[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