum

[14:12] for our resident artist for this year

[14:19] all right our um local filmmaker dean duncan

[14:24] do you want to come up dean or do you want to

[14:27] yeah it is special it's very special we'll be honored during the 2022 art

[14:33] city day celebration as springville's resident artist

[14:36] and i have to say rita is so sad that she can't be here to do this

[14:41] i have worked with rita for eight years really closely and there's almost no one

[14:46] she speaks more highly of than dean duncan your name comes has come up all

[14:49] the time ever since i've worked with rita and she's

[14:52] she just she really doesn't speak highly of

[14:54] almost anyone more highly almost anyone else

[14:58] she speaks highly of a lot of people but i just know she really respects you and

[15:01] your work

[15:04] okay so duncan is an associate professor of film in the department of theater and

[15:08] media arts at brigham young university he has served as director of the byu

[15:12] children's media initiative and director of his department's london study abroad

[15:16] program he received his bachelor's of fine arts degree in film production from

[15:20] byu in 1987. his master's degree in film criticism came from the university of

[15:26] southern california in 1992. he earned his phd in 1999 from glasgow university

[15:32] he is especially interested and involved in documentary and children's media

[15:37] dean is a professor in the theater and media arts department and byu and has

[15:40] been teaching for 30 years he is also a writer documentary filmmaker and

[15:45] broadcaster he has produced many film projects

[15:48] including fit for the kingdom lives of the latter day saints a series of films

[15:52] telling the stories of ordinary people living their lives

[15:54] duncan has made presentations about various aspects of film at conferences

[15:59] and workshops both nationally and internationally in 2016 he created and

[16:04] presented a film series at the springville museum of art in conjunction

[16:07] with the museum's exhibit of soviet era art the series was titled kino russian

[16:12] stories and soviet ideals in film he has written several books about

[16:16] filmmaking including charms that soothe classical music and the narrative film a

[16:21] survey of the aesthetics of classical music and film

[16:24] thinking about film a critical perspective a book for those who want to

[16:28] be more active intelligent film viewers and stories of childhood evolving

[16:32] portrayals in books and films which questions the widely held perception

[16:36] that books as an artistic medium are superior to and more respectable than

[16:41] film or television he has also authored many scholarly

[16:44] articles for various publications including byu studies and the children's

[16:48] media review dean comes to us from edmonton alberta

[16:51] but for the last 30 years springville has been home to him and his wife sharon

[16:55] they have six children and four grandchildren

[16:58] one of dean's greatest satisfactions is helping students and individuals make

[17:02] the connection of the importance and positive influence that all forms of art

[17:06] can have on our lives congratulations dean

[17:09] [Applause]

[17:40] we have one more recognition um rheem's market is business of the year

[17:45] unfortunately they were unable to make it tonight so we just want to recognize

[17:49] rheem's market as our art city days business of the year

[17:53] [Applause] well congratulations to all of you i

[18:02] mean we're just so honored to be able to to honor you and to express our

[18:06] appreciation as a city for all that you do to make our city a wonderful place

[18:11] some have been here a little bit and some have been here a long time but

[18:15] springville is a great place and it's because of people like yourselves that

[18:18] make it possible so thank you very much for everything that you've done we

[18:22] really appreciate it thanks

[18:27] and i didn't confess that much to frank just

[18:34] mayor can i say one thing about frank please about 50 years ago i was working

[18:38] the night shift at miners auto and frank was running it and it was late at night

[18:43] and he pulls in about 11 o'clock with a

[18:46] cheeseburger and fries for me from some dairy queen because he knew i was

[18:50] there working hard alone so

[18:53] what that just tells you what an awesome guy he was most owners would have been

[18:57] home in bed he's down there watching brought me a hamburger hamburger and i

[19:00] still appreciate that 50 years later

[19:06] thank you

[19:10] okay we'll move to the public comment uh portion of our meeting is there a roger

[19:16] rabbit here

[19:20] okay

[19:22] there we go excuse me

[19:26] oh please yes i didn't see you there thank you

[19:29] you're from fruitland utah

[19:32] wonderful not missouri i know where fruitland is

[19:39] um i'm here to announce to you that um

[19:44] uh the company i represent made a 12 million dollar bid on some property here

[19:49] locally and we wanted you to be aware that we're

[19:52] thinking about you and so if

[19:57] we find through working with josh and laura

[20:01] that we can do a development here for it in the

[20:06] community that will bring hundreds of millions of dollars to springfield city

[20:12] uh economic development just wanted to let you be aware we have

[20:16] not chosen a place i just had a chance this morning to talk to

[20:21] josh and laura and a couple other people at once and

[20:25] find out what

[20:28] uh criteria i have

[20:32] to develop

[20:34] and i've been uh just from my bank they want me to do a project

[20:38] so you're in luck i guess

[20:42] that's wonderful we're very i'm just looking

[20:46] i was trying to do something in a housing area

[20:49] up in left fork but there seems to be a jam up of water

[20:54] rights up there just slightly

[20:56] [Laughter] and so

[21:01] i guess i need to take a look at this and see if

[21:04] this will be a little bit different and i've already got a couple

[21:08] subdivisions i'm working on up in duchenne well that's wonderful well

[21:11] we're glad you're uh looking at us and we uh try to put our best foot forward

[21:15] for you and josh is a good man you'll be able to have good conversation with him

[21:19] he's very nice he is thank you very much thank you

[21:25] okay let's enter to the

[21:28] portion of our meeting for the consent items uh we asked in the last meeting if

[21:32] there were any questions in relationship to them and having none

[21:35] i'll entertain a motion for approval of the consent agenda

[21:40] a motion to approve the consent agenda is written second i'll second those in

[21:44] favor oops excuse me

[21:48] i stand back that back it's a roll call vote okay mr jensen yes sir mr jason

[21:54] yep chris yes liz yes mike yes okay it passes

[21:59] there we go okay let's enter the regular portion of

[22:03] our agenda josh in relationship to a change from r115 to r18

[22:15] when we number the consent agenda items individually like that it

[22:19] always makes me think i have more time before i

[22:21] gonna stand up for item eight but we've made good time uh just a moment

[22:26] let me

[22:38] all right thank you mayor and council uh

[22:42] this request that's coming before you was

[22:45] heard by the planning commission on may 10th

[22:48] and comes to you with a unanimous recommendation from the present uh

[22:52] planning commission members it was a four to zero

[22:54] vote it is for an area in the uh a property

[22:58] in the area of 1500 west and center street is shown here on this vicinity

[23:02] map commonly known as the urchin back

[23:04] property across the street from merit academy to

[23:07] the west of reagan academy and north of the

[23:11] the jakers the site that's used for jakers in the

[23:14] fall the current zoning for the area is r115

[23:20] it's about 28.53 acres and the general plan calls for it to be medium low res

[23:26] density residential some of the back uh ground on this area

[23:30] is that as you can see in the zoning map it's

[23:34] r115 and using cs of r18 to the north of it up north of merit academy

[23:41] and that is actually the same general plan designation as this site

[23:47] so a number of uh property owners when the

[23:50] westfield plan was in process and the zoning was adopted to implement that

[23:55] plan uh

[23:57] ask the city to or petition to have their property stay or

[24:02] be designated in the r115 zone to protect their what they perceived as

[24:06] their animal rights so they didn't have they weren't made

[24:10] non-conforming this area was

[24:13] designated as medium density residential in the westfields plan which actually

[24:18] ranges from six to ten units an acre but was designated in the actual general

[24:23] plan under that medium-low density uh

[24:26] i mean four to seven dwelling units an acre but was actually designated in the

[24:29] general plan as the medium-low density residential

[24:33] the current r115 zoning permits essentially up to two drilling

[24:37] units per acre and the requested r18 zoning

[24:41] is comes in at a maximum of 3.8 dwelling units per acre

[24:46] and that falls right in line with the medium-low

[24:49] density residential general plan designation in the three to five units

[24:53] per acre realm there's some interesting policy

[24:56] considerations here generally i use the council have directed us not to

[25:02] support proposals to increase residential density in

[25:06] these areas of the city to stick with the plan essentially

[25:11] but where we have the westfield plan that designated this site

[25:14] according to what the actual request is now and it's essentially just been a

[25:19] 20-year separation between the adoption of the plan and the application of the

[25:23] zoning we don't view it as an increase in density because it actually conforms

[25:27] to the current plan uh the planning commission did recommend

[25:31] approval as i mentioned on a four uh to zero vote

[25:35] and uh is the overlay active in that area

[25:38] probably the westfield's overlay yeah yes so so they could get increased

[25:41] density and they they are they are seeking or

[25:45] applying for density bonus uh as part of that same overlay so correct they could

[25:50] go because it's already in the westfield's overlay right was it i

[25:54] thought it was r10 and then it could be r8 with density bonus

[25:58] it it doesn't bump you up a zoning category it actually just gives

[26:04] you a certain number of additional

[26:07] units based on the criteria that you meet whether that's enhanced front

[26:12] porches or open space or enhanced materials you'd still need the eight

[26:16] there'd still be in the eight which is eight thousand square feet yes yeah that

[26:21] that's the minimum lot size is gonna be eight thousand square feet no matter

[26:24] what yes the minimum wage is gonna be eight thousand well no not for the whole

[26:28] project there may be there's gonna be there could be town homes or other units

[26:32] in there but a certain percentage of the property has to be conformed to the

[26:36] requirements of the base zone so a certain percentage of that 28 acres has

[26:40] to have eight thousand square foot minute they don't use the west fields

[26:43] overlay then it's eight thousand minutes okay yeah i just wanted to make sure

[26:46] because i mean it's the whole west field is set up this way so it's only correct

[26:49] i just wanted to make one make sure that they weren't getting any more than the

[26:52] other westfields but then at the same point make sure they're not good

[26:54] nothing's changing about the westfield's density bonus program we're just

[26:57] changing the base zone from the r115 to the r18 which is what was intended it

[27:02] was kind of carved out yeah if you go back to the map there's

[27:05] actually a couple pieces that were carved out the urchin bracks the uh

[27:10] uh there was another one in there somewhere

[27:13] on center street i can't remember where there was one here we just redid uh last

[27:18] year and then there's the uh um

[27:23] you know i'm talking about the two property owners on either side of center

[27:26] freedom well sims but some was it simpson no uh

[27:30] dutch hall and then across the street to the west of dutch hall those are also

[27:35] r115 still yeah and that probably will be for

[27:39] at least another 10 15 years we'll see

[27:44] any other questions is that all

[27:47] i had another question are you still going to keep adding to this no i i i i

[27:51] just wonder are we as far as uh

[27:54] what they're giving to us have we not decided i mean if park space or in lieu

[27:59] of or what are we doing it's just a zone change this is not a subdivision

[28:04] approval of any sort this is just to allow them to move forward okay with

[28:09] bringing us a subdivision plan which they've done some preliminary work on

[28:13] but no approvals i guess when i saw that flip up there i thought that was

[28:17] you know the previous one i thought those were some of the

[28:20] yeah yeah it's not that the one you had i guess and that's that's good because

[28:25] we haven't we want to look at that yeah and they're

[28:27] going to dedicate however it works out the area

[28:31] along 1200 west is part of the 1200 west linear park

[28:35] and there may be some other dedications in there as well

[28:38] okay so josh you and i had a conversation with this particular

[28:43] developer at one point and they threw some

[28:46] kind of uh plat drawings at us and we didn't

[28:51] like those i'm i'm not opposed to the zone change but i would be opposed to

[28:57] something like that being put in there that's uh the catch here

[29:01] uh is when you approve the zone change you

[29:05] approve any

[29:07] you're essentially granting entitlement to any code compliant development so if

[29:12] there is a concern that

[29:15] you want that the existing ordinance won't give you the level of comfort you

[29:20] want to guarantee a certain result then you shouldn't uh you would want to hold

[29:24] off on changing the zone or put some restrictions on that zone

[29:28] which would require us to go and do some drafting and go back to planning

[29:32] commission which we're happy to do but if you feel that

[29:36] another typical westfield's subdivision here isn't quite what you're wanting

[29:41] well it's not it isn't the typical westfield subdivision i'm fine with the

[29:45] typical westfield subdivision what what i had a problem with when we had that

[29:49] conversation before was i mean it looked kind of like that

[29:54] that townhome area just to the east of that

[29:57] property at least the drawings that they gave us

[30:01] which which i would have not been comfortable with at all and

[30:05] that would be permitted

[30:09] but only in a certain only honest portion of the site but not

[30:14] an insubstantial portion of the site because it all has to average r18

[30:19] no uh there is a maximum total units per

[30:23] acre that you can yield and then a certain percentage of that

[30:27] has to be developed to the 8 000 square foot lot standard a certain percentage

[30:31] can be developed as twin homes or duplexes a certain percentage then the

[30:36] rest could be developed as a smaller single-family

[30:39] uh lot product as long as you don't exceed

[30:43] the total number of units we go through a whole

[30:46] spreadsheet to come up with your debt your base units plus your density

[30:50] bonuses give you your total units and that's in the overlay not in the zone

[30:53] right

[30:56] the density bonus the the developer has to give back to the city if you will in

[31:02] terms of open space development quality materials and design and so forth that

[31:07] they they can add those up to whatever density they're seeking up to a maximum

[31:11] amount but to mike's point they could design or have that any way they want as

[31:16] long as it conforms to the overlay if we approve it to the overlay and the r18000

[31:22] correct and so that's the same as they can do the same thing in the r115 zone

[31:27] but obviously quite a bit less density and you get less total units

[31:32] to work with

[31:36] that was really one of the key elements of the westfield's overlay is it

[31:40] worked to

[31:43] reduce the really harsh segmentation of product types by allowing

[31:49] uh different types of product types under one base zone and i mean i wasn't

[31:53] around when that was created but i like it because it helps it helps community

[31:57] because if you have all of your high density in one spot

[32:00] it really is not useful it's not helpful for a community but if you have and it's

[32:04] like my son lives in this ward so i know it very well and it's like well we have

[32:08] this but then we also have these nice houses that's what that overlay creates

[32:12] is it's like hey you can have that density in this spot so create yourself

[32:15] some affordable housing here but real close like in the same ward if you will

[32:20] there's going to be some nicer homes so you have a little more

[32:23] that that's my i mean and we call it different things but that's a form of

[32:27] mixed density yeah absolutely that really makes for a better community in

[32:32] my opinion and people may disagree and the

[32:34] the concept they're currently working off of is an improvement over the

[32:38] concept you saw uh which i hope so which in a lot of

[32:41] ways you saw before was awful right and it didn't necessarily meet the

[32:45] requirements of the zone they're getting a lot closer there's way too much

[32:48] density in it yeah they're originally asking for an

[32:52] additional uh to go up to the r2 zone as a transition between this village center

[32:57] and the r8 so i'm okay with that i'm okay with that

[33:01] mix like what craig's talking about as long as that whole piece doesn't turn

[33:05] into it doesn't turn into what that thing is

[33:08] then it can't based on the based on the r18 i don't think no we can pull it up

[33:14] under the r18 25 percent has to be done the land area has to be done in the base

[33:19] zone so 25 percent of land area will be an r1

[33:22] 8000 single family lots another 25 has to be in single family detached product

[33:29] and then the rest can be done i mean it can all be done in single family but the

[33:33] rest can be done uh either in an r2 or in some multi-family and it's

[33:37] town homes um for the balance but that's half of that half of the acreage could

[33:43] be in r2 it could be they also can't go over the maximum

[33:47] density

[33:49] they can't go over the maximum density allowed and they have to qualify for

[33:53] density bonuses um

[33:56] to to get there so we can we can pull up and show you the numbers if you'd like

[34:00] so the maximum density increase is 40 percent

[34:04] most of our developments are coming in with about a 20 density increase did you

[34:09] hear that mike that you could get 40 or 50 percent your base in r18 is 3.8

[34:14] baseline units per acre that's what we do the math off of that's

[34:18] what you get to start and then by employing your maximum

[34:22] density bonus you get 40 which takes you to five three in an r18

[34:29] so if you look at that overall 28 acres and did the multiplication that's how

[34:33] many total units they have to play with and we're not seeing people reach that

[34:38] 40 percent in too many developments right but they could they could

[34:43] but for instance a lot of the developments that have been on the

[34:47] south side of four south of you're seeing numbers around 10 to 14 is all

[34:52] you saw in a lot of those so you got a lot of single family homes

[34:56] yeah i mean and the the density right because i mean the density bonuses based

[35:01] some of them at this point and that's something we've

[35:04] talked about internally if things were ever slowed down it may be worth

[35:07] rebalancing some of that because the density bonuses when originally created

[35:12] were made roughly equivalent to

[35:15] value-wise to the increased density you're receiving but some things have

[35:19] gotten out of balance for example it may be more expensive to put brick on the

[35:23] house now than it's worth in terms of additional units you get from density

[35:26] bonus and so that's why you're seeing

[35:29] many of them come in less than maximums because it doesn't make financial sense

[35:33] to do that but if you're only getting i mean if you use the 20 percent that's

[35:38] um you can't put it all in multi-family

[35:42] housing because you'll have too much other land left over if that makes sense

[35:45] because you've got to get your units in there in a profitable way yeah josh can

[35:49] you answer me a question i i apologize because i just want to understand it and

[35:53] i don't yet you said it really matches what has been out there anyway

[35:58] yet we're making a motion to amend it so i i'm not clear on if if

[36:05] it's matching what is already out there why are we amending it i don't get that

[36:08] when you said that what i meant is that the existing westfield's plan and

[36:14] general plan say that this should be r18

[36:18] they haven't ever asked for that because they were not interested in developing

[36:22] the property go back to your big map it's easier like

[36:26] dutch hall's property is not r18 but if at some point it will be yes this these

[36:31] are all designated to come in go back to you had the overall plan from the west

[36:36] field oh yes yes you understand my question

[36:39] so if you look at the go ahead and explain and walk through

[36:42] that plan so these lighter colors are the lower density areas

[36:47] at the extreme perimeter and then you gradually step up uh towards the center

[36:52] with higher density and then in the areas generally adjacent to the

[36:56] rail corridor you have slightly higher densities permitted as well so this plan

[37:01] said this area should always be this dense because of where it is and so

[37:06] you see i've drawn this little box over it so you can see where it is so it's in

[37:09] this orange area but they never asked to change the zone to match the plan so

[37:15] we've heard loud and clear from the the council that

[37:18] you like the plan that was in place and that you didn't want to see

[37:22] increased densities that that was something you're generally not in favor

[37:26] of and so i pushed back pretty hard on community development on that point

[37:29] because um this violated that second tenet of

[37:32] kind of increasing density but when the staff brought to me and walked through

[37:37] this portion of it the original plan this is in harmony with the original

[37:41] plan it meets what the intent of the original plan was to have the dense area

[37:45] at the center radiating outward to lower density they said fine then it can you

[37:49] can go to the planning commission for their guidance and recommendation

[37:53] um and planning commission heard it and has has recommended it to you and you're

[37:58] asking the questions we would anticipate you asked based upon the guidance you've

[38:01] given us in the past but you know josh is explaining the

[38:04] reasoning behind both the planning commission and staff recommending for it

[38:08] but this particular piece was left r115 simply because the property owners

[38:14] requested that originally and now they don't want that

[38:18] anymore they're ready to sell and

[38:22] 20 years later they're ready to have the plan come into effect they want to go

[38:26] back what they could have accepted earlier yes i missed that i missed that

[38:31] in the translation why we were having to change it if it was the same yes

[38:36] but it never got yeah right but the r115 from the overall

[38:40] plan would be out of place with what the

[38:44] overall plan is yeah sure that's why we would need to

[38:48] change it yeah but it was the same i was confused there okay it's kind of like my

[38:52] old my dad's old coat in my closet at my house they had this

[38:57] thing on it with punch holes in it he said don't ever tear that off and i said

[38:59] why he said well those are punch passes to although i was like they do those

[39:02] he's like no i just haven't redeemed it so these

[39:05] these people have just been not redeemed their punch pass for 20 years and now

[39:10] they're but it's still up to you i mean for our benefit we're listening to the

[39:14] debate to understand better kind of the tug of war between those two items right

[39:19] between whether no density preempts stick with the plan so that we know how

[39:24] to better you know react to and and educate and talk to developers in the

[39:28] future and as mayor packard uh noted in the last meeting

[39:33] a few you know a future council can always make a different decision so

[39:36] you're not bound by this plan you're not the lift guy who has to punch the pass

[39:41] lost why we were doing it if it was the same

[39:45] yeah good discussion okay are we ready

[39:50] uh hold on unless me see are there any questions that need to be asked of josh

[39:54] i it thank you i'm just uh the only thing

[39:57] was just when mike brought up the

[40:00] the look of the buildings but but i understand the whole

[40:05] country where we are the concept but we are much more into the look of things

[40:08] yes we are i like a better look of things i don't want somebody giving me

[40:12] some thing that's not beautiful

[40:15] okay any other questions my eye

[40:18] okay great i'll motion to prove ordinance 06 2022 amending the

[40:22] springville official zone map on parcels two three

[40:25] zero three zero zero zero one six two three zero three one zero zero one five

[40:29] two three zero three zero zero zero one and two three zero three one zero zero

[40:34] one four from the r 115 single family residential zones to the r18

[40:38] single-family residential zones located in the area of 1500 west and center

[40:43] street okay i have a motion on the any questions on the motion

[40:48] i have a second a second okay it's a roll call vote

[40:54] miss crandall yes mr miller yes mr sorenson yes mr snelson yes mr jensen

[41:01] yes okay motion passes

[41:10] okay mr yoster still up

[41:19] our next item is uh some amendment to our city code related related to

[41:25] specific sign regulations and i

[41:29] copied this slide over from planning commission this has not been continued

[41:32] to you it was continued in planning commission sorry about that

[41:35] this also was heard at planning commission on may 10th

[41:40] so we have some specific sign regulations our sign code is set up

[41:45] to designate sign areas across the city and

[41:49] then define a series of different types of signs

[41:52] and then apply those signs to the different sign areas

[41:56] there are some

[41:58] signs types that we don't have as i mentioned in the staff report that

[42:02] traditionally were very common there are some signs that we don't have

[42:06] really well crafted regulations for

[42:10] and that need to be updated and one of the

[42:13] impetuses behind this discussion was uh wavetronix came to us with the signed

[42:18] package for hobble creek square which is their corporate campus

[42:22] and they had some great sign types in there that were very reminiscent of

[42:26] signs you may see in his historic or traditional downtown

[42:30] that we just didn't have a way to permit we didn't have categories for so made us

[42:35] take a kind of a look at our sign code and evaluate uh

[42:40] how we could make the sign code more palatable or

[42:44] more clear or

[42:48] better in its ability to facilitate creativity and expression in signage

[42:53] commensurate with our images of the art city

[42:56] without while still maintaining everyone's quality of life in terms of

[43:00] the aesthetic considerations and things that are important to people

[43:04] so uh we took this chance as we were getting

[43:07] into this to actually look at a-frame signs because it was one of the things

[43:10] on my accounts priorities list that i'm hoping to check off tonight

[43:15] and the elements we've included in this

[43:18] update to the a-frame signs is that you can have one portable

[43:22] a-frame sign per ground level business and it has to be

[43:26] attended by a responsible party and we've included some uh requirements for

[43:31] that so it basically means there has to be somebody in the business or next to

[43:34] the sign attending it

[43:37] we limit the size height area of the signs

[43:41] the the type of copy that can be on the signs that can

[43:45] only be used for on-premise advertising

[43:50] allstate couldn't put out a sign for duke's jewelers or vice versa

[43:56] the location of the display is also defined as being essentially between the

[44:01] side property lines of your business and also the time of the display that if

[44:05] you're open you can have it out if you're closed it needs to be taken in

[44:09] are there any questions on a-frame science yes i have several

[44:14] questions about this whole deal nothing bad i just want to make sure

[44:18] we're clear because there is some a little bit of verbage that i'm unclear

[44:22] on so

[44:24] uh in paragraph b

[44:27] it says one a-frame attended portable sign should be permitted for each ground

[44:31] level business with an individual front door entrance fronting a public street

[44:40] i guess my question is why does the entrance have to front a public street

[44:45] and i could give two examples of businesses that don't

[44:49] have a door fronting the public street uh copies plus is one for example and

[44:58] not that it has anything to do yeah thanks for

[45:01] bringing that up because i wanted i was going to hesitate with that but my

[45:05] building doesn't have a door fronting the public street at least not the

[45:09] regular entrance door if we take a look at

[45:15] number 13 paragraph b

[45:20] that phrases the same thing a little bit differently and i think would clarify

[45:26] that fronting of public street or street level parking lot entry having

[45:31] frontage on a public or private street pedestrian way plaza or open space

[45:35] subject to the following conditions so

[45:39] i would prefer to see that particular verbiage change to something like what

[45:45] is in what's 13b does that make sense or if you can tell

[45:51] me i mean if you can explain to me why

[45:55] that's phrased that way and if that's going to create a problem if it's

[46:00] not going to create a problem we don't need to fix it but i'm just wondering if

[46:03] it will i may defer to john but one of the elements in this is that these signs

[46:08] are actually being placed in the public right-of-way so we have to be very clear

[46:13] about not establishing a public forum with these signs so being

[46:19] not being very restrictive on where they can be placed and how they have to be

[46:23] observed and attended protects the city as opposed to the

[46:29] projecting signs those signs do project over the right-of-way to a certain

[46:33] degree with an agreement but they are attached to the building

[46:38] and have less of a potential for being alternately construed

[46:43] okay so so my building would be a bad example of it

[46:47] of this particular thing that you're talking about because i don't have that

[46:50] public right-of-way that area between the sidewalk and the curb

[46:54] but copies plus does and so can copies plus not put an

[47:00] a-frame sign out there in the public right-of-way

[47:03] because their front door doesn't front the street you see what i mean so do you

[47:07] normally put i mean if you were to put up an a phrase sign you'd put it up

[47:10] behind the sidewalk is that what you're saying well i would i would so it's

[47:14] irrelevant to me i'm just i was using my building as an example of a building

[47:18] that doesn't have a front street facing door but copies plus

[47:24] does have a public right-of-way out on the street

[47:28] but they don't have a door facing the street you see what i mean

[47:32] yeah and i think i mean what we're trying to do here is keep the sign

[47:36] ordinance content neutral and so it's it's something that we can make what

[47:41] you're trying to do happen we just need to tweak a few things in here okay and

[47:45] that's fine i just want to make sure that it works almost take out b all

[47:49] together and just include c and then include those numbers uh just increase

[47:53] those numbers from 50 feet to like 150 feet and then that lets any ground level

[47:58] business have a sign within 150 feet of their

[48:02] door whether it's front facing or not

[48:05] but i mean then it comes back to you if that's technically whether it's in front

[48:08] of their business or not either yes i was thinking of this little strip mall

[48:12] uh by anytime fitness uh you know that we're uh by reigns there's about eight

[48:17] or none of those would be able to do it

[48:19] according to this so that's a good point

[48:24] yeah so i think it's it's a simple fix that we could do fairly quickly this is

[48:28] just the basic of this is a radical change from the side ordinance we've had

[48:33] in my opinion i mean the whole thing i'm talking about

[48:35] the whole thing because for years the city has fought businesses

[48:40] over the sign ordinance i mean it's it's probably i think it was one of the most

[48:44] restrictive sign ordinances in the valley and and this is a pretty radical

[48:49] change i'm not opposing it i'm just this is monumental

[48:53] frankly yeah in fact i think this is i think this is a great

[48:57] idea overall i think it's great i just want some of these little details worked

[49:00] out so we're not getting confused and there's you know problems in the future

[49:08] the other question i had was on uh paragraph f

[49:13] line eight is outline eight for business with

[49:16] a front setback the sign shall be located in the front

[49:20] setback so that means if a business has a front

[49:24] setback uh like mine for example does that mean

[49:29] that the sign can't go in the public right away it has

[49:34] to go in the front setback is that do i understand that correctly

[49:38] yes that's how so if a business has a front set back and a public right-of-way

[49:42] in front of it that business can't put an a-frame sign in the public

[49:47] right-of-way right it has to be in okay behind the walk okay i just wanted to

[49:51] make sure i was clear on that and then uh the next lying down for

[49:57] businesses without a front set back so that would be for example businesses

[50:00] here on historic main street where they're right there that sign has to be

[50:06] it says it has to be adjacent to the facade with a six foot wide

[50:11] clearance so the sign would have to be up against the building to provide six

[50:15] feet between the sign and the curb and gutter or within the park strip okay

[50:22] so it can either be on the park strip side of the sidewalk

[50:25] or on the storefront side sidewalk as long as there's a six foot

[50:29] clear space in line parallel with the sidewalk

[50:33] okay and then

[50:36] paragraph g the time of display it can only be up during business hours

[50:42] if it's in the public right-of-way but if it's in the front setback or on the

[50:46] business's property does that a-frame sign still need to come down yes

[50:50] even if it's even if it's in the setback or on the business's property not the

[50:55] public right away all those provisions apply to a-frame signs generally so they

[50:59] they would all have to come down each day okay and do they have to get a

[51:03] permit and pay a fee to have these i didn't read that

[51:07] for a frame signs no

[51:17] we wanted to make it as easy as possible for someone to stick out

[51:21] an a-frame sign and say come get some fresh bagels or yeah because i i mean

[51:25] i've i've got a renter in my building that puts an a-frame sign out by my

[51:28] building but it's on my property it's not in the public right-of-way so that

[51:32] that's why i was kind of wondering about was there a restriction on size yes i

[51:37] missed it 24 by 36 oh okay

[51:40] oh there we are yep sorry that's a standard a-frame

[51:44] sorry yeah so that's your face size i was just

[51:48] thinking of a variety up and down the street it could be and right hand uh

[51:55] so that's your your sign face but your frame size can be uh

[52:00] up to 27 inches wide and up to 47 inches tall

[52:04] when when standing up so yep okay

[52:10] very good any other questions on the a-frame

[52:15] okay vertical blade or marquee signs

[52:20] and this is not shameless pandering i actually do like this one

[52:24] uh but the mayor did actually mention this in a

[52:28] meeting that

[52:30] the bank struggled significantly in trying to make modifications to this

[52:34] sign i don't know whether it was for repairs or to change it to central bank

[52:38] from springfield banking company uh but that they really weren't able and

[52:43] had to replace it with that small box that is up there and

[52:47] was i right that you would have rather maintained the historic sign

[52:51] yep so this

[52:55] amendment actually creates a a sign type to permit these type of

[53:00] signs and provides allowances for them and

[53:04] from my perspective i think they're great because they provide interest and

[53:08] variety to the street front they reflect a lot of historic sign types that we've

[53:13] had in town all of our theaters had these type of

[53:17] signs and

[53:20] they really i think contribute to the

[53:23] to the interest and aesthetic quality of downtown as long as it doesn't get out

[53:28] of hand and i think we've struck a good balance here

[53:31] so they're permitted in all non-residential science districts

[53:34] originally uh we were think we were thinking you

[53:37] know shouldn't this just be like downtown

[53:40] and that's kind of when waitrose came to us and said well

[53:43] we'd love to have this on our little cafe out here and we thought you know

[53:48] when we already have some other ones in the city that may have not gotten

[53:50] permits that uh work well or if walmart wanted to come put a vertical blade sign

[53:55] on the side of their building and have a cool looking sign we just didn't see any

[53:59] reason not to restrict this from all the commercial districts the people that

[54:05] fought and got the origin the other sign company will have reasons and

[54:10] they'll come and talk to us about it when we pass this

[54:15] say that again they they were wanting to go to the park city

[54:19] model where everything's on the ground small

[54:22] nothing up in the air so this isn't permitting signs on polls

[54:26] at all no no on buildings you know it i'm just saying

[54:31] okay those people will be here to tell us the reasons why we shouldn't do it

[54:36] yeah

[54:42] what chris was saying is that there was a group that promoted this for aesthetic

[54:46] reasons and that

[54:48] were very adamant and this again this is a major major change in signing

[54:53] and had enough clout to get it passed right and pretty common across the

[54:57] country actually if you go up to there's actually a push across the state

[55:01] to change some of these ordinances by uh historic preservation groups and sign

[55:05] aficionados because there's so many from the

[55:08] uh the noodle dragon camera there's a noodle house in ogden

[55:12] that has an amazing sign there's some stuff on main street and

[55:16] they're very hard to preserve because you can't change the copy so if the

[55:19] business has changed and you don't have that name anymore

[55:23] what you can do with the sign and most cities actually moved away in an attempt

[55:27] to de-clutter or kind of streamline

[55:30] downtowns a lot of these sign types were taken out of codes actually very broadly

[55:34] across the country i like them personally i thought because i thought i

[55:38] thought it was unfair that we had people down on the freeway that were allowed 50

[55:42] feet or higher or whatever the number was and the new ones coming in couldn't

[55:45] that didn't seem fair to me so i thought you know let's make it

[55:49] so that everybody has equal chance at advertising well there's a there's a

[55:52] level of novelty to this you know that we're trying to maybe create for the

[55:56] city a little bit more so so mayor if you put this blade sign back

[56:00] on the bank and also change the facade back to this as well

[56:05] um that's the easiest change yeah what i'm going to do is take the awnings off

[56:09] there's even a facade for that one and there's always sandstone yeah like the

[56:14] reynolds building i'll let josh address that

[56:18] there is talk about this one's still here and it's

[56:22] intact so it's yes it's the easy sell right

[56:27] uh this also deals with location and

[56:30] projection requirements height and area allowances it's really counted as part

[56:35] of your wall sign so you can't have a huge wall sign and a

[56:38] huge blade sign you kind of have to make a decision

[56:42] so that those are the elements about uh the projecting

[56:46] uh we renamed it from projecting science to projecting vertical blade or key

[56:50] signs and if there's any questions about the specific language that you have in

[56:54] your report i'm happy to address those

[57:02] all right well

[57:05] i'm not done yet you're not done wait until he's i mean

[57:08] i'm free you if you feel like making a motion you don't have a tv

[57:16] so the the size of the sign can't be over 12 square feet is that right uh

[57:21] i read that right that's in oh i'm sorry i'm on the wrong

[57:25] one i'm on 13. yeah so it's it's just what you do the calculation for wall

[57:30] sign area and you can use that within your uh

[57:36] projection and you have to be at least uh

[57:39] seven feet above or something yeah you can't

[57:49] it can only project a maximum of seven feet and it has to meet the clearance

[57:52] requirements uh in this other section which is essentially i think saying

[57:57] i think it's 10 feet in 116305

[58:01] sorry i'd have to go back to that section but it does it references

[58:04] another section for the minimum ground clearance on those

[58:12] the last category is these projecting

[58:14] storefront signs which interestingly on our

[58:18] community board walk the other night i noticed or getting ready for that that

[58:22] we actually have one now we didn't really have any this new boutique

[58:26] that's occupying the former jackson's whole store

[58:30] is that april the poetic boutique has a cute little

[58:34] projecting projecting storefront sign that they mounted up

[58:37] and if uh what we're proposing here would actually

[58:40] make that legal and provide some regulations for those

[58:44] these are really great signs to

[58:47] increase the pedestrian friendliness of downtown

[58:51] to make it interesting charming all those kind of small town things we're

[58:53] looking for it really is the the evolution of hanging out your

[58:57] shingle putting out a little bracket and hanging a piece of wood on it with your

[59:01] name and

[59:05] they provide a lot of interest and additional ability to communicate to

[59:09] people that are people-sized and walking speed in front

[59:14] of your business again on these we regulate the number of

[59:19] signs uh the location of those signs their ground

[59:23] clearance these are can be down to eight feet

[59:27] uh their area dimensions there's a

[59:30] total area in a maximum dimension so you can kind of play with the the shape or

[59:35] aspect ratio of your signs and then it governs the maximum

[59:39] projection from the building as well can they be lit

[59:44] they can be lit uh the lighting i we actually added one

[59:50] element to the lighting from since planning commission that i noted in your

[59:53] staff report they can be either internally or externally lit but this

[59:57] any external lighting has to be directed uh shielded and directed only onto the

[1:00:01] sign and the lighting has to be uh static it can't be animated

[1:00:07] uh flashing move there can't be chasing or running lights there can't be neon

[1:00:11] that turns on and off it has to just be a steady state

[1:00:14] uh light so if you're ever in provo there's some ins there's some uh

[1:00:19] examples that are essentially box signs that have uh translucent faces on them

[1:00:25] there's some that are signs like you see here and they just

[1:00:28] have small little led lights that shine down on them

[1:00:33] or there's a couple that did have some uh neon on them but it's all static as

[1:00:38] long as you can stay within the you can't have a 10 inch thick cabinet it

[1:00:41] has to still stay pretty thin so

[1:00:45] so i think i read someplace that the cabinet on this style has to be no

[1:00:50] greater than six inches is that correct was that what this was on these kinds

[1:00:54] yeah the signs including the cabinet should not

[1:00:56] be more than six inches yeah okay but external lighting doesn't count towards

[1:01:00] that right six inches so you could have like two flood lights

[1:01:06] or spotlights that have a little hood on them or whatever

[1:01:08] exactly

[1:01:12] and then there's a whole harmless agreement

[1:01:15] required with the city to be able to hang

[1:01:18] something essentially over the right-of-way if it does come over the

[1:01:21] right-of-way and the messages are limited again to

[1:01:24] on-premise messages you can't hang out a somebody else's shingle

[1:01:30] and the uh the type of the sign it can't be an

[1:01:33] electronic display sign or a changeable message sign

[1:01:37] and

[1:01:41] that that are all the elements that we added into those and we hope that

[1:01:45] they'll be well used and hopefully we can go out to

[1:01:48] hubble creek square as well and see some great signage adding to the

[1:01:52] character that project

[1:01:57] okay questions for josh that's awesome i like it because i have missed the

[1:02:02] a-frame on our city parks

[1:02:07] advertising um we had a big discussion about that very

[1:02:12] about that very thing when we were doing the sign ordinance

[1:02:16] and it was we're going to ban a-frame signs but the city can have it

[1:02:20] there's like no it's either

[1:02:23] yeah we either allow it or we don't and so i like that we are i think it's great

[1:02:28] i really have missed him i think it's really hometown and awesome

[1:02:32] so thank you but these a-frames are quite a bit smaller than what the cities

[1:02:36] used to be these are just 26

[1:02:39] 26 or 24 by 36 signs so it's not like the big ones that we use i know

[1:02:44] and maybe someday we'll be able to have the big ones too jason did you have a

[1:02:48] question yeah john the changes that mike was talking about those require some

[1:02:52] kind of amendment we need to put that into the motion well actually

[1:02:56] we'll need to change the ordinance the ordinance has to be

[1:02:59] uh worded correctly in front of the council uh before you kind of pass it in

[1:03:04] a meeting so i would have to actually go upstairs and type it in so on that what

[1:03:08] mike because i think what mike said is probably a pretty good idea to where we

[1:03:11] take what is it section 13 and replacing we can just probably just strike b and

[1:03:15] that accomplishes strike b for john's recommendation

[1:03:20] what's that strike uh 3b

[1:03:25] well we could but we're still not gonna i think get to

[1:03:29] where councilman nelson wants to be i think he

[1:03:32] wants to probably be more than 50 feet i mean if you were to look at some of

[1:03:37] these well yeah i mean if you look at for example copies plus they set way

[1:03:41] back exactly

[1:03:46] but he has that whole building so he should be able to put that sign out

[1:03:49] there to so if you wanted to continue this josh

[1:03:52] actually has this on his computer we could do his i could give him the

[1:03:56] language and then he can run up and change and bring it back is it critical

[1:03:59] to have it done today i don't think it's critical to have it done today but i not

[1:04:03] opposed to that but if it doesn't make any difference to wait two weeks i mean

[1:04:06] how much time does it take to change it that's it doesn't matter

[1:04:09] the other alternative is to move to the next item on the wetlands and let you do

[1:04:14] your thing with the ordinance so the problem is is it's actually on his

[1:04:18] computer oh nice and i can't get into where he is

[1:04:22] there we go we can do service always trying to get us

[1:04:25] all impervious

[1:04:27] sometimes i feel like an impervious surface

[1:04:31] okay we'll uh

[1:04:35] we'll bring this back here in just a few

[1:04:37] minutes so okay we'll let you do that okay brad if we'll let you uh

[1:04:44] address this in relationship to impervious surface

[1:04:51] so over the past year or so we've been talking about stormwater

[1:04:55] and we're just tweaking a few things to get it

[1:04:59] exactly right the last time we went with the council

[1:05:03] we were talking more about impervious surface and billings we actually sent

[1:05:07] out about 458 billions and we've got less than 10 responses

[1:05:11] back of customers that we're a little bit

[1:05:14] frustrated because of the way we're billing and the way we're calculating

[1:05:17] impervious service so we feel that's really good percentage

[1:05:21] but we did find something that we thought we might want to change just to

[1:05:24] make it a little bit more equitable to our citizens

[1:05:28] and so what we're doing is we're actually going through and

[1:05:31] looking at the current code that gives me the opportunity to give up to a 35

[1:05:35] percent reduction in their original billing

[1:05:39] for a couple criteria and those two criteria that they exceed the city's

[1:05:42] stormwater development standards and or

[1:05:46] if they reduce the city's downstream cost in providing stormwater capacity so

[1:05:50] in layman's terms what that means is if they're able to keep some of that storm

[1:05:54] water on their property permanently then we don't have to have

[1:05:58] bigger pipes down the line right and or if they're doing something on

[1:06:02] site that makes it so that that storm water is not leaving or it's coming off

[1:06:06] in a much slower than than we recommend in our standards bleeding off into the

[1:06:11] system so we want to be able to give them

[1:06:14] a

[1:06:17] reduction i lost the word so so what what would that mean if you're holding

[1:06:22] storm water i mean how do you retain that

[1:06:26] well we we'll talk about that as we go into it oh okay so there we go jumping

[1:06:29] ahead again yeah i need to send you my presentation

[1:06:35] so so the proposed action that we have here is to

[1:06:38] allow an additional so beyond the 35 i can give to allow the

[1:06:43] seat administrator to give up to 30 percent more

[1:06:47] reduction in their fee and we'll go through and talk a little bit about that

[1:06:51] right now the current code states this and i left it blank in the middle

[1:06:54] because we're going to fill that in with new language

[1:06:57] but literally if they don't like my decision then the code says they can go

[1:07:01] to the city administrator and say we don't like his decision and this is why

[1:07:05] but the code doesn't say what the city administrator can do it just says he can

[1:07:09] listen to it right

[1:07:11] and so what i what i'm suggesting here is that we put this language in here

[1:07:15] that gives the seat administrator the ability to hear

[1:07:19] the arguments of the person that wants to have this greater reduction

[1:07:23] and go through and get any information and it allows this administrator to go

[1:07:26] up to 30 percent more in the fee reduction

[1:07:31] and the reason for doing that is is because the fee itself isn't totally

[1:07:36] based on what they're doing on their property and in fact

[1:07:40] i wanted to bring this up this is the actual code language for the paragraph

[1:07:44] and it tells the city that we need to we need to impose this fee on all on all

[1:07:48] real property within the city and the way we've taken that is all

[1:07:52] developed real property we're not charging fields or anything like that

[1:07:56] for storm water but with that it says that the fee

[1:08:00] is going to fund administration so the other things that we have to do that's

[1:08:03] been put on us by the state through fema to make us do this storm water stuff

[1:08:09] and so there still needs to be a fee on every parcel even if they keep it on

[1:08:14] their property all the way does that make

[1:08:16] sense and some people do that for example the old prior dairy has a whole

[1:08:21] bunch of concrete areas but they all drain into us into a pond that's on site

[1:08:27] and so this person is saying

[1:08:30] i'm nodding i'm not

[1:08:32] having to go off into the area and for me to give just a 35 reduction we

[1:08:38] thought maybe that's not the right amount that we should be reducing it and

[1:08:41] that's why we're bringing this the other reason is because it gives a second step

[1:08:45] for somebody to have an appeal beyond what i'm doing and it allows the

[1:08:49] administrator to to hear that and give the appropriate amount to and realize i

[1:08:54] don't always just give 35 if it's we look at how much is being

[1:08:58] held and what they're doing we might only give them 10 percent reduction

[1:09:02] does that make sense yep and so that's the whole point of this discussion

[1:09:06] so where did those uh how are those percentages

[1:09:10] uh derived i mean we look at the stormwater flow that's

[1:09:13] coming off and based on the system whatever they're using and so forth i

[1:09:18] think what he's asking is 65 why not 90 or 100

[1:09:23] yeah i mean why is it 35 instead of 45 and 30 instead of 50 or whatever it

[1:09:29] might be well my reductions of 35 came about because that's the way the code's

[1:09:32] been written forever what i when i talked with troy about

[1:09:36] this i thought and again i brought back the fact that we're spending money on

[1:09:39] administrative stuff too trying to keep the storm water going so everybody

[1:09:43] should pay and that's what the code says we could go different than 30 we could

[1:09:48] say that the administrator could have 40 more percent if we wanted to go no

[1:09:52] i'm not suggesting that we do that i'm just asking where the numbers came from

[1:09:56] so that i had some understanding of how it was calculated

[1:10:00] so again we look at the flow that's coming off of the parcel so remember we

[1:10:04] had all this discussion about this was it a year or two ago well it was

[1:10:08] actually a year ago a year ago so are we saying that when we approved

[1:10:13] it that we

[1:10:15] over approved it by about 35 percent if you're able to get 65 percent

[1:10:20] no that's not working actually basically said that we didn't put a provision in

[1:10:24] there that they could appeal brad's decision and go to troy

[1:10:28] and get it heard and that he had his guard rails that said you can only give

[1:10:33] so much if you so choose to do that guard drills were the same as his

[1:10:37] guardrails i could just verify whether he'd acted correctly or not so brad's

[1:10:42] brad in talking to the existing people i think has

[1:10:46] come across some circumstances where he

[1:10:50] believes it would be better to give something greater than 35 and this is

[1:10:54] the mechanism he's recommending yeah that's good but i mean given we've

[1:11:01] we've had you know just one or two percent even raised questions about the

[1:11:06] rates within that one or two percent they're people that are raising issues

[1:11:09] that say maybe something in excess of 35 would be

[1:11:13] fair okay i'm glad we have a mechanism

[1:11:17] because i think it was a lively discussion back then

[1:11:21] that was the same well it was that it's such a small piece but

[1:11:26] you know boy you poke a bear and he comes around

[1:11:29] there are some smaller businesses with pretty good sized lots that

[1:11:33] really hits into their ability to make certain pain you know right when you get

[1:11:38] into hundreds of dollars for a small business we need a motion what do we

[1:11:41] need we do yep okay

[1:11:44] ordinance it's number 11.

[1:11:48] anybody anybody oh hey okay well okay there you go i'll go ahead and do it

[1:11:52] yeah consideration of an ordinance amending title four dash chapter 12.

[1:11:58] where i might always read the wrong one you just need to do the motion

[1:12:02] underneath that i have a motion to approve ordinance number

[1:12:08] 09-2022 amending springville city code title 4 chapter 12 paragraph 109

[1:12:13] granting the city administrator authority authority to award as

[1:12:17] appropriate an impervious surface stormwater fee

[1:12:20] service credit okay i have a motion any questions on the motion

[1:12:24] okay i need a second i'll second one second by uh mayor

[1:12:29] mayor councilman snelson we have a roll call vote

[1:12:32] kale is yes chris yes mike yes jason yes craig

[1:12:38] yes okay motion passes

[1:12:42] are we can you yeah if you'd like me to move to

[1:12:45] number 12 i think i'm close enough to this that i can do it i probably won't

[1:12:49] do everything john would do he's been the primary negotiator with the

[1:12:53] springville high school campus site plan and the associated work done with this

[1:12:59] some time ago the city council approved

[1:13:03] an agreement for some exchange of of land and how

[1:13:07] things were going to happen with the new high school site

[1:13:10] that has been a good framework to work with

[1:13:14] but as we've gotten into the specifics and looking for ways to bring value to

[1:13:20] the community by working collaboratively with the school district there have been

[1:13:24] substantial changes to the site that you're seeing before you

[1:13:28] the school has rotated around and instead of facing southeast now faces

[1:13:33] northeast and has moved significantly north on the site

[1:13:36] and that has changed substantially the properties the city needs to

[1:13:41] dedicate and how the finances work um so john's kind of negotiated through

[1:13:46] this at the staff level it meets my approval as well um strongly

[1:13:52] feel that this is heavily

[1:13:55] awaited really in the city's favor although i would also say we've done a

[1:14:00] lot of things that help them financially as well with with regard to it but just

[1:14:04] on the nuts and bolts it's a great deal for the city the

[1:14:09] school district is considering this tomorrow night on their board meeting

[1:14:14] what what would happen here is springville city

[1:14:18] would give up the spring acres

[1:14:21] lower arts park that's shown in yellow in the center of the screen there you

[1:14:26] can see the existing site is it's hard to read because there's there's the new

[1:14:31] site there's the existing site and all these colors on here but if you squint

[1:14:35] at it it really starts at the driving range or the parking lot for the arts

[1:14:39] park and heads west is the property that would be dedicated

[1:14:45] over to the school district in return for that springville city

[1:14:50] would receive this open space at the northeast corner

[1:14:55] the school district would dedicate at for no compensation the light blue area

[1:15:01] which is the hillside that really has little value to either party

[1:15:05] the other green parcels would all also generally come to springville city

[1:15:10] including the anticipation of receiving the oak ridge building

[1:15:15] which is a roughly 15 year old well-constructed and well-maintained

[1:15:20] classroom building but also has multi-use space and office space in it

[1:15:25] the green space as things continue to move will include

[1:15:29] eight tennis courts six of those would be owned and maintained by the school

[1:15:34] district two by the city um

[1:15:38] and then in addition to that this the city would give up

[1:15:43] one of its softball fields to the district to balance the

[1:15:48] kind of the scoresheet or the finances with regard to that but the school

[1:15:52] district would completely rebuild the pony league field

[1:15:56] and both softball fields and the city would still have access to both those

[1:16:01] softball fields through the inner local agreement and to all eight south or all

[1:16:04] eight tennis courts for that matter we still have the ability to to have

[1:16:10] discussions about how these parks will be developed and look in terms of

[1:16:14] amenities and parking lots and so forth with

[1:16:17] regard to that and then i don't know that i saw

[1:16:21] john adding to that

[1:16:24] um but

[1:16:27] yeah here at the bottom of what he projected here there's also two parcels

[1:16:33] not shown on the campus site plan they are in your staff report but in picture

[1:16:38] version but the city would receive 1.45 acres at

[1:16:41] memorial park that's the grass area west of the balf diamonds at memorial

[1:16:47] park an additional 1.85 acres at meadowbrook elementary

[1:16:52] which is where our pickleball courts currently are and

[1:16:56] 150 foot wide strip all the way north to seventh south

[1:17:01] so um those are the items for that and mr

[1:17:05] penrod's here and can finish it if he needs to

[1:17:09] does this oh sorry chris go ahead one question i don't quite understand

[1:17:13] unless it's just that we have use of it i don't know why we would split the

[1:17:17] maintenance and ownership of the tennis courts i'd say either let the school

[1:17:20] district own them or i unless that's

[1:17:24] i think there's two reasons one is they're worried about having eight

[1:17:27] tennis courts there because for most of the high schools have only built six is

[1:17:32] what they've told us and the other one is

[1:17:34] uh we're trying to keep up with uh what we're supposed to keep up with in our

[1:17:37] master plan uh based upon the iffp and ifa that we just went through and passed

[1:17:43] and they just want six but we want to have our programming also needs at least

[1:17:48] eight um we're filling actually the double session where stacy went the

[1:17:53] eight tennis courts we have currently at the spring acres arts park and the high

[1:17:57] school so they our staff would really like to see eight the alternative would

[1:18:02] be to just let the district build six we'd still have access to the six and

[1:18:06] and we could use the the dollar value of the remaining two tennis courts and

[1:18:11] other improvements within the facility my thought i don't think we should

[1:18:14] reduce the number i think it's great to have eight but

[1:18:17] but the the maintenance goes along with that i don't know if through interlocal

[1:18:21] right they can just assume that because that's going to be weird that cover

[1:18:25] let's take care of two and then take care of six it just doesn't make sense

[1:18:28] to me with the people we've worked with so far at the district and it could

[1:18:32] change in the future we've been pretty good at uh working out maintenance costs

[1:18:35] so when they've redone theirs uh we've actually helped out with the percentage

[1:18:40] of where we have of a facility so it has worked pretty well i would stress to try

[1:18:45] to do it yeah we can certainly raise that issue i mean to me that's an

[1:18:48] operational issue that we can can work through yeah i think

[1:18:52] but that i understand now why eight that's what i think case we wanted to

[1:18:55] make sure we had two right we wanted to keep keep uh the same number of courts

[1:18:59] available for the public and i know there was a conflict before with city

[1:19:03] residents wanting to use the ones we kind of had

[1:19:09] up there but we let the high school use them and this high school used them in

[1:19:12] the morning and people were showing up to use them in the high school classes

[1:19:15] were out there so that figure in here too right and it

[1:19:19] does from exactly what john's talking about which says we're supposed to have

[1:19:23] a certain number of publicly available and accessible courts for our own

[1:19:28] utilization so that's something we'll have to watch as well yeah

[1:19:32] did you go over improvements as well uh

[1:19:35] this last slide you know and i can just do it on the map because that's kind of

[1:19:38] hard to read if you want me to um i did not go through those okay yeah

[1:19:42] you'd be happy while you're switching over

[1:19:46] you know the pond that's on spring acres what's going to happen to that is that

[1:19:49] what what's the purpose of that in the first place and then what's going to

[1:19:52] happen to it when this

[1:20:03] current hole is

[1:20:05] whether or not and how to continue to allow secondary watering to occur which

[1:20:10] is the

[1:20:15] purpose down there my understanding is again they're doing

[1:20:20] all the engineering my understanding is they put a box there

[1:20:24] that would allow some secondary watering to still happen for that but it would

[1:20:27] happen contained in underground they've had some conversation about

[1:20:31] leaving it open with various designs but i think most currently they're gonna

[1:20:35] cover it up um reduce it but still are investigating secondary watering

[1:20:40] okay yeah

[1:20:43] and then with respect to improvements uh that's in this second joint uh

[1:20:49] resolution uh the school issue will come in and improve all of uh the pony field

[1:20:55] and both of the softball fields uh they will

[1:20:58] then retain the softball field that's here in

[1:21:01] purple the snack shack they will put at least

[1:21:05] 150 000 worth uh to renovate that a little bit

[1:21:10] um and then

[1:21:12] they also

[1:21:16] will put in new plane lights and they will put in

[1:21:19] new turf around the fields on the north green property up here

[1:21:24] roughly 5.15 acres so you're looking basically like this we'll end up with

[1:21:30] turf irrigation trees so it'll be landscaped and then there's

[1:21:35] going to be a parking lot of about 1.5 acres down here one of the reasons why

[1:21:38] we need this parking lot is the gate to the facilities right here

[1:21:43] we need to have some kind of access for 88 purposes to get to

[1:21:47] that gate that's not crossing the road and other things

[1:21:52] and then they also will stub up here in this area they'll at least put the

[1:21:55] conduits in for future lights so we could put lights up there if we

[1:22:00] want them and then on the south property this property in this location they will

[1:22:06] put irrigation and grass and so the arts park will change the shape and it will

[1:22:11] come down here and we'll include again this area and then down here

[1:22:15] you've already heard there will be two tennis courts

[1:22:18] there will be a parking lot of at least 0.75 acres to be utilized for those

[1:22:23] tennis courts and uh the city would receive this

[1:22:27] building here which is the oak ridge building so that building is in good

[1:22:30] condition it was uh constructed in 2005. and that's

[1:22:35] why sorry no go ahead no i was just going to say i mean that as an example

[1:22:40] you could forego the tennis courts and install lights or we can bring money to

[1:22:44] the table if we do it relatively soon and they know that's coming and then you

[1:22:48] could have lights on that other park as part of we could add money to the to the

[1:22:53] project yes so where's the parking to the arts park

[1:22:57] where do people park to go into the arts park today or then then

[1:23:02] once it's built once it's built the parking would be over in this location

[1:23:06] but so there'd be parking here and then there'd also be parking here

[1:23:11] so the would it utilize the school's parking

[1:23:15] and then would also put in a parking lot in this location and there's access

[1:23:19] across that road to get into the arts park yes and there would be a walkway

[1:23:24] and i mean one of the discussions we've had is there's some interesting things

[1:23:28] you could do there with the new road north south road not being the primary

[1:23:33] access point in general there's good flow around it you could close that

[1:23:37] segment of road and put food trucks in there and allow free passageway

[1:23:42] most closely to that provo will close

[1:23:49] byu game days they close the road just to the west of the stadium whatever that

[1:23:54] is and uh allow free flow of people there so it's safe and it could be

[1:23:57] easily done here john was there any conversation about that little walking

[1:24:02] path on the south of the softball fields that's around yes that that the walking

[1:24:06] path down here by the creek is this the one you're talking about that would

[1:24:10] remain the cities also too as part of this uh development of this new campus

[1:24:16] site plan there will be a walking path along the entire entire outside of the

[1:24:22] site plan so that's something that's not shown here but we have seen other plans

[1:24:27] that have it in and it's something that the school district and the city are

[1:24:30] working to make happen school districts on board with it okay and this one more

[1:24:35] question the the old swimming pool that originally i

[1:24:40] mean a long time ago was part of the discussion i don't care that it did or

[1:24:43] didn't go away but was that discussed and why didn't well the reason why it

[1:24:47] was part of the discussion before is the school was going to be located down this

[1:24:51] area and so it was actually part of the

[1:24:54] discussion for a seminary building the the lds church was looking to purchase

[1:24:58] that property put their bullying hail up here and then have some kind of bridge

[1:25:02] or something just to get to the school that was down in this location but now

[1:25:05] with the school up here this property will probably remain

[1:25:09] untouched by this process it's something that if

[1:25:12] the city wants to put money into it that's something we could do so

[1:25:17] is the seminary going to stay where it is the seminary right now is looking to

[1:25:21] move up in this location okay so how does that road pop out

[1:25:34] no you can see on this you can see a little bit of the gamma home right there

[1:25:38] people ask me

[1:25:53] whoever's to the west yeah but there is an opening it's big enough for them it

[1:25:57] is yeah oh yeah i need to see that roundabout before is

[1:26:01] that fairly new where was i when that roundabout got played no that is fairly

[1:26:04] new yeah that's fairly new but i know the last discussion that was there oh

[1:26:07] yeah he might not have been there yeah you were at disneyland

[1:26:10] so if the seminary building is moving up there what happens to that little piece

[1:26:14] of ground there in that green space uh that's a good i mean the church owns

[1:26:18] it right church owns it so they could uh sell it they could do whatever with it i

[1:26:22] know that the school was interested in purchasing it the school district but uh

[1:26:27] until recently the there hasn't been a whole lot of communication coming from

[1:26:32] uh the church and so my guess is they're trying to exchange it yeah but now it's

[1:26:37] getting them to be a little bit better that's what they did with junior high

[1:26:39] yeah i could make it to a little food court or something yes now a couple

[1:26:43] things i don't know if troy mentioned this just quickly this is red devil

[1:26:46] drive and as part of this joint uh resolution

[1:26:50] which was part of the first one as well the parties would share equally in the

[1:26:54] costs of that road uh we do have some impact fees that would that could be put

[1:26:59] towards that road and just for everybody's purpose one of

[1:27:03] the reasons why we are coming back is the high school was going to be located

[1:27:06] down here with the football field up in this location they're keeping the

[1:27:10] football field where it is and they've moved the high school to the north to

[1:27:13] get a better site plan just a matter of

[1:27:17] gee whiz they are going to tear this up right after the football season so in

[1:27:21] january you'll see the football field torn up and the new

[1:27:25] football fields will start to be constructed for the next season it is

[1:27:29] pretty neat that they can continue to hold school completely while they're re

[1:27:33] building that's always awesome yeah and i was back to the pool issue

[1:27:37] the the superintendent is really focused on

[1:27:41] be having equivalent facilities for each of the cities they service so

[1:27:46] there is a field house shown on that new plan it's

[1:27:50] the darker gray ver north-south box right here um they don't know 100 that

[1:27:56] they can have that based upon changing costs but my

[1:28:00] guess is they continue to say they'll everyone will have it so they're either

[1:28:05] all going to be there or not but i think with their long-term plan to have

[1:28:10] a field house at each high school location that they don't need to

[1:28:14] consider uh utilizing ours or or having ours so

[1:28:19] we're gonna just have to discuss whether it's worth

[1:28:22] continuing to have ours serve into the future what to do with that parcel man

[1:28:26] and right now uh they're saying we could utilize that and it will not

[1:28:31] come under the control of coaches we'll have to wait and see

[1:28:35] well some of the other ones they were donated weren't they i mean was it like

[1:28:38] the minor house or something maple mountain had some money given to

[1:28:43] you i think they did have some money i don't think it's called the miter

[1:28:46] house so

[1:28:48] so questions for john

[1:28:53] great work yeah that's good

[1:28:56] okay i think we're looking not for an approval final approval but this is an

[1:29:01] approval to move ahead to the next phase is that correct

[1:29:05] that's correct underneath the resolution now it still directs the staffs to work

[1:29:09] together to finalize uh what you see here in front of you

[1:29:13] we're a lot closer than what we were the first go around with that first joint

[1:29:17] resolution so i think it's shaping up

[1:29:20] wonderfully i think we're going to have a great campus it's going to be a very i

[1:29:24] think the city is just going to be proud of it so i think all around is going to

[1:29:27] be a great great uh facility and site i could make the motion if you're ready

[1:29:31] for it mayor i am i make a motion to approve resolution number 2022-21

[1:29:38] approving property exchanges and construction of improvements between

[1:29:42] springville city and the nebo school district as part of the new springville

[1:29:45] high school campus okay have a motion any questions

[1:29:49] second then i'll second it okay roll call vote jason yes mike yes liz yes

[1:29:56] craig yes chris yes hey motion passes good work

[1:30:04] all right do we have

[1:30:08] uh something to make a motion on for signs

[1:30:15] that's good timing i should have just kept my mouth shut when councilmember

[1:30:19] jensen uh wanted to make a motion earlier we would

[1:30:21] have done it

[1:30:24] so we made uh some changes i can read them to you we basically

[1:30:30] took out the the former b

[1:30:35] and then change the current b change the former c

[1:30:40] to read one a frame attended portable sign may

[1:30:43] be placed in the public right-of-way behind the curb and gutter by a person

[1:30:47] or through a representative at all times while the sign is in the

[1:30:51] public right-of-way remind remains either within

[1:30:55] and i just noticed a typo within on 100 feet i can just fix that within 100 feet

[1:31:00] of the sign or two on the first floor building his front entrance is within

[1:31:03] 100 feet of the sign and then we changed the next sentence

[1:31:08] springville city reserves the right to request the removal or relocation of a

[1:31:11] portable sign to accommodate construction activity or the free flow

[1:31:15] of pedestrian traffic within the public right-of-way

[1:31:21] and on that we did take the example building that was uh proposed and we

[1:31:25] made sure that the hundred feet would work

[1:31:28] okay pretty good

[1:31:30] well i'll make a motion okay to approve ordinance number

[1:31:35] 07-2022 amending springville city code section

[1:31:39] 11-6-313 specific sign regulations

[1:31:45] as amended as amended yes

[1:31:48] okay i have a motion

[1:31:51] second okay it's a rock roll call vote mike yes

[1:31:55] chris yes craig yes liz yes jason yes okay motion passes

[1:32:02] i think that's pretty monumental i don't think people realize what that is

[1:32:05] it's a big deal especially for the people on north main i'm pretty happy i

[1:32:09] mean this will make him happy right that it's a different coffee shop guy

[1:32:14] though okay do we have any reason for a closed

[1:32:17] session wetlands

[1:32:20] oh my heavens sorry josh

[1:32:33] okay sounds good josh number 10 sorry wetlands

[1:32:37] this is a pretty simple administrative uh

[1:32:41] process change we're making uh

[1:32:45] we're basically just amending and you that what you have in your packet is

[1:32:49] probably a little confusing i think kim may have passed out

[1:32:52] uh did you pass out copies of this

[1:32:59] oh the copy i got that when i printed out

[1:33:01] the packet didn't actually show the strike throughs

[1:33:05] and the underlines so i just wanted to make sure you could see that

[1:33:08] so we're basically just adding options for providing wetlands

[1:33:14] delineations or clearance previously the code read that a wetlands

[1:33:18] delineation or clearance letter as required by the city engineer

[1:33:23] and it wasn't clear and we wanted to make it clear that that

[1:33:26] could be from a wetland specialist it didn't have to be a delineation or a

[1:33:30] declaration letter from or a clearance letter from the corps

[1:33:34] but just from a wetland specialist and then down in

[1:33:38] the next section we

[1:33:41] it was just redundant and we consolidated language from the end of

[1:33:45] the code describing a letter uh from the core and just brought it up into that

[1:33:50] subsection uh one under the kk

[1:33:54] uh because it essentially said it twice so

[1:33:58] we just consolidated that it's just a little fix but it makes some difference

[1:34:02] in terms of our administrative process when people are trying to

[1:34:05] do site plans and uh if

[1:34:09] they uh being able to know that they can go to a specialist instead of waiting uh

[1:34:14] indeterminate amount of time for the court to respond to a request but it

[1:34:18] still would have to come from them to be able to proceed with it correct if there

[1:34:23] is a if the clearance letter from the wetland specialist says there are

[1:34:26] wetlands then we will need uh a report and a letter when we get to

[1:34:31] site plan yes but what if they say

[1:34:35] that it's there's not a wetlands issue

[1:34:38] then there's no further thing requested concerning wetlands they don't ask for

[1:34:42] the army corps to to rule on it that i mean the wetland

[1:34:47] specialist isn't the final word on wetlands they are not

[1:34:52] and one of the things we've uh faced again and again is

[1:34:55] especially with covet and other things is the army corps is out of ways we're

[1:34:59] more than happy to keep it like it is one of the suggestions for why it's

[1:35:03] coming here is because we've had a lot of people bring

[1:35:06] it up again i i agree that it there's a it's hard to work with and i'm not

[1:35:10] opposed to letting them get going on it but now are we putting ourselves at well

[1:35:14] you gave us permission to build on this now

[1:35:17] five years later the army corps looked at it said no it's

[1:35:20] wetlands what do you what are you doing city letting them build on that and

[1:35:24] that's not our responsibility to make sure that it the lines aren't built on

[1:35:27] other than if that's something that we care about as a city then we shouldn't

[1:35:32] make sure we get the army corps it's really their responsibility and they

[1:35:36] receive included in this that we're not ultimately responsible if it comes back

[1:35:40] even though this specialist said it was good we said okay if your

[1:35:45] special says it good but they get it you know turned over or overruled then i

[1:35:51] i might make sure that we're not the ones liable for that it sounds like we

[1:35:55] would be to me we approved it well look at the staff report under background it

[1:35:59] actually delineates what the state code uh

[1:36:03] allows us to do it states that a municipality may not designate or treat

[1:36:07] any land as wetlands unless the corps of engineers or other agency has designated

[1:36:11] the land as wetlands so we actually can't

[1:36:15] legally hold somebody up because we say something is wetlands

[1:36:19] so are you basically saying you are giving them permission to

[1:36:23] build but at their own risk

[1:36:26] yes and we can do that legally to chris's point yes we don't we're not the

[1:36:31] the gatekeepers of whether it's wetlands or not it's up to the developer to work

[1:36:36] that out with the army corps and we're saying we'll approve a

[1:36:41] building permit with a letter from a certified specialist but really for them

[1:36:47] to protect themselves they should go get the letter from the army corps

[1:36:51] yeah i mean to their point i mean are we

[1:36:54] going to do a development agreement in that sense that shifts that risk or

[1:36:58] makes it clear to the developer that they're undertaking that or how how does

[1:37:01] the developer know that well the developers should know that

[1:37:04] because they're developing i mean that what we've had in our code is

[1:37:08] really to protect the developer and that's what we've had in our code

[1:37:12] code all these years and i'm more than happy to keep it like it is we have just

[1:37:16] had so many people come to bureaucracy i mean we're not supposed to be the police

[1:37:21] then why the heck are we policing it yeah and i know from experience on the

[1:37:25] one even this letter that was here i i had some experience there and it was

[1:37:29] clean everybody knew it was clean but there

[1:37:31] was still some weird stuff out there that said it wasn't and as a city we

[1:37:35] were like well what do we do what do we do what do we do

[1:37:38] but in the end it really is on the developer and the core

[1:37:42] at some point i mean i think we did due diligence which is important but i don't

[1:37:46] think we try and be another gatekeeper in the middle of it i don't think that's

[1:37:48] our position i don't either i don't either but we're seeing cities

[1:37:53] get sued with landslides on hillsides because they allowed them to build there

[1:37:58] and as long as it's as long as it somehow transferring that liability hold

[1:38:02] harmless or something that if it ever eventually is declared as wetlands

[1:38:07] the city is can we if we can legally do that i don't know if we can i don't know

[1:38:11] if you can probably what we ought to do i mean because i don't see that we have

[1:38:15] uh any liability because it's really on them but

[1:38:19] if that i i like that what you're saying because it just puts one more layer of

[1:38:23] protection for us i would say let's continue this until then

[1:38:26] i like it josh i think it's a great let's continue to the next meeting we

[1:38:29] can put that language in there and bring it right back to the next meet we could

[1:38:34] probably even just put it on the consent agent if that's what you wanted well

[1:38:37] it's my opinion that i would just leave it the same

[1:38:40] i don't think you should be opening it up i i think that they need

[1:38:44] to demonstrate to the city that it's it's a clean piece of property to build

[1:38:48] on that's my opinion and i don't have a vote but for what it's worth no and i'm

[1:38:52] we're fine with that as well

[1:38:56] i'm kind of like craig on this one i think you know if the if the builder is

[1:39:00] willing to accept the response because most of the times they're

[1:39:04] it's forever and ever our bus shop down there forever and ever and

[1:39:09] ever yeah and and you had a specialist that

[1:39:11] said it was clean it was clean but and by the time you get to the army corps

[1:39:15] that says yep you're right it's clean

[1:39:19] it's it's kind of an interesting process because we don't know if there's

[1:39:22] wetlands or not and so what we have is we have an engineer who's not a

[1:39:26] specialist saying hey i've looked at the national wetlands inventory map which is

[1:39:31] clearly not accurate and it even says that on there and so i'm going to make

[1:39:35] you go out and do all these things for wetlands and so it's kind of a tough

[1:39:39] little situation that we're put in and then we have a state statute that says

[1:39:43] we can't declare something wetlands unless the army corps declares a

[1:39:46] wetlands and so it's just kind of a tough situation but

[1:39:51] i kind of like what you're saying if it makes you feel better and it makes me

[1:39:54] feel better too to let's just add some language that hey you can move forward

[1:39:58] with the wetlands delineation letter that says there's no wetlands but you've

[1:40:03] got to do some kind of development agreement that says you're going to

[1:40:06] indemnify and hold harmless the city just like they do if they're going to

[1:40:10] build on a hillside yes i mean if they're going to put helical piers and

[1:40:13] come off a cliff they have to say yep we did that yeah so we need a motion to

[1:40:17] table this or to continue excuse me yeah continue to the next regular meeting

[1:40:23] i'm open for a motion hard motion that we continue it but just put it on the

[1:40:26] consent agenda if if that works for everybody else we don't have to hash it

[1:40:30] out again because we have to vote okay yeah we'll vote via consent agenda

[1:40:41] thank you all right troy we don't need a closed

[1:40:45] session you just have no it's just an administrative report that's the next

[1:40:48] item on the agenda there i talked just very briefly with the

[1:40:52] mayor about this in fact maybe while i'm pulling up the

[1:40:57] city map we had a

[1:41:00] quick and detailed discussion on public infrastructure districts in the first

[1:41:05] work session tonight the developers have gone home for the evening

[1:41:11] but are you okay like we're discussing with

[1:41:15] the best way to get your feedback on your interest in doing a pid just to put

[1:41:19] it on the next work session along with the 16 south discussion just to get

[1:41:23] feedback is that you think a good way to do that do we have people asking us for

[1:41:28] pids or we're just getting educated on them no we have people that are asking

[1:41:33] your interest in uh entering into some pids to allow financing and some of the

[1:41:38] larger developments under consideration

[1:41:42] i just struggle with it i mean i do to we're not that big of a city but i mean

[1:41:47] if any i mean i could maybe see lakeside landing in its infancy for that because

[1:41:52] that's a brand new but it'd be interesting to know when and

[1:41:55] where they want it but it's also is it is it true that you basically turn the

[1:42:01] taxing authority over to the pid and they have discretion from the amount of

[1:42:07] up to that limit .015 yes and no you do turn the taxing

[1:42:12] authority over to that entity but the council establishes by their policy and

[1:42:17] the agree agreement enabling establishing

[1:42:20] um that entity what authority it has so you could

[1:42:25] instead of 0.1015 i think it was you could say no

[1:42:29] .003 is the most we would allow you to to enter

[1:42:34] to allow you to tax the citizens in that area the city has kind of complete

[1:42:38] control over the creation of that district and what authority ukraine can

[1:42:43] we become like an rda agency like we absolutely would be in other words it's

[1:42:48] slightly different from rda but effectively

[1:42:52] as a city council you say we're granting authority for this area of town to to uh

[1:42:58] create this special district with taxing authority with these uh restrictions

[1:43:04] troy and refresh my memory these the city council is not the board for that

[1:43:09] though no that's correct but the board is a different board that's right but

[1:43:13] this board establishes the parameters exactly in which they connect so it's

[1:43:17] it's actually not this group that can act on the parameters that you use

[1:43:21] you set the parameters a different board um then goes and so it borrows money is

[1:43:27] it a board that's appointed by the city or who who is this board uh i believe

[1:43:32] that's true as well i think the city can help determine how to be set up but

[1:43:36] state law governs how it is set up and so it's kind of like a special

[1:43:41] improvement district that's a that's uh that's not ran through the city

[1:43:46] there's special improvement districts everywhere where the board runs what

[1:43:49] goes on with say sewer or water or whatever and

[1:43:52] that's what this would be in collecting funds to repay and see what john john

[1:43:56] and i were talking just kind of offline in there i mean one other thing that

[1:44:00] didn't come out in there is developers are using this to develop really their

[1:44:04] on-site infrastructure is what they want yeah so i mean technically you could

[1:44:09] have a developer come in get a bond get the tax set up put the

[1:44:15] roads in leave and then the people who buy their house are

[1:44:19] paying for the road that's in front of their house when technically they're

[1:44:22] still selling it at full value yeah full value there's nothing here

[1:44:27] yeah but then the so they sell for full value which normally the developer puts

[1:44:31] the road in and then they have to pay a tax for the road that the developer put

[1:44:35] in but they bought for full value on their house i mean it's just kind of an

[1:44:38] interesting little i mean the primary interest what i'm hearing from

[1:44:41] developers coming in they're they're varied

[1:44:44] interests uh really but but it's it's it's an economic development tool

[1:44:50] because it allows the city to help developers over that hurdle that

[1:44:55] that mr penrod is talking about those upfront costs

[1:44:59] by way of a guaranteed revenue stream that would come back i've conveyed to

[1:45:04] the developers that asked me that i felt pretty strongly the council would

[1:45:08] not be very interested in pids in general the one concept again we didn't

[1:45:13] talk about it very much tonight that i said they might be willing to possibly

[1:45:18] consider it is a is a public infrastructure district that had no

[1:45:22] taxing authority on the property tax side um

[1:45:26] but would

[1:45:28] but the pid the public infrastructure

[1:45:31] district would receive the

[1:45:35] impact fee revenue stream for the installation

[1:45:40] of impact fee eligible infrastructure that's a lot to get your minds around

[1:45:45] there but if they if they have a guaranteed

[1:45:50] revenue stream they could go to the bond market still sell tax-free bonds below

[1:45:55] commercial rates because they have a guaranteed income

[1:45:59] stream coming in to pay back those bonds but it's still a very

[1:46:04] complicated transaction you'd have to have a policy you'd have to set up the

[1:46:07] district you'd have to enter into an agreement to

[1:46:10] have your revenue streams go there much of that you're doing already right

[1:46:14] you'll anticipate doing a development agreement to pay those revenue streams

[1:46:19] to a developer that installs that that's the feedback i gave generally

[1:46:25] when i first heard of these but the question is do you want do you have

[1:46:29] feedback for me or do you want to discuss it

[1:46:32] um again

[1:46:35] i'm not sure we understand it yeah i'm not really that but i don't think we're

[1:46:38] all i don't think we're at all excited about saying go for it

[1:46:42] but well as it is i mean it my feeling is we're not really that pro

[1:46:46] development anyway it's not like we're nice to developers so why would we come

[1:46:49] up with this tool that makes us even nicer that's exactly

[1:46:53] i don't know that's exactly against what this council basically represents maybe

[1:46:57] not me but they're but they're i wouldn't want

[1:46:59] to be nice there have been times in the history of springville where it would

[1:47:03] have been nice to help some development happen and get over the hump but you're

[1:47:06] right now like man there's development coming at us every which way and then

[1:47:11] they line up and ask for that it's like well i think we always have to be

[1:47:14] friendly about it but not well we don't

[1:47:18] yeah i i always figured with the rdas when we first started doing those would

[1:47:23] that property develop within a few years anyway without it which is maybe selfish

[1:47:28] but that's who we represent as the city and i think

[1:47:31] do we need to be doing this incentive and if i don't know that we need to be

[1:47:35] doing this incentive i don't understand it well enough but i don't understand

[1:47:38] why we would look at it this way

[1:47:42] your the advantage to the developer is you give him a ch a avenue to get a

[1:47:48] cheaper borrowing and

[1:47:52] you give him an avenue of cash flow to pay back the borrowing that's

[1:47:57] principally what it is yeah and what the the market said or at least the people

[1:48:01] that came to me that that are not the developer they're saying often

[1:48:06] what the city will do then is negotiate a better development in other words hey

[1:48:11] we'd be willing to participate in this if you also provided us a park or

[1:48:16] you put specialized stamped concrete on the sidewalks or do something that gives

[1:48:22] um the development something different to

[1:48:25] deal with the differentiation and property tax um levels that we talked

[1:48:30] about hey yeah you are paying a higher property tax but you have fancy lights

[1:48:35] whereas the people over here are not paying as much but they don't have fancy

[1:48:38] lights you could offer i mean you could require that anyway

[1:48:42] yeah and then currently we've got zoning in place in all those

[1:48:47] areas so we're not really in right now at least being offered or negotiating

[1:48:51] anything on that so at least with this discussion i think

[1:48:55] what i can do is i can point back i just looked just before i got up we're

[1:48:59] getting between seven and 35 views of the stream but the stream being there we

[1:49:04] can point the developers they'll get your initial reaction to it and let them

[1:49:08] decide if they want to continue to have the discussion which i think is good i

[1:49:12] mean it's that's um

[1:49:14] because we i think a couple of you kind of mentioned that my position has always

[1:49:18] been we're always willing to listen we're always willing to talk to you um

[1:49:21] there'll be a time where it comes a vote and you'll say yes or no to it and

[1:49:24] they'll have to gauge that out so okay that's helpful so on to the one item we

[1:49:29] had provo you'll remember we tried to get a joint meeting with provost city

[1:49:34] council that's still in the works i received a call from provo today and and

[1:49:40] their engineering group is supposed to come talk to you about something to me

[1:49:43] this is so simple and basic i can't imagine

[1:49:46] um there'll be a ton of concerns so i just wanted to highlight what what they

[1:49:50] they wanted two things when they wanted to talk about what i'm about to talk

[1:49:53] about they also were just wanted to get to know you better and kind of

[1:49:57] um have both councils have an opportunity to know each other which i

[1:50:02] think could still happen but to orient you here is main street 1400 north joe

[1:50:07] banditos um so can you see where we're at in the

[1:50:12] city this current uh city boundary is the

[1:50:15] slightly darker thicker gray line if that makes sense and if i highlight

[1:50:20] this and pull it out of the way

[1:50:25] this parcel here goes right up to the edge of the city

[1:50:30] boundary which it's supposed to do but this parcel here is owned by provo

[1:50:35] city and it's about to become a road so mayor a child and and i went and

[1:50:41] spoke with america cafusi and some of her staff

[1:50:45] just over a year ago and said hey we really don't want provo you leaving a

[1:50:51] nuisance trip here because we need to make this intersection a little bit

[1:50:55] safer for our community uh likewise the owner of just these

[1:50:59] properties here was concerned about how they could could

[1:51:04] develop and uh

[1:51:07] my understanding and i'm looking here and going i might need a touch more

[1:51:11] understanding but provo is suggesting it has worked out an

[1:51:15] agreement with the neighboring property owners that would

[1:51:18] gift the property to the adjoining property owners and

[1:51:24] they would request to move the city boundary from this line over to directly

[1:51:29] adjacent to the road all they're asking to do is give us

[1:51:34] this uh give

[1:51:37] this third of an acre to springville city within this not to us as owners but

[1:51:42] within our city boundaries um

[1:51:46] is all so that we can go up against the road

[1:51:49] and our interest is to be against the roads so that we can connect to it

[1:51:53] without a neutron strip the road would be provost the road would be maintained

[1:51:57] by provo um if springville city eventually had a road that connected to

[1:52:01] it obviously we would maintain and and uh

[1:52:06] snow plow and take care of the road on our side that's that's really all provo

[1:52:11] is interested in as is the property owner uh to to be able to better develop

[1:52:16] their property it also makes it safer for our citizens once all that gets

[1:52:20] taken care of any questions or concerns on the t

[1:52:24] intersection what looks like it's not going to go straight through is

[1:52:27] it into spring springville current which

[1:52:31] currently it would be a t intersection uh and they will be moving the entrance

[1:52:37] uh if i get it right they will be moving the entrance to this

[1:52:41] to be centered on the intersection so it'll also be

[1:52:44] it'll be safely done here but no it will not continue as a roadway south and that

[1:52:48] helps to do what you're saying yes absolutely

[1:52:52] can you show the boundaries of springville going west

[1:52:55] i thought we were further north at that point so we continue here until you

[1:53:00] reach the railroad tracks and obviously we go a long ways north because we have

[1:53:03] the whole industrial park there all the way up to this point here okay

[1:53:07] and that didn't matter i just i thought we were further i thought we were some

[1:53:12] of that area works single was not interested in this

[1:53:15] you can see it at this this area right here

[1:53:18] was actually a superfund site which is a federal environmental cleanup site so

[1:53:23] this was uh yeah we didn't but apparently it's been cleaned up now and

[1:53:28] is ready for development so are there any questions or can i

[1:53:31] convey back to provo that um yeah we'll still come back and you'll have a

[1:53:35] presentation you'll have an action but springville city would be okay with this

[1:53:38] concept of moving the city boundary a few feet to the west

[1:53:42] sure i love that road

[1:53:45] it'll be good

[1:53:50] no kidding okay is there anything else that needs

[1:53:53] to be brought up entertain a motion then for adjournment

[1:53:57] a motion to adjourn this meeting second a second those in favor

[1:54:02] all right opposed great

[1:54:05] lots of wood shop tonight have fun at the parade without me i'm sorry i won't

[1:54:09] be there when are you leaving thursday morning two days in

[1:54:13] this thursday

Springville City Council Meeting

Transcript