[0:03] Welcome to the regional growth
[0:04] committee. My name is Mayor Tammy Tran.
[0:07] It is Thursday, March 19th, 2026. It is
[0:10] 9:18 a.m. And we'll have introductions
[0:13] both around the table and then those
[0:15] attending online. If this is your first
[0:17] meeting as a member, we'd like we'd love
[0:19] to have you take a minute to tell us
[0:21] about yourself when you do go around the
[0:23] table and introduce yourself.
[0:27] » Start with
[0:28] >> start.
[0:28] with start with. Okay, Rosie.
[0:31] >> Good morning. Rosie Hernandez. I'm part
[0:33] of the admin team at WFRC.
[0:36] >> Jordan Chandler, also part of the admin
[0:38] team at WFRC.
[0:44] » Jeannie Groberg, mayor and in Fruit
[0:46] Heights.
[0:49] >> Yes. And Genie, you are a new member.
[0:51] Would you like to share anything about
[0:53] yourself? We're happy to have you.
[0:56] we can share.
[0:58] >> Sorry.
[1:00] Oh my gosh, my mind is a blank, guys.
[1:02] I'm having a crazy morning with stuff
[1:04] happening in life. So, can I delay that
[1:06] for another time?
[1:07] >> Yes. I will say that you're an
[1:09] incredible mayor and friend. And yes, we
[1:12] love you.
[1:12] >> Thank you.
[1:12] >> Former Fred Heights City Council as
[1:14] well.
[1:14] >> Thank you so much.
[1:17] >> I'm Gayen Ben and I'm the mayor of
[1:19] Cottonwood Heights. I served in the
[1:21] legislature. I've lived in in Cisville
[1:25] >> and near Cottonwood Fruit Heights.
[1:30] » Keith Bradshaw. I serve as mayor of
[1:32] Bountiful. Uh prior to this role, I
[1:35] served on the city council for a number
[1:36] of years. Um when I'm not in meetings, I
[1:40] prefer to be mountain biking.
[1:42] >> Mountain biking.
[1:44] Mayor Bradshaw is also, you know, all
[1:46] know this, but Mayor Bradshaw is also
[1:47] the current president of the Utah League
[1:49] of Cities and Towns and uh we were on
[1:52] the flight together back from DC just
[1:53] yesterday.
[1:55] >> We were I sprinted and made the flight.
[1:58] I was really excited about that,
[2:01] although I do have blisters from
[2:02] sprinting in shoes.
[2:07] » I'm Andrea Pearson, part of the admin
[2:09] team at WFRC.
[2:11] >> Good morning. I'm Andrew Guber.
[2:12] executive director here at WFRC.
[2:14] Welcome. Happy to have all of you.
[2:18] >> Good morning. Hi, I'm Ted Nolton. I'm
[2:20] the deputy director and chief planner
[2:22] here at WFRC and I am also the regional
[2:25] growth committee point of contact.
[2:32] I'm Loren Kamalu, not new to the group,
[2:35] but um I serve as a Davis County elected
[2:39] commissioner and um but I'm in this
[2:42] group appointed by the Utah Association
[2:44] of Counties and it's really awesome to
[2:48] see all the new mayors.
[2:53] I'm Mick Sbury, Mayor Magna. My first
[2:56] time ever.
[3:00] » Good morning. Christy Overson, mayor of
[3:02] Taylor'sville.
[3:04] >> And good morning. I'm Bryce Bird with
[3:05] the Utah Division of Air Quality.
[3:10] >> I'm Kristen Cordova with the Urban Land
[3:12] Institute of Utah.
[3:15] >> Jordan Bachmann with DOT.
[3:18] >> Jiren Robertson with the Utah Transit
[3:19] Authority.
[3:21] >> Jason Brown. I'm the CEO of Envision
[3:23] Utah.
[3:26] Good morning. Ty McCutchen. I'm here as
[3:28] in my role as chair of the board of
[3:30] advision Utah.
[3:35] » Mike Pageant, WFRC staff CT director.
[3:39] >> Tim Watkins, WFRC staff.
[3:42] >> Emma Clinton with Envision Utah.
[3:46] >> Cody Lutz, I'm a planner at Envision.
[3:49] >> Uh Jory Joner, long range plan director,
[3:51] WFRC.
[3:54] I'm Adam Olsen with uh Midville City and
[3:56] Community Development.
[4:00] » John A. Nardone, communications manager
[4:02] with WFRC.
[4:04] >> Heidi Hammond, Grantsville City Mayor.
[4:06] And I think I'm in the wrong spot.
[4:08] >> You are. Come on up, mayor.
[4:12] >> Paula Aguilera, WFRC staff.
[4:16] >> Joel Temple, WFRC staff.
[4:19] >> Julie Bernadet on WFRC longrange
[4:21] planning.
[4:23] Good morning. Hugh Van Wagon, long-range
[4:25] planning at WFRC.
[4:28] >> Byron Head, WFRC Community and Economic
[4:31] Development Staff.
[4:33] >> Christy Dolberg, WFRC Community Economic
[4:35] Development Staff.
[4:38] >> Bert Granberg. I just made the long walk
[4:40] across the hallway from the WFRC
[4:42] analytics group.
[4:46] » I'm Donnie Johnston and I'm the
[4:48] assistant to Mayor Sudbury in Magna.
[4:51] introduce
[4:56] your shirt.
[4:57] >> Hi, Kim Frost with uh Regents. I'm the
[5:00] air quality seat.
[5:02] >> Kim, you're a member. Come on up to the
[5:04] table. We do. We do. Of course.
[5:14] » People online one time.
[5:15] >> Oh. Oh.
[5:16] >> Mayor Mayor Dhy, would you like to
[5:19] introduce yourself?
[5:23] Marie Dherty, Clinton city mayor.
[5:25] >> And you are a new member. Would you like
[5:26] to share anything about yourself?
[5:28] >> Oh, I am new. All right. Late, new, all
[5:30] the all the things. Yeah.
[5:33] Just happy to be here. That's excited to
[5:36] go.
[5:37] >> Fantastic. And Mayor Hammond, you are
[5:38] also new. Would you like to say
[5:39] something about yourself?
[5:43] >> Yeah.
[5:43] >> Yes. I'm happy to be here. Thank you.
[5:45] And I'm sorry for being late, but
[5:47] >> Oh, no problem. I found us and now next
[5:50] time I'll know right where to go. So,
[5:52] >> it's tricky the first time.
[5:54] >> We regard it as a uh an aptitude test
[5:57] >> to to find your way in and and if you
[5:59] drove here to navigate parking. So far,
[6:01] you're doing great, everybody.
[6:02] >> Yes.
[6:04] >> All right. Online.
[6:08] » Do you want to call them out?
[6:10] >> No, I cannot see it. I can't see it.
[6:11] Andrea, will you call them out? I don't
[6:12] have it for me.
[6:15] >> Okay. online today. We have Reed Ewing,
[6:19] um Blaine Ferrell,
[6:22] Mayor Braden Mitchell, Mayor Lauren
[6:25] Palmer.
[6:25] >> Let's have the Andrea, if it's okay,
[6:27] Mayor, let's have the folks introduce
[6:28] themselves. Do you want to go Professor
[6:30] Ewing and then uh um and then uh
[6:34] Commissioner Ferrell. Next,
[6:37] >> uh Reed Euing. I'm at the U in city and
[6:40] metropolitan planning.
[6:43] I'm Blaine Ferrell, Morgan County
[6:45] Commissioner. Been here a while.
[6:51] >> A while.
[6:54] >> Yeah. I don't know if I don't know if
[6:56] I've been on this committee for a long
[6:58] time, but I've been working with WFRC
[7:01] for five years.
[7:02] >> You have indeed. Um, can I keep going?
[7:05] Mayor Palmer. Mayor Mitchell.
[7:09] Uh,
[7:09] >> Mayor Palmer out in Herman.
[7:14] Uh, Mayor Mitchell from uh, Sunday
[7:16] Riverdale City
[7:18] >> in his lab coat. Welcome.
[7:20] >> Yeah. Yeah. I'm playing pharmacist
[7:22] today, too. So,
[7:24] >> council member Strad and Mayor Wood,
[7:27] >> Allison Stout, Sandy City Council,
[7:30] >> Sherwood, mayor of South Salt Lake,
[7:33] >> and Mayor Vanderwood,
[7:35] >> Mayor Rob Vanderwood of West Haven City.
[7:39] >> And welcome, Mayor Vanderwood. Would you
[7:41] like to share anything about yourself?
[7:44] It's your first meeting.
[7:45] >> Uh I actually attended the last meeting,
[7:47] but uh it's been it's been really
[7:50] interesting and fun to join and uh be
[7:52] involved with uh with this group. So
[7:55] happy to be here.
[7:56] >> Well, thank you.
[7:57] >> And madam chair, I'll just note that we
[7:58] have several other folks attending uh
[8:00] participating online guests and members
[8:02] of the public as well.
[8:03] >> Okay. Okay. Thank you. All right. Thank
[8:06] you everyone. We have our first item is
[8:09] an action item on the minutes. Would
[8:10] someone like to make a motion to pass
[8:11] the minutes from January 15th, 2026?
[8:18] » So moved.
[8:18] >> Thank you, Commissioner Kamer. Do we
[8:20] have a second?
[8:20] >> Second.
[8:21] >> All right, we have a motion and a
[8:22] second. All in favor?
[8:23] >> I.
[8:24] >> Any opposed?
[8:26] >> Okay, none opposed. All right, thank
[8:28] you. We might have some public comment.
[8:30] Is anyone online or in the room um
[8:34] interested in public comment?
[8:38] Okay, sounds great. We'll now hear an
[8:41] overview of the regional growth
[8:42] committee roles and responsibilities
[8:44] followed by a brief discussion of issues
[8:45] of interest that committee members would
[8:47] like to explore for future meetings.
[8:49] I'll turn the mic over to Ted Nolton.
[8:57] Mayor, as Ted is going to the mic, I'll
[8:59] just note for our participants online,
[9:01] we want you to feel fully able to
[9:03] participate. So feel free to speak up at
[9:06] any point that you want to and also
[9:08] we'll keep an eye on you if you want to
[9:10] raise your hand. So please uh in the
[9:12] hybrid world please feel free to engage.
[9:14] Thanks.
[9:18] » Okay. Uh new chair Tran, thank you so
[9:21] much and uh it's so great to welcome a
[9:25] lot of new members here today and to
[9:28] have kind of our first uh new member
[9:30] regional growth committee. I'm really
[9:32] excited for this. Um, as mentioned
[9:34] before, I'm uh the WFRC staff point of
[9:37] contact for the regional growth
[9:38] committee. What I want to do is two
[9:40] things. One, just do a very short
[9:43] overview of some of the roles that RGC
[9:46] plays and then second listen to your
[9:49] thoughts and ideas of things you want to
[9:51] explore as members and uh so later
[9:57] it's going to work right.
[10:00] This is a test of patience which I don't
[10:02] have any. Um, at the end of my
[10:06] introductory slides, we'll ask you these
[10:08] three questions and I'm giving them to
[10:10] you in advance so that your brain can
[10:13] start tickling. Um, what topics you'd
[10:16] like to have discussed at future
[10:17] meetings, specific guest speakers,
[10:19] subject matter experts, or
[10:20] organizations, other suggestions for RGC
[10:24] meetings. you can start to join um at
[10:27] slido.com with that number or that uh QR
[10:31] code. I will bring up those instructions
[10:33] again in a number of slides. So, don't
[10:36] worry if you don't get it now.
[10:38] All right. So, WFRC
[10:42] is the name of our organization and our
[10:44] board, right?
[10:46] um 27 people I think it's 17 elected
[10:49] officials on the board and there's
[10:51] really two big branches off of that
[10:55] transportation coordinating committee
[10:57] which focuses on short range uh planning
[11:00] and programming the assignment of money
[11:03] to projects and the regional growth
[11:05] committee which focuses on long range
[11:08] planning including the Wasuch choice
[11:10] vision and the regional transportation
[11:12] plan both branches are then supported by
[11:15] technical technical advisory committees.
[11:17] Um
[11:19] now, so I'm going to touch on the RGC
[11:21] roles. You can have this in your head as
[11:23] new members. Um under three bins,
[11:27] planning, implementation, and
[11:30] engagement. Uh so you're really uh the
[11:33] guiding uh committee to help shape these
[11:38] activities at WFRC. So when we're
[11:41] talking about planning at WFRC that
[11:43] starts with the Wasatch Choice vision
[11:45] and you may know about the Wasuch Choice
[11:47] Vision already, but the easy way to
[11:50] think about this is this is the shared
[11:52] effort to coordinate a transportation
[11:55] plan for the region. um a framework for
[11:58] where communities want to go with their
[12:00] land use and major economic development
[12:04] opportunities and how those three things
[12:06] align geographically
[12:08] on a map. And so this is just a zoom in
[12:11] on a portion of the region. I think this
[12:14] is northern Davis, Southern Weber. And
[12:16] you can see all these pieces come
[12:17] together, different uh road, transit,
[12:21] trails,
[12:24] um major destination areas in our land
[12:27] use plans or our vision of where we want
[12:29] to go as we handle the demands of growth
[12:32] and parks and open space uh and how
[12:36] these these uh components align
[12:38] together. That's what we mean by the
[12:39] Wasich Choice vision. will hear a lot
[12:41] more about that over time. But this is
[12:44] one of the key things that the regional
[12:46] growth committee advises is how do we
[12:48] develop and use the Wasatch Choice
[12:51] vision. Now that's the umbrella. A key
[12:54] part of that a focus area of the of the
[12:57] RGC is the regional plan itself. You can
[13:00] kind of think of it as so if the W was
[13:02] choice vision coordinates land use
[13:04] transportation economic opportunity the transportation piece is very robust
[13:10] and detailed the regional transportation
[13:12] plan roads transit active transportation
[13:14] especially with a focus on regionally
[13:17] significant facilities. So we we oversee
[13:20] that process. This is a four-year
[13:22] process to develop the regional
[13:24] transportation plan. where we are at is
[13:27] we are in the second to last year of a
[13:30] four-year cycle. So the the tenor of our
[13:33] conversations as a committee, they
[13:35] adjust based on where we are in the
[13:38] regional transportation plan cycle. So
[13:40] this year we're focusing on
[13:44] uh phasing projects or prioritizing them
[13:47] and addressing fiscal constraint. How
[13:50] much money do we think we might have
[13:52] available into the future? and that
[13:53] informs that prioritization process. So,
[13:56] we'll talk about it as a as a committee
[13:59] and we'll talk about how to engage the
[14:02] rest of the comm uh community on this
[14:04] question of the regional transportation
[14:06] plan. Um, so there's planning, there's
[14:10] also analytics. Uh, WFRC
[14:13] shines a light on issues in our region,
[14:17] transportation, land use conditions, and
[14:19] we forecast. We we have models that help
[14:22] us,
[14:24] you know, look at plausible or probable
[14:29] futures based on what we might do. If we
[14:32] build a road here, we build a transit
[14:34] line there, if land use patterns shift
[14:36] in this way or that way. So, we forecast
[14:38] things and we provide data and tools to
[14:41] fill in the blank communities, um,
[14:44] transportation agencies, this kind of
[14:47] work. You'll advise that was all under the planning and
[14:52] analytics. Now we're in the second bin,
[14:54] the implementation bin. Within
[14:57] implementation, there's a couple of
[14:59] things that the regional growth
[15:00] committee focuses on. One is to advise
[15:03] the transportation land use connection
[15:05] uh
[15:07] program. This is a planning and
[15:09] technical assistance program uh that
[15:11] helps local governments. You're going to
[15:13] hear about this. It's on the agenda
[15:16] today. I'm gonna I just want to
[15:19] highlight that that is a partnership
[15:20] effort with UD do and UTA. Really
[15:23] important to note that um and you're a key adviser in that. One of the
[15:29] things that we do as well is we certify
[15:32] or we make recommendations to the
[15:34] council to certify station area plans um
[15:38] in support of statewide legislation
[15:41] helping communities as they fulfill
[15:43] those requirements by certifying plans
[15:46] about a half a mile around uh rail
[15:49] stations and a quarter mile around BRT
[15:51] stations. That was a huge activity for
[15:54] regional growth committee last year.
[15:56] there was about 50 stationary plans that
[15:58] were certified. This year it's only like
[16:01] a tenth as much. And that's just a note
[16:04] that we have a lot more room in our
[16:05] agendas uh this year because of that.
[16:09] Last of the three bins, engage. How do
[16:12] we reach out and work to build
[16:15] consensus? Um and we'll bring up these
[16:18] questions of process and engagement here
[16:21] at uh the regional growth committee.
[16:23] What are the kinds of things that we
[16:24] might do? um and are they being
[16:27] effective and how can we uh sharpen our
[16:29] efforts? And then also within that
[16:32] engagement space, thinking about policy
[16:35] levers, analyzing federal, state, and
[16:38] local policies for our members, thinking
[16:40] about what we advocate for, um such as
[16:43] appropriations and policies that are
[16:45] consistent with our plans like the
[16:47] Wasuch Choice Vision and the Unified
[16:48] Transportation Plan, and we coordinate
[16:50] with National Association partners to
[16:52] adopt best practices. These are the
[16:54] kinds of things that the regional growth
[16:56] committee uh looks at. Here's the
[16:58] summary of those that you can look at.
[17:00] These are the ones that I went through.
[17:02] But this is not everything that we might
[17:04] look at. And this is where I want to
[17:06] turn it to you to say what are the
[17:08] things you want to explore given a basic
[17:11] notion of the space that was front
[17:14] regional council addresses
[17:17] transportation
[17:19] land use and economic development that
[17:20] are associated long range within that
[17:22] general space dealing with the demands
[17:25] of growth what should you what do you
[17:28] think we should discuss as well so here
[17:30] I'm going back to the slido
[17:32] um uh joining instructions
[17:37] these this that slido.com number is also
[17:41] on the first question. So I'm going to
[17:43] pull up the first question so people can
[17:45] start pouncing on that and have at it
[17:49] and then uh uh madame chair love to have
[17:53] a short discussion around these three
[17:55] questions as uh as you'd like.
[17:59] >> Sounds great. Has everyone had a chance
[18:01] to uh take a picture of the QR code?
[18:04] Will you go back a slide? I think it
[18:05] would help to just kind of give the
[18:07] lanes a little bit
[18:08] >> to give the
[18:09] >> go back one slide just as people are
[18:12] thinking about these questions. I think
[18:13] it would be helpful to have that
[18:14] information up there.
[18:16] >> Okay. Yeah. And it's
[18:18] >> want to see all the all the questions.
[18:20] >> Yeah. Yeah. That's what I was saying.
[18:22] >> I'd h I'd have to go back slides to get
[18:25] all three, but I can I'll just
[18:26] articulate them. The first is
[18:28] >> what are the issues that you want to
[18:30] explore? Okay. The second is are there
[18:32] specific subject matter experts,
[18:35] organizations, etc. that you think we
[18:38] ought to invite or engage? And the third
[18:40] is general reflections on how to create
[18:43] great meetings here at the regional
[18:45] growth committee. That kind of thing.
[18:47] >> Okay.
[19:08] if anybody online has any issues with
[19:10] the slidoh, just let us know in the
[19:13] chat.
[19:23] new UTA governance. How much housing is
[19:27] being developed around transit hubs?
[19:29] What does that development look like?
[19:31] How much of housing is investment
[19:32] property for second homes? Yeah, that's
[19:35] that is a real issue that we we could
[19:37] explore.
[19:39] I'm I'm trying to not do like a a James
[19:41] Earl Jones dramatic reading around each
[19:43] of these, but I can if you'd like. So,
[19:45] just let me know.
[19:54] You could breathe breathe heavily into
[19:56] the microphone if you wanted to.
[20:00] Climate,
[20:01] no snow by 2050, regional transportation
[20:05] solutions,
[20:08] opportunities for small owner occupied
[20:10] housing such as condos or town homes.
[20:13] Yeah,
[20:15] >> Ted, I think as I see these topics come
[20:17] up, I also look around the table and we
[20:19] have experts in some of these topics.
[20:21] Like there was a one that passed by
[20:23] about uh air quality growth and
[20:25] development. I'm looking at uh Kim and
[20:27] Bryce
[20:28] >> on on that issue. There was a topic
[20:31] raised about the UTA governance changes.
[20:34] We'll be talking about that. Jiren's
[20:36] here from UTA. So there's a lot of folks
[20:39] that participate already on this
[20:41] committee that we can uh tap for their
[20:44] expertise as we look ahead here.
[20:46] >> Does anybody want to do any elaboration
[20:48] on an item that you've shared here?
[20:55] » Ted.
[20:56] >> Yeah,
[20:57] >> it's Lorine.
[20:59] When I was first starting in public
[21:01] service in 2014,
[21:04] um, in my city on a planning commission,
[21:08] um, I got the chance to be part of an
[21:12] active transportation coordination
[21:15] between two cities who had gotten a
[21:17] grant and it was Kisville and Farmington
[21:20] together. And it was incredible to be
[21:25] part of that. And I and so what I put up
[21:28] there, I put two things. I put great
[21:29] Salt Lake, but the first thing I put was
[21:32] um just some of the things that are
[21:35] happening that are great updates between
[21:39] jurisdictions such as multiple cities
[21:42] working together because we all know
[21:44] that these plans don't stop at borders
[21:47] and shouldn't stop at borders. So just I
[21:49] think it's inspiring like when we heard
[21:51] last year from all of those um
[21:54] reinvestment zone areas or sorry
[21:57] >> stationary plan. Yeah. Like I felt like
[22:01] it was very inspiring to hear what was
[22:03] going on in in certain areas and and
[22:06] that stimulates ideas for other areas
[22:08] too.
[22:10] >> That's a great suggestion. Thank you.
[22:12] And we do have experts in the room about
[22:15] air quality and we all know that that's
[22:17] an issue along with water. So just to to
[22:21] be aware of,
[22:23] you know, what's appropriate for this
[22:25] group and the Great Salt Lake.
[22:27] >> Absolutely. Um Madam Chair, if it works,
[22:31] okay, I'll go to the next question.
[22:32] >> Yeah, go ahead.
[22:34] >> If you have more thoughts on that first
[22:37] question, please share them as you can.
[22:39] Um, I just want to note we're we're not
[22:41] wiping the slate clean. There was
[22:44] feedback from a year earlier that I just
[22:47] wanted to reflect and that we're going
[22:49] to continue to keep that in mind. Things
[22:51] like the Olympics, understanding
[22:53] markets, and I won't do the reading of
[22:55] this, but I wanted to note some of the
[22:56] findings that we got from this survey a
[22:58] year ago. But Ted, if you if you now go
[23:00] back one, that first item on there,
[23:02] housing solutions missing middle, that
[23:04] was a a suggestion that came from uh
[23:07] Sandy City Council person Allison Stout,
[23:09] who's on with us here and a member of
[23:11] this committee. Do you want to say
[23:12] something about that?
[23:13] >> Yes. Um and uh Council Member Strad
[23:16] suggested, hey, we ought to focus on
[23:18] this. And we talked as a committee and
[23:21] decided a great way to do this is to
[23:24] uh spread that training and conversation
[23:27] out into the community. And so we're we
[23:29] have a webinar just on March 26th, okay,
[23:32] that delivers on that conversation. So
[23:35] that regional growth committee guidance
[23:37] led to a webinar that is jointly hosted
[23:40] with the League of Cities and Towns, uh,
[23:42] WFRC and others. And we can give you
[23:44] some more details on that.
[23:45] >> Focused on home ownership. Yes. Also,
[23:49] >> that's right. home ownership es
[23:51] especially with regard to other options
[23:53] that add to ownership that complement
[23:57] single family homes. Okay, second of
[24:00] three questions. Are there specific
[24:02] guest speakers, subject matter experts,
[24:04] or organizations you'd like to hear
[24:05] from?
[24:14] And for the sake of time, we may not
[24:17] discuss this one quite as long. And then
[24:20] I think what I could do on the third
[24:22] question,
[24:23] uh,
[24:25] Madame Chair, is I could leave that up
[24:27] as we do an introduction to the, uh, the
[24:30] ensuing agenda item.
[24:32] >> Sounds great.
[24:38] Professor Reed viewing indeed. And if if
[24:40] anybody would like to elaborate on some
[24:43] of the things that you're putting into
[24:44] this question for a few minutes, we
[24:46] could do do that.
[24:51] » You know what? One of the things that I
[24:53] hear a lot is that um since we are in a
[24:56] drought and we have such water issues,
[24:57] why are we allowing multiple units to be
[25:00] built and more housing to be built? So I
[25:02] think it would be a great future
[25:03] discussion to talk about how building
[25:05] more doesn't use more necessarily.
[25:09] >> Yeah. Uh it's a it's a great point and
[25:12] it and it's sort of at Envision Utah has
[25:15] helped us through the years. I I think about this question of
[25:19] >> if we try to limit growth, what are the
[25:21] consequences of that, right?
[25:22] >> Um but what we do have is we have a lot
[25:24] of a lot more control collectively on
[25:26] the form that of growth uh that growth
[25:29] takes. And so we can think about impacts
[25:31] through form whereas we don't have a lot
[25:35] of control over the how much.
[25:38] Um but we can talk that through
[25:40] >> Jugs. Okay.
[25:42] >> I'll also note we as staff can do some
[25:44] interpretations here like the housing
[25:47] guy for the gov. Who's that? Steve
[25:48] Walrip. So we'll help just throw out
[25:50] whatever you want and we can fill in
[25:52] some blanks here.
[25:53] >> Love that.
[25:55] So, I know that I'm I'm going to move on
[25:58] perhaps before everybody's gotten their
[25:59] thoughts in here. I just want to
[26:01] reiterate that as members, please share
[26:03] additional thoughts after this meeting
[26:05] and we will follow up with an email that
[26:08] enables you to do that.
[26:09] >> Yeah.
[26:10] >> So, I'm going to go to the next uh
[26:11] question
[26:13] uh which is the last question. Any other
[26:15] suggestions to enhance the value of
[26:17] regional growth committee meetings? And
[26:19] I think uh Madam Chair, what I could do
[26:21] is I can leave this up.
[26:22] >> Okay. even as we uh move into the next
[26:25] agenda item if that is acceptable to the
[26:28] committee.
[26:29] >> People can think about the question.
[26:30] Okay,
[26:33] >> Jason, were you trying to Were you
[26:34] raising your hand, Jason? Oh, okay.
[26:36] >> No,
[26:39] >> ready to move on then? Okay.
[26:42] >> Thank you so much everybody.
[26:47] Okay, so we know the Wasatch Choice
[26:49] vision is our long-standing regional
[26:51] blue blueprint is coordinating
[26:53] transportation, land development, and
[26:54] economic opportunities. Um, back in
[26:57] August, WFRC staff shared the idea of
[27:00] reporting on five key progress
[27:02] indicators to follow up on the ground
[27:04] progress towards this the Wasatch Choice
[27:06] vision. So today, let's look at the
[27:09] draft numbers and see the progress and
[27:11] I'll turn it over to you to to do that.
[27:17] >> Sorry, Julie.
[27:18] >> Julie, sorry about that.
[27:20] >> It's fine.
[27:20] >> To you, Julie. Thank you.
[27:23] >> I know the last name was a little
[27:24] tricky. Um, and this is Look, things are
[27:26] sliding down. Okay, so um yeah, we're
[27:29] going to talk about a progress indicator
[27:31] dashboard that we created here. And
[27:33] before I get started, I just want to
[27:35] mention that this was a joint effort
[27:36] between um our analytics team, our
[27:39] community economic development,
[27:40] communications, and long-range planning.
[27:41] So even though I'm up here alone, I most
[27:43] certainly didn't do all of this work um
[27:45] by myself.
[27:47] So Ted,
[27:49] yep, there we go. Sorry, I have two ways
[27:50] to advance the slide, then I got a
[27:52] little confused. Um so Ted mentioned the
[27:54] Wasatch Choice vision and uh our four
[27:57] key strategies on how to make that
[27:59] vision happen. So with any plan or any
[28:02] strategy, in this case a vision, we want
[28:04] to ensure that we're actually meeting um
[28:06] what we set out to do. So
[28:10] the law,
[28:12] I'm going to put this here for now. Um
[28:16] one second. I'm not used to being at the
[28:18] podium.
[28:20] Here we go. Okay. I'm gonna get fired in
[28:24] two seconds if I don't figure out how to
[28:26] slide. Okay, there we go. Okay. Um yeah,
[28:29] so we set out to to kind of figure out
[28:32] how our vision is being implemented. Are
[28:33] we meeting what we set out to do? Um
[28:36] with uh we have a performance indicator
[28:38] dashboard. We wanted to start small. So
[28:40] we have five key indicators that align
[28:43] with the four Wasatch Choice vision
[28:45] strategies. The fifth one being um our
[28:47] beloved access to opportunities. So if
[28:49] you're new here at RDC um and we haven't
[28:51] talked to you about access to
[28:52] opportunities, this is one of our key
[28:54] performance measures that we do at WFRC.
[28:57] It's a way to measure how how well
[28:58] people can be connected to jobs,
[29:00] education, and other key destinations.
[29:02] So that's the opportunity part of access
[29:04] to opportunity.
[29:06] And we chose these five so that they
[29:07] were easy to understand. Um they were a
[29:10] way for us to be able to calculate them
[29:12] over time. So we wanted to make sure
[29:13] that we had um both past data and data
[29:16] that we could continue to measure well
[29:18] into the future. We were focusing on
[29:20] that transportation land use connection.
[29:22] So you'll see that some of these are
[29:23] more land use. Um some of these are
[29:25] transportation and affordability is a
[29:27] mixture of of transportation and land
[29:30] use. Um and then we wanted to be able to
[29:32] calculate these at different
[29:33] geographies. So not just for the region
[29:34] but be able to dig down into county and
[29:36] city um level numbers.
[29:39] So I'm going to um go to the
[29:44] dashboard now. You can join using this
[29:46] QR code. if you're online, um, we're
[29:48] dropping it into the chat and we'll also
[29:51] send this out after the meeting for you
[29:53] to explore as well.
[29:55] >> And Julie, if you don't mind a quick
[29:57] interjection,
[29:58] >> this is a work in progress. It's a
[30:00] draft. Um, so it's not ready for prime
[30:04] time. And then the other note is we
[30:06] talked about this initially at the
[30:08] regional growth committee back in August
[30:10] and I and I just wanted to remind you of
[30:13] that. So, we're coming back to say you
[30:15] gave us some guidance in August and now
[30:17] we're at, you know, 85%.
[30:24] » Okay. So, on the Wasatch Choice Vision,
[30:26] if you ended up going to the QR code, uh
[30:30] there's a little bit of introduction
[30:31] text about what um the intent of this
[30:34] was was doing. And if you scroll down a
[30:36] little bit, you'll see the dashboard
[30:38] with the five key indicators.
[30:40] Um this is generally for the was when
[30:43] you first get on the the um website it
[30:46] will be for the Wasatch Choice as a
[30:48] whole. So that includes our planning
[30:49] area as well as our MO to the south, the
[30:51] Matland Association of Governments. Um
[30:54] and it's just a a broad overview of how
[30:56] the the five measures um are measuring
[31:00] and then how the trend is is going. So
[31:02] that's what the these arrows are. You
[31:05] can click on the learn learn more on any
[31:07] of the
[31:09] five um indicators and you'll get um not
[31:13] only the data
[31:16] sorry
[31:20] um but you'll also see that there's on
[31:23] the left
[31:29] uh is a little description of what we're
[31:31] measuring, why it's important,
[31:39] um why what are some solutions to um
[31:42] improve this measure? How we're
[31:44] measuring it? So, our methodology and
[31:46] our data sources so anyone can kind of
[31:48] double check our work or dig deeper into
[31:50] the details. Um and then there are some
[31:52] resources at the bottom of this. So,
[31:54] we're trying to give you sort of an
[31:55] overview what what the measure is um and
[31:58] how we can improve the measure
[32:01] for some of the indicators. So this is
[32:02] access opportunities, how many jobs we
[32:04] can get to in a typical commute. Um for
[32:07] some of the measures like this one,
[32:08] that's the strength of our centers. So
[32:10] we're measuring development within our
[32:12] um was choice vision centers.
[32:15] You can see the total number. So this is
[32:17] the total number of households and jobs
[32:18] that are within a center. Um but here
[32:22] also you'll be able to scroll across and
[32:24] break that down into the number of
[32:25] households within the center and the
[32:27] number of jobs within the center.
[32:30] And likewise for um
[32:32] >> and Julie, can I do a quick add-on?
[32:34] Sorry for that. This a quick add-on on
[32:36] the strength of our centers. Um in part
[32:39] because we have a lot of new members.
[32:40] Part of the reason why WFRC focuses on
[32:43] city and town centers is they have a
[32:45] significant transportation impact. they coordinate location-wise with major
[32:52] roads and major transit and they tend to
[32:54] have a significant
[32:57] sort of a punching above their weight
[32:59] impact on on a transportation behavior.
[33:03] So that's part of the reason why we we
[33:04] have a focus on on city and town
[33:06] centers.
[33:07] >> Great. from a regional perspective.
[33:10] >> Um on households and transportation,
[33:12] you'll also see um so I just wanted to
[33:14] point this one out because often I feel
[33:16] like people think that you only want a
[33:18] positive numbers up. So here we are um
[33:20] showing that the total household and
[33:22] transportation cost that we see in our
[33:24] region is um increasing over time. Um
[33:27] you can break that down into how the
[33:29] percentage that is being caused by the
[33:32] household cost. So, rent, mortgage
[33:35] payment, and then the um amount that's
[33:38] being on the transportation cost. You'll
[33:39] see that dip in 2020 when we were not
[33:42] driving as much um and our overall sort
[33:45] of gas purchases and and other wear and
[33:47] tear on the vehicle um dropped over
[33:49] time.
[33:51] Um
[33:53] I will also note one other thing. Um so,
[33:56] let's go to transportation choices. So,
[33:59] this is measuring the number of people
[34:00] who have transportation options.
[34:03] um in particular with the choice of
[34:06] driving or using frequent near nearby
[34:09] frequent transit. Um so I want to say
[34:12] two things here. First is that I've been
[34:14] showing you the region numbers but if
[34:16] you come back up to the geography you
[34:19] can select um this is breakdown by our
[34:23] MO areas by county by these small areas
[34:26] that you've come to. If you've come to
[34:28] any of our workshops, these are their
[34:29] workshop areas
[34:31] as well as um individual cities.
[34:35] So I'll go down to Marriott Slaterville.
[34:39] I get down to M. There we go. So on this
[34:43] measure, so um the we have five key
[34:46] performance indicators and the intention
[34:48] here is that we will go in some more
[34:50] detail and provide um some more insights
[34:53] in a secondary measures that we're
[34:56] developing now and we'll update the this
[34:59] progress indicators to have those
[35:00] secondary measures. The reason that this
[35:02] is important is because this
[35:04] transportation choices which is
[35:05] measuring access to frequent transit in
[35:09] some areas you'll see that there isn't
[35:11] any information. So in Marriott
[35:12] Slaterville there's not frequent transit
[35:14] and there's not fixed guideway but that
[35:16] doesn't mean that there's not other
[35:17] options for people in Marriott
[35:19] Slaterville to get around by transit
[35:20] right there might be um all day bus
[35:22] there might be um on demand services
[35:26] which are not being shown in this
[35:27] particular measure but it does not mean
[35:29] that there's not other things. And so
[35:31] these um broader more detailed
[35:34] information will come in as a set of
[35:36] secondary measures. I just wanted to
[35:37] point that out as if you're going
[35:40] through this and you're like, "Oh, the
[35:41] data is not loading or there's an error
[35:43] here." Um in some cases it might just be
[35:45] that there's not that frequent transit
[35:46] that we're expecting in other areas. Um
[35:48] and that we're acknowledging that
[35:50] there's other types of transit that
[35:51] might be serving these areas and and we
[35:53] will have that as a secondary measure
[35:55] later on. The intention is to have these
[35:57] secondary measures for all of the key
[35:59] performance indicators, but we're
[36:00] starting small because this is a new um
[36:02] initiative here at WFRC.
[36:04] >> I mentioned that we're at 85%. This is
[36:07] the kind of thing that before we launch
[36:10] uh I would hope that you know Marriott
[36:12] Slaterville goes to this and they see
[36:15] information about their transit access,
[36:18] not necessarily for frequent but for
[36:20] other forms of transit and so that it's
[36:22] still there. Um, but we're looking for
[36:25] your feedback and guidance. And so if as
[36:27] you're as you consume this and explore
[36:30] it and the questions you've got or
[36:31] suggestions, that's that's part of what
[36:33] we're hoping for today.
[36:36] >> Um, yeah. So, I'll just put this up
[36:39] there. So, that's my contact information
[36:41] and my little picture from the website.
[36:43] If you can't um remember anyone's name
[36:46] or our emails on the new website, we
[36:48] have all of the staff and it looks like
[36:50] this with a picture, our role, and our
[36:52] email. Um, and I invite you as you
[36:54] explore this after this meeting, um,
[36:56] give us your feedback. If you feel like
[36:58] we're missing something or something
[36:59] could be added that would make this more
[37:01] useful, there's other resources. Um, we
[37:03] would love to hear about it as we're,
[37:06] um, finalizing this and then doing those
[37:08] secondary indicators as well.
[37:11] >> Thank you, Julie. Does anyone have
[37:12] questions or thoughts right now as you
[37:14] sort of maybe um, engaged your brain a
[37:17] little bit as you're thinking about
[37:18] this?
[37:18] >> I'm sorry. Can I get one more um, of a
[37:20] QR code up there? Yes, you can.
[37:22] >> Oh, yeah. That's great.
[37:24] >> There you go.
[37:28] » Mayor, can I interject? May I please?
[37:30] >> Thank you, Andrew.
[37:30] >> Um, Julie, thank you so much. This
[37:32] trying to pull together data. Um,
[37:36] there's so much data and there's so much
[37:37] information, you know, what are the
[37:40] right things to look at to understand
[37:42] how well are we doing as a region? Um,
[37:45] and so Julie, will you act will you go
[37:47] back to the slide that actually shows
[37:49] the numbers the the main dashboard.
[37:51] >> Um,
[37:52] >> yeah, I'm not showing any. Yeah. Um, you
[37:54] just have to click on that and go back
[37:55] to
[37:56] >> So, let me just say two two things
[37:58] quickly. First, you know, when you work
[38:00] with WFRC, we spend a lot of time
[38:03] planning for the future, right? The
[38:05] Wasatch Choice Vision looks out to the
[38:07] future to a desired state that we want
[38:10] collectively we want for our region and
[38:12] our individual communities.
[38:14] And that looks out to decades into the
[38:17] future. Now, it also says, what do we
[38:19] need to be doing now? What decisions do
[38:21] we make now to shape and have the future
[38:23] that we want? But it it's it's really important not only to be casting
[38:29] your eyes to the future, but to be
[38:31] looking at how are we doing, right? Are
[38:33] we are we pointing in the right
[38:35] direction? What's actually happening in
[38:37] our region and in your individual
[38:38] communities? And I feel like these
[38:41] indicators
[38:42] uh address that critical question. How
[38:46] are things going? Are we heading in the
[38:48] right direction or not in the right
[38:50] direction? And so just for example, the
[38:52] transportation choices that Julie talked
[38:54] about at a topline regional number. So
[38:58] that 23.7%
[39:00] is what, Julie?
[39:03] >> The percentage of residents that are
[39:05] have a choice of driving or using um
[39:07] frequent nearby transit. Okay. So, right
[39:09] now in the entirety of the Wasatch
[39:11] front, the majority of like we assume
[39:15] that everybody has the ability to drive.
[39:17] That doesn't mean everybody has a car,
[39:18] but who also has the ability to access,
[39:21] as Julie said, frequent bus rapid
[39:24] transit or tracks or frontr runner, you
[39:26] know, easily from their home. And it's a
[39:29] little bit less than a quarter of our
[39:31] region's residents. But it's going up.
[39:34] And that over the last what, five from
[39:36] 2019? Is that the time? horizon. It has
[39:39] gone up some. Why does that happen?
[39:42] Well, we expand transit service, right?
[39:45] Um, Mayor Overson, as we, you know, as
[39:47] the, uh, as the BRT comes online
[39:51] regionally, that'll go up and in your
[39:53] community, it'll it'll jump up
[39:55] significantly, right? We hope, right?
[39:57] And as as Ted was noting before, as
[40:00] stationary plans and development occurs
[40:03] around transit stations, that number
[40:05] also goes up. So it helps us to see if
[40:08] we want the Wasach's choice vision has
[40:10] this one of its core principles is and
[40:13] strategies is that our residents should
[40:15] have transportation choices. Are we
[40:17] going in the right direction? Are we
[40:19] improving that year by year by year? So
[40:22] this whole effort will help us to
[40:24] understand that and then as Julie noted
[40:27] not just regionally but in individually
[40:29] down to a a city level with the best
[40:31] data that we have. How are these things
[40:34] playing out for your individual
[40:35] communities? And we hope that this will
[40:37] help us understand what's at play in our
[40:39] region, but then also help us to shape
[40:42] decisions. If we do this strategy, if we
[40:45] do that strategy, if you know there's a
[40:49] b a bountiful uh uh uh uh Davis Salt
[40:52] Lake connector um enhanced transit, what
[40:56] impact will that have? If we do our
[40:57] development patterns in different ways,
[40:59] what impact will that have on these
[41:01] important uh measures? So that's what
[41:03] we're aiming at.
[41:04] >> Okay. And so the feedback that you're
[41:05] asking from us is whether or not we
[41:08] understand these indicators or or
[41:10] whether or not they're working for our
[41:11] communities. Help us understand so that
[41:13] we can give you better feedback.
[41:15] >> I and I can give you if if it would
[41:17] work. Okay. Um I could give a couple of
[41:19] examples. So we we've we've been
[41:22] previewing these also with partners and
[41:24] they've been posing great questions like
[41:26] how do we know if a number is a good
[41:28] number? Um can you give us some context?
[41:32] Uh should this be a percentage so that
[41:34] we understand uh how how many people in
[41:38] our community
[41:40] or should it be a raw number? Um you
[41:42] know it could be it could be looking at
[41:44] any of those details like that. But I I
[41:47] think maybe the threshold question is
[41:48] does it make sense? Is it
[41:50] understandable? Is it interesting? Is it
[41:52] compelling? But then it can be more like
[41:54] well how was this developed? um gosh
[41:58] that this number doesn't I need more
[42:01] information to understand how to h how
[42:03] to interpret the number whatever um and
[42:06] you know it's it's the kind of thing
[42:08] that um we're going to learn a little
[42:12] bit I believe after we launch it we'll
[42:15] launch it and we'll see how how it's
[42:17] being utilized and we'll be able to
[42:20] refine it a little bit over time what we
[42:22] don't want to refine is the methodology
[42:24] so that we can sort of keep track of
[42:26] things longitudinally.
[42:29] >> Yes. Go ahead.
[42:31] >> Sure. Mike Kim mic.
[42:32] >> Oh, your mic's not on. Thank you.
[42:35] >> Thank you. Yeah, I guess I was just
[42:37] thinking the same thing like what's the
[42:38] context of this and it's would probably
[42:41] be very difficult to compare to other
[42:44] regions of our size and density, but
[42:46] like
[42:47] kind of some comparison of other regions
[42:49] that are similar to ours might be
[42:51] helpful for some context at least to
[42:53] kind of pull out what are our values as
[42:55] far as transportation choices and how
[42:57] we're investing in those. I don't know
[42:59] that was I was just trying to think of
[43:00] how do we create that context.
[43:04] Thank you. That's very helpful. Anyone
[43:06] else?
[43:08] >> Do we have anyone online or
[43:09] >> I'm looking online for any comments. I'm
[43:11] not seeing any at the moment, but I will
[43:12] note that Weber County Commissioner
[43:14] Sharon Bolos joined us earlier as did
[43:16] Mary Katherine Perry from the Salt Lake
[43:18] Chamber. So, welcome friends.
[43:21] >> Thank you.
[43:22] >> All right. Thank you so much.
[43:25] >> Okay. Community planning updates. This
[43:27] item covers a lot of ground that relates
[43:29] to planning in communities across the
[43:30] region.
[43:32] The Utah housing capacity analysis. The
[43:34] first item looks at the new statewide
[43:35] housing analysis. The governor's office
[43:37] of economic development recently
[43:39] produced a statewide housing capacity
[43:41] constraints analysis with the help of
[43:43] envision Utah to help local leaders and
[43:45] infrastructure providers plan for Utah's
[43:47] growth. I know representatives from both
[43:50] god.
[43:52] Are you gonna me?
[43:54] >> We don't have goed. Oh, okay. So, we
[43:56] have envision Utah here though, right?
[43:58] Okay. So, first like to invite uh Ty
[44:01] Mcken
[44:02] >> McCutchen and Jason Brown from Envision
[44:05] Utah. Thank you.
[44:07] >> All right. Thank you. Uh thank you to
[44:10] our chair for putting this on the agenda today.
[44:15] I'm I'm happy to to be here to talk
[44:17] about this. Um as was mentioned, Ty, our
[44:20] chair is here uh to add some insight. Uh
[44:22] we also have uh our great planning team,
[44:25] Cody Lutz and Emma Clinton here. Uh so
[44:28] when we come to some Q&A and discussion,
[44:30] you're all of us are fair game uh to to
[44:33] jump in and or to answer questions or or
[44:35] have questions directed to us. Um I'm
[44:38] going to take a page out of some college
[44:41] journalism classes and I'm going to
[44:42] start with the headline and then I'm
[44:44] going to go back and give some context
[44:45] for this. So, the headline of this
[44:47] analysis and this study uh is that over
[44:50] the next 30 years, we expect that we're
[44:53] going to need in the state 840,000
[44:56] new homes in order to meet our demand.
[45:00] And when we look at the uh constraints
[45:03] that we have on the housing market, uh
[45:06] we are only going to be able to build
[45:08] about 600,000 of those uh based on the
[45:11] constraints as they stand today. In
[45:13] other words, we're going to come up
[45:14] short by about 235,000 homes. So,
[45:16] there's the headline. Let me give you
[45:18] just a little bit of uh background on
[45:20] this. Um, this is not the kind of
[45:22] analysis that can be done by just
[45:24] sitting in a room and staring at maps
[45:26] until you you come up with the answer.
[45:27] We had a lot of partners uh who helped.
[45:30] As was mentioned, uh the governor's
[45:32] office of economic uh development now I
[45:35] guess uh was uh over oversaw this. This
[45:38] uh is an idea that came out of the
[45:40] governor's uh or the commission for
[45:43] economic opportunity. Um and uh and the
[45:46] bit the real question that we were
[45:48] trying to answer was, you know, we know
[45:49] that we have a housing shortage. We've
[45:51] seen the the data around uh around the
[45:53] mismatch between new households per year
[45:55] and new housing units per year. Uh it's
[45:58] expected to get worse, but do we
[46:00] actually have the capacity to build the
[46:03] housing that we need uh to meet demand?
[46:06] And at this point, I do want to give a
[46:08] moment to Ty. Ty was on the Economic
[46:10] Opportunities Commission uh along with
[46:12] Andrew and helped uh create the idea for
[46:15] this, which was eventually funded by the
[46:17] legislature uh and and passed through
[46:19] Goyo and and we were able to bid on the
[46:21] project and get it. But Ty, do you want
[46:22] to add any insights into the impetus for
[46:24] this?
[46:25] >> Uh sure. Um it's good to be with you
[46:27] today. Um th this all started because
[46:30] and and this I'm a poster child for
[46:31] don't complain to the wrong person uh
[46:34] because you'll get tasked with work. Um
[46:36] I was at breakfast with the then speaker
[46:38] and I was grousing about how um we don't
[46:42] have enough infrastructure in the right
[46:44] places to attract the types of
[46:45] businesses the state really wants to
[46:47] draw. That that was sort of my point.
[46:50] And I used the example of the TSMC chip
[46:53] plant down in Phoenix. And I said why
[46:55] did they pick Phoenix for that chip
[46:57] plant? And I said, "Well, they they had
[46:58] a big loop freeway going through like
[47:00] 50,000 acres of desert, and that was why
[47:03] the chip plant went there." I mean,
[47:04] there were other reasons, but that was a
[47:06] big one. And he next thing I know, I got
[47:08] a call from somebody and said, "You've
[47:09] been appointed to this uh work group of
[47:12] the UEOC that's going to think about
[47:13] growth and infrastructure." And I said,
[47:15] "Oh, great." Um, so out of that, we we
[47:19] really thought hard about where are we
[47:22] going to put all of this growth? uh and
[47:24] do we actually have enough
[47:25] infrastructure to support it? That that
[47:27] was my sort of starting point question
[47:29] and it grew out of this this breakfast
[47:31] conversation. And so um Andrew will
[47:34] remember as we were conceptualizing how
[47:37] this might work. It's not an easy thing
[47:39] to to forecast not only the growth for
[47:42] the entire state but sort of where it's
[47:43] going to go. And so we went back to the
[47:45] beginnings of the original quality
[47:47] growth strategies that that were kind of
[47:49] put forward and agreed upon in large
[47:52] measure by uh residents of of then
[47:54] predominantly the Wasatch front uh back
[47:56] in the mid late 90s. The original
[47:58] quality growth strategy that Envision
[48:00] Utah put forward. You remember the
[48:01] little uh surveys in the newspaper and
[48:03] Governor Levit saying fill out the
[48:05] survey. Uh well that was what drove that
[48:07] first vision um for our region and it
[48:11] was updated again in 2014. But but we
[48:13] said if if we were to take the buckets
[48:16] and Jason's going to talk a lot about
[48:17] these buckets, but if we were to take
[48:18] the buckets that sort of drive how land
[48:21] can be developed and used, you know, we
[48:24] have transit nodes, ERT, light rail,
[48:28] heavy rail, so forth. We have infill,
[48:30] you know, places in our cities where
[48:32] there's some or a good deal of
[48:34] infrastructure already and we could add
[48:35] some units. And then there's the green
[48:37] field. And so the thought was if we if
[48:39] we took a demand model which we've done
[48:42] an amazing job and WFRC is I think one
[48:44] of the best in the country at this which
[48:46] is pulling in all of the inputs from the
[48:48] local jurisdictions and aggregating them
[48:50] but into a plan that we can then use to
[48:53] drive statewide planning for
[48:55] infrastructure primarily transportation
[48:57] in this context. But um what if we what
[49:00] if we spread the peanut butter so to
[49:02] speak across all these acres and then
[49:05] started to cut off the pieces of the
[49:07] bread that that don't really exist
[49:09] topographically
[49:11] because of infrastructure constraints
[49:13] because we run out of those acres to
[49:14] spread the peanut butter over. Uh how
[49:17] many units are we going to end up with?
[49:18] And so now we know. Uh I'll let Jason go
[49:21] into the details of but that was really
[49:23] the motivation behind doing the work and
[49:26] it was very unique in that we married
[49:28] not just the land plans that exist and
[49:31] the great planning work but with what
[49:33] the market will do with all that and so
[49:35] the nexus of those two things to me is
[49:38] what's really unique and
[49:39] transformational about what this is
[49:40] teaching us and where we go with it. So
[49:43] >> thank you Ty. Okay so uh yeah I'll give
[49:46] you a little bit of the details of this
[49:48] process. So we did start with creating
[49:50] that structural demand model and to
[49:52] create that we looked at uh where are
[49:54] market trends going and how do those
[49:56] interplay with our demographic
[49:58] forecasts. Uh oh I should also mention
[50:01] uh we used for the modeling work uh a
[50:04] really reputable national partner um RCL
[50:06] co- real estate uh consultants. They
[50:09] have a long history of doing a lot of
[50:10] great work here in Utah. Uh demographic
[50:12] forecasts of course came from the the
[50:14] gardener policy institute here. But um
[50:17] so you you you mix together the market
[50:18] trends and demographic forecasts and you
[50:20] get a sense of what the demand is going
[50:22] to be and then like Tai said you kind of
[50:24] spread the peanut butter so to speak you
[50:26] spread that out uh to create the
[50:28] distribution model uh which is where is
[50:31] the demand going to be uh based on a
[50:34] number of uh factors there. And then the
[50:36] constraints or the cutting is the of the
[50:38] bread uh that we looked at were um water
[50:41] availability of course um and uh planned
[50:44] sewer capacity, planned transportation
[50:46] infrastructure, uh land use planning and
[50:49] zoning uh and then uh of course you know
[50:52] what land is actually developable
[50:53] because we have a lot of uh natural
[50:56] difficult to change constraints here. Mo
[50:58] a lot of the other constraints there are
[51:00] things that we can do something with
[51:02] which is where I want to tee up uh the
[51:05] discussion and question after or at the
[51:07] end of going through the data is well
[51:09] where do we go from here what can we do
[51:11] about the constraints that that we've
[51:13] identified um okay so the first piece of
[51:17] this the statewide structural demand
[51:19] this is where the number came from I
[51:20] apologize if this is a little small but
[51:22] uh we have 842,000
[51:24] units that we expect uh we're going to
[51:27] need over the next uh 30 years. And you
[51:30] can see uh in the pie chart there how
[51:33] that breaks out. We have about 50% a
[51:36] little bit more than 50% I think that uh
[51:38] of the demand is going to be in single
[51:40] family detached housing. Uh 35% of the
[51:43] demand is going to be for multifamily or single family attached housing and
[51:48] then uh it's about 15ish%
[51:51] uh of the demand we expect to be for
[51:53] multifamily housing. Yeah. Ted
[51:55] >> Jason. And that demand forecast is is
[51:59] based on the combination of what people
[52:02] prefer and what they can afford.
[52:04] >> Yes. Yes. Uhhuh. Yeah.
[52:09] » Categories.
[52:10] >> Yeah. Uhhuh. So the big one is uh uh
[52:13] about 50% of of demand that is for um
[52:16] single family detached housing. Uh the
[52:19] next biggest one is about 35% or 34% and
[52:23] that is for uh single family attached
[52:26] housing and then the smallest uh piece
[52:28] of the pie is for multifamily housing.
[52:31] Okay, apologize for the size there.
[52:34] Really helpful to sort of wrap your
[52:35] brain around what is the big picture.
[52:39] What is the need for different types of
[52:42] housing in the decades to come in our in
[52:45] our state? Those three categories. Thank
[52:47] you. And one more question. When when
[52:49] you gave the headline, was that
[52:51] including the deficit that we already
[52:53] have? Because there's supposedly a big
[52:55] deficit right now.
[52:56] >> Yes. Yeah. So, uh I I'm not sure the the
[52:59] latest numbers, but uh we've hovered
[53:01] over the last 10 years or so, uh
[53:04] somewhere between, you know, I think the
[53:05] low was around 15,000 short or units
[53:08] short to 50,000. We've been last couple
[53:11] years, I think 20 or 30 or so units or
[53:13] thousand units short. And so it's just a cumulative deficit over time. So by
[53:19] the year 2055,
[53:21] how many units short are we going to be?
[53:22] And and the answer is about five to
[53:25] eight times worse than we are today.
[53:27] >> Jason, it's the new deficit that adds on
[53:29] to our existing deficit.
[53:31] >> So Oh, sorry. I I misspoke. It is the
[53:34] new deficit that adds on to our existing
[53:36] deficit.
[53:36] >> Yeah. Thank you. Because there's a giant
[53:38] deficit right now, right? We were
[53:40] concerned about the right now.
[53:42] >> Yeah. Yeah.
[53:42] >> And now that's that's kind of
[53:44] astounding. Yeah. I think
[53:45] >> can I add one thing, Jason, as well. Um
[53:47] we won't go into it today, but what was
[53:49] so interesting about the work is it it
[53:51] really built in each of the high growth
[53:54] areas of the state. So Cash Valley, you
[53:56] know, it's not just Salt Lake County,
[53:57] Utah County, Davis County, or Washington
[53:59] County. it added in some of these first
[54:01] ring high growth areas and and the
[54:04] modeling um took into account the the
[54:07] household quantity, the household
[54:09] composition, as Ted said, the budget.
[54:11] And so that's how these aggregated
[54:13] numbers were built up. And so they were
[54:16] built from the local neighborhoods and
[54:18] then aggregated up, not the other way
[54:20] around. Does that make sense? And I
[54:22] think that's an important piece of sort
[54:23] of how the framework was put together.
[54:25] And I think the staff did an amazing job
[54:27] with that.
[54:27] >> Thank you. That's a really really
[54:29] important insight. Um, okay. And then
[54:32] there we go. Oops. Okay. And and then,
[54:35] uh, as was mentioned, we kind of we
[54:37] looked at the different buckets. Uh,
[54:39] maybe actually I'll go to this next
[54:40] slide. Um, again, I'm worried this might
[54:43] be a little small. We have a map here
[54:44] that is only for illustrative purposes
[54:46] right now because it's uh difficult to
[54:48] read.
[54:48] >> Can I interrupt you really quick?
[54:49] >> Oh, yeah. Sorry. We have a we have a
[54:51] question.
[54:51] >> Oh, yeah. Professor Yuing.
[54:53] >> Yeah.
[54:57] Hi. I'm Could we go back to I've
[55:01] got dogs in the background here who've
[55:04] just been set off by something. Someone
[55:06] walking by. Um could we go back to the
[55:09] last slide, please? No, the one before
[55:12] that.
[55:14] >> No, the single family attached is
[55:18] missing. No.
[55:19] >> Oh, this one. Yeah. Yeah. single family
[55:22] attached includes the missing middle and
[55:25] I'm surprised that the uh slice pie
[55:29] slice is that large for single family
[55:33] attached. I would have expected
[55:36] multifamily to be about that size and
[55:39] single family attached to be the
[55:41] multifamily slice size. Could you
[55:44] elaborate on that?
[55:46] >> That's interesting.
[55:47] >> I'm gonna Cody, can we elaborate on
[55:49] that?
[55:51] Do you want do you want to come grab the
[55:52] mic here?
[55:58] » Good question, Reed. That's so so yeah,
[56:01] you're right. Our current trends are
[56:03] more multifamily than single family
[56:05] attached. Um but as as we looked at the
[56:08] demographics moving forward, we see a
[56:10] lot of um households aging into like key
[56:14] household formation stages, but families
[56:16] are a lot smaller. So there's an
[56:18] increasing demand for those um kind of
[56:21] small family type products, but people
[56:23] are kind of like aging out of their
[56:25] primary multifamily years basically.
[56:29] >> Great. Thank you.
[56:32] >> Thank you.
[56:33] >> Okay, so uh we looked at where housing
[56:36] could go based on uh several different
[56:38] market types. We we originally looked at
[56:40] six and then uh you'll see that we
[56:42] landed on about three of of real
[56:45] importance here. So the the six market
[56:47] types are greenfield development areas
[56:49] or greenfield markets where we you know
[56:51] currently vacant land uh where we don't
[56:53] have housing infill markets and that's
[56:56] obviously within our existing
[56:57] communities cities and towns. Uh we
[56:59] looked at transit adjacent markets and
[57:02] uh within a certain distance of our uh
[57:04] transit stops and for transit we were
[57:06] looking specifically at uh rail and BRT.
[57:09] Uh and then uh we also considered uh
[57:12] priority seasonal areas uh which is you
[57:15] know where we have non a lot of non-
[57:17] primary residents. We looked at uh uh
[57:20] excluded seasonal areas which are um
[57:22] also you know lots of non-primary
[57:24] residents and then and then commercial
[57:26] industrial areas that and what we found
[57:28] is those bottom three the seasonal and
[57:29] commercial industrial there's they're
[57:32] not going to play a significant role
[57:33] here. We don't expect a ton of change uh
[57:36] in in those areas I guess. So, uh, the
[57:38] main buckets, oops, going back here that
[57:40] we looked at were these three.
[57:42] Greenfield, transit adjacent, and
[57:43] infill. Uh, those are the main buckets
[57:45] that will receive or can receive the
[57:47] housing demand that we have.
[57:49] >> Jason, while you're on that, Council
[57:50] Member Stout asked a question. Is there
[57:52] a percentage of each of those groups
[57:54] that's estimated to be rental properties
[57:56] versus owner occupied?
[57:58] >> Oo, that is a good question. I'm going
[58:00] to defer to the planning team again. Do
[58:01] we have details on that one?
[58:04] Emma's looking that up.
[58:08] We need to come back to that one.
[58:13] The the So there's a full report which
[58:16] has a lot more detail. It's already been
[58:18] dropped in the chat and in the followup
[58:19] to this meeting, we'll send a link to
[58:22] that report so people can dig in. And
[58:25] yes, the question of rental versus owner
[58:27] occupied is a critical question. We
[58:30] already hit on that in this meeting. So,
[58:32] thank you, council member, for asking
[58:33] that question, and we'll make sure that
[58:35] we see what's in the report about that.
[58:37] >> Okay. All right. Sounds great. Um, okay.
[58:39] I'm going to go to this is where I think
[58:41] things get really exciting here. looking
[58:43] at uh the different market types or
[58:45] these three main market types. We also
[58:47] did divvy up transit adjacent uh markets
[58:50] in infill areas versus transit adjacent
[58:53] markets in green field areas because we
[58:55] have uh some transit adjacent or transit
[58:58] planned for areas that currently are
[59:00] essentially green field. They don't have
[59:01] a lot of uh housing that currently
[59:03] exists but they will in the future. So
[59:06] um if we were to when we looked at the
[59:09] visioning work that we've done at
[59:10] Envision Utah that that is part of the
[59:12] Wasatch Choice vision and the
[59:14] conversations around growth that have
[59:15] happened over the last uh two and a half
[59:17] decades or more uh we came up with a
[59:19] target distribution that that kind of
[59:22] aligns with um uh what what
[59:26] opportunities we also have available.
[59:28] And so if we were to try and meet what
[59:30] we expect demand to be, we are going to
[59:33] see about 50% of our uh new housing
[59:36] units land in Greenfield areas. Oh, I
[59:38] should say these numbers are only to for
[59:40] the Wasatch front. So this is not
[59:42] looking at the entire state, but just
[59:43] the Wasatch front. So we expect
[59:45] >> inclusive of Utah County, not just WFRC,
[59:48] right?
[59:48] >> Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Not the WRC, but the Yeah. the the Wasatch front there.
[59:52] So, we expect about 318,000 units to
[59:55] land in Greenfield in the Greenfield
[59:57] bucket. Uh about 191,000 units to land
[1:00:00] in the infill bucket and about 127,000
[1:00:04] units to land in the uh transit adjacent
[1:00:07] bucket. Just to give you an idea of what
[1:00:10] that looks like based on current project
[1:00:12] or current densities and and sort of
[1:00:14] trending that out. Uh that's about
[1:00:16] 64,000 acres in Greenfield, 26,000 acres
[1:00:19] of of new uh homes in infill and 9,000
[1:00:22] new acres of homes in transit adjacent.
[1:00:25] I'll just a side note, that's right now
[1:00:27] about twice what we have in uh in
[1:00:30] current uh transit adjacent acreage. Um
[1:00:33] so obviously you know acres can be
[1:00:35] variable depending on what densities end
[1:00:37] up looking like but uh just as a a
[1:00:39] reference point real quick. Okay now
[1:00:42] let's look at the constraints. Uh when
[1:00:44] we look at our green field areas the
[1:00:46] constraints on housing or the biggest
[1:00:49] constraints on housing are uh perhaps
[1:00:51] not surprisingly water uh but then also
[1:00:53] infrastructure and planning and zoning.
[1:00:56] And I want to put just a little bit of
[1:00:57] uh of commentary on the infrastructure
[1:01:00] piece. When we think about 318,000
[1:01:03] units, we are talking about a a scale of
[1:01:06] housing that needs to be developed over
[1:01:07] the next 30 years that is not going to
[1:01:11] really be handled by building uh roads
[1:01:14] out to you know small uh small you know
[1:01:17] 200 500 unit developments uh one little
[1:01:20] neighborhood at a time. This is a lot of
[1:01:23] housing that is going to have to be
[1:01:24] built and to serve that housing we're
[1:01:27] going to need some pretty massive
[1:01:29] infrastructure probably more
[1:01:30] infrastructure uh if I can uh add some of my own views on this probably
[1:01:35] more infrastructure than we can put uh or that that can be handled by a
[1:01:40] single city or a single developer. This
[1:01:42] is infrastructure that of a regional
[1:01:44] scale where we're going to have to think
[1:01:45] about where do we want uh major um
[1:01:49] transportation access to be. Where do we
[1:01:51] want major water uh availability to be
[1:01:54] created? Uh and then of course planning
[1:01:56] and zoning uh is is another constraint
[1:01:57] that we currently have on on some of the
[1:01:59] greenfield areas. Infill areas. The main
[1:02:01] constraints are again you know planning
[1:02:03] and zoning uh redevelopment potential uh
[1:02:06] which is also tied to infrastructure in a lot of our infill areas. And then
[1:02:11] uh transit adjacent uh when we look at
[1:02:14] our infill areas, redevelopment
[1:02:16] potential I think is one of the big
[1:02:18] constraints that we see there in our uh
[1:02:19] currently existing cities and towns. The number of transit nodes uh is
[1:02:25] another constraint. uh we can you can
[1:02:27] only have uh we only have so many
[1:02:30] currently identified and planned uh
[1:02:32] transit nodes and you know if we had
[1:02:34] more I think then we'd have more acreage
[1:02:37] uh available to uh to build around
[1:02:39] transit areas and then for the green
[1:02:41] field transit de or transit adjacent
[1:02:43] markets one of the biggest constraints
[1:02:45] and challenges is going to just be
[1:02:47] lining up the timing because it's going
[1:02:48] to be uh you know it's a little bit of a
[1:02:50] balancing act and and tricky to to uh
[1:02:53] time the market right to get the uh the
[1:02:56] densities that that we would expect or
[1:02:58] to or want to see uh around immediately
[1:03:00] around transit stops when they don't
[1:03:02] have a lot of existing infrastructure
[1:03:04] and and city around them already. And so
[1:03:06] that gives leads us to here's the math
[1:03:09] um the actual shortage along the Wasatch
[1:03:11] front. When we look at the constraints,
[1:03:13] greenfield areas come up 78,000 uh homes
[1:03:16] short. Infill areas come up 48,500
[1:03:20] homes short. and our transit adjacent
[1:03:23] areas come up uh just under 70,000 homes
[1:03:26] short by the time we reach uh 2055.
[1:03:30] So this is really I think the heart of what we found. Um for the sake of
[1:03:35] time I'm going to just go real quick.
[1:03:36] Oh. Oh then of course I should mention
[1:03:38] water is our constant uh constant
[1:03:41] constrained companion. uh that's going
[1:03:43] to need a lot of careful consideration
[1:03:45] there both in terms of the supply and
[1:03:47] managing the supply that we have and
[1:03:48] then treatment and of course
[1:03:50] distribution and making you know that's
[1:03:52] going to be a constant constraint that
[1:03:54] we're going to have to be working with.
[1:03:55] >> Jason just pause here for one sec. Okay.
[1:03:59] So
[1:04:00] >> what do you when I look at this and I've
[1:04:03] been looking at these numbers for a long
[1:04:05] time but when I look at this I see an
[1:04:07] all of the above strategy. What do we do
[1:04:10] as Utons to deal with the growth
[1:04:12] challenges that we face? And it's we
[1:04:15] need new green field development. We
[1:04:18] need suburban infill and we need transit
[1:04:20] adjacent. And you know that may look
[1:04:23] differently in Grantsville where you
[1:04:26] have, as we've discussed, lots and lots
[1:04:28] of development occurring in Greenfield
[1:04:30] areas than it will in Taylor'sville
[1:04:32] where it's suburban infill and and
[1:04:34] transit oriented development. It's going
[1:04:35] to be different community by community,
[1:04:37] but rit large, it's an all of the above.
[1:04:41] And it's actually, if you think about
[1:04:42] it, it's kind of remarkably balanced in
[1:04:45] terms of the shortfall as you as you
[1:04:48] look at it. And then you think about,
[1:04:49] well, what are and Tai was saying this,
[1:04:51] what are the uh constraints, the
[1:04:54] impediments that stand in the way? And
[1:04:57] infrastructure
[1:05:00] um is one of the the key elements. And
[1:05:03] as Jason, as you were presenting, I saw
[1:05:05] Mayor Tran grab her legislative summary
[1:05:09] uh postcard. Do you do you want to say
[1:05:11] why you grabbed your legislative summary
[1:05:12] postcard?
[1:05:13] >> Well, just because infrastructure is so
[1:05:15] important and we do have some funding.
[1:05:16] We had some good bills passed, so
[1:05:18] hopefully we'll see some good
[1:05:20] infrastructure developed in the next
[1:05:22] couple years.
[1:05:23] >> Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. And you know, um th
[1:05:26] this is by my saying what I'm about to
[1:05:28] say now, it'll shorten what I'm going to
[1:05:30] say later in legislative updates. So,
[1:05:32] you're welcome. Um,
[1:05:34] so sometimes I feel like we sit in these
[1:05:36] meetings and I think you know, Mayor
[1:05:39] Doherty, you're new to this committee
[1:05:41] and you're like, okay, this data is all
[1:05:44] really interesting and there's so much
[1:05:46] work that goes into it. Uh, how does
[1:05:48] this translate down into what's
[1:05:49] happening in my in my city, right? Well,
[1:05:53] if you take what Tai said before about
[1:05:55] the big picture challenges and we do
[1:05:57] this analysis and think about well what are the development patterns that
[1:06:01] we need and then you think what about
[1:06:03] what are the constraints and because we
[1:06:05] identify those constraints we know that
[1:06:08] infrastructure is one of the regional
[1:06:10] infrastructure needed to unlock housing
[1:06:12] development that as you said one city or
[1:06:14] one developer couldn't do on their own
[1:06:16] and then that all informs policym
[1:06:20] and mayor Bradshaw knows this because
[1:06:22] she was deeply involved in this every
[1:06:24] day of the session. That in many ways
[1:06:27] led directly to one of the most
[1:06:29] important pieces of legislation this
[1:06:31] past session, House Bill 492, sponsored
[1:06:34] by Representative Cal Roberts from
[1:06:36] Draper, which authorizes
[1:06:39] $250 million in state funding for
[1:06:43] regional infrastructure that's designed
[1:06:46] to unlock housing development. 150
[1:06:49] million of that is grant funds in Salt
[1:06:52] Lake County and a 100 million of that is
[1:06:55] loan funds at favorable interest terms
[1:06:58] around the state and that work emerges.
[1:07:01] So then mayor a city like Clinton can
[1:07:04] say working with developers we need help
[1:07:08] to put in you know the lift station the
[1:07:10] sewer line the water infrastructure the
[1:07:13] roadway infrastructure to enable
[1:07:15] development to occur. So you see this
[1:07:17] through line from conceiving a problem,
[1:07:20] analyzing it, understanding the data,
[1:07:22] identifying the stren constraints, and
[1:07:24] then having policym that addresses it.
[1:07:27] So I'm hoping that that ties together uh
[1:07:30] what we're what we're trying to do here.
[1:07:32] >> Yeah. Well, and I would like to say we
[1:07:34] like to think of this as this is our
[1:07:36] baseline scenario. This is this is a
[1:07:39] look at what the constraints are today.
[1:07:41] But the task that we all have as as a
[1:07:44] region, as a state, is to figure out how
[1:07:47] do we not land here? Because I don't
[1:07:49] think anyone wants to land with a
[1:07:50] shortage that's uh you know somewhere
[1:07:52] between five and eight times worse than
[1:07:54] it is today. That's not going to do much
[1:07:56] for quality of life, for affordability.
[1:07:58] And so so that's really the invitation
[1:08:00] that I think this gives all of us is to
[1:08:02] say all right how do we come up with the plans the policies the the visions
[1:08:08] the transportation infrastructure the uh
[1:08:11] the centers you know that that are going
[1:08:13] to help us address all of this and so
[1:08:15] that's sort of uh what I want to to pose
[1:08:18] as the question for us. One other quick
[1:08:20] thing I just want to jump to real quick
[1:08:21] here and then we can get into some more
[1:08:23] discussion on that is because we're at
[1:08:26] WFRC uh we wanted to just uh put put a
[1:08:29] plug in here as was mentioned uh
[1:08:31] centersbased development is is a big
[1:08:33] piece of the Wasatchet choice vision and
[1:08:35] we we think that that's an applicable
[1:08:37] and helpful strategy in all of these
[1:08:40] buckets. I mean I think the obvious ones
[1:08:42] that we can think of are the around
[1:08:44] transit adjacent especially the station
[1:08:46] area planning. Um but as we look at
[1:08:48] infill uh making sure that we have a
[1:08:50] centerbased uh approach in some new
[1:08:52] infill development that's going to help
[1:08:56] uh create the housing opportunities and
[1:08:58] quality of life aspects that we're
[1:08:59] looking for. Uh but also as we develop
[1:09:02] 318,000
[1:09:04] green fields homes along the Wasatch
[1:09:06] front. If we can uh incorporate centers
[1:09:09] within our planning there, we're going
[1:09:11] to uh make sure that we're building on
[1:09:13] less land and keeping more land
[1:09:14] available, but also facilitating uh the
[1:09:17] long-term access to transportation uh
[1:09:20] and uh and the quality of life aspects
[1:09:22] that we know are are part of what uh
[1:09:24] Utons are looking for.
[1:09:26] >> Jason, can I do a one quick add-on onto
[1:09:28] that,
[1:09:28] >> please? Yeah. So you talked about
[1:09:31] transit adjacent as having a green field
[1:09:34] aspect too and UTA knows this and we all
[1:09:40] know this. It's part of the Wasuch
[1:09:41] Choice challenge is if we want more
[1:09:43] transit, we have to have the development
[1:09:46] that get has people close enough to
[1:09:49] stations that they want to get on board
[1:09:51] and that then the funders of transit in
[1:09:54] turn say that's a good bet for us to
[1:09:56] build that transit line. And so
[1:09:58] Greenfield Centers is part of creating
[1:10:01] more stations in green field areas. I
[1:10:04] just wanted to make that connection.
[1:10:05] >> Yep.
[1:10:05] >> Yeah.
[1:10:06] >> Um in our last minute or two, I I want
[1:10:09] to suggest that that the next set of
[1:10:11] questions that this provokes is along
[1:10:14] the lines of where Andrew and Ted have
[1:10:16] just gone. So if we if we say, okay, we need to deliver this many hundred
[1:10:20] thousand homes or this many tens of
[1:10:22] thousands homes in the green field.
[1:10:24] Well, roll back 30 years and think about
[1:10:28] Salt Lake County and think about the
[1:10:31] opportunity that existed in the
[1:10:33] southwest corner of of Salt Lake County.
[1:10:36] And the state made significant
[1:10:38] investments to build out the Bangoder
[1:10:40] Highway and the Mountain View corridor.
[1:10:42] The state along with UTA and others uh
[1:10:45] funded the expansion of our light rail
[1:10:48] system uh including to Daybreak. uh
[1:10:53] where is that next place? Uh when we
[1:10:57] were meeting with Representative
[1:10:58] Roberts, he said, "Well, can you just
[1:10:59] draw a line on a map and show me where
[1:11:01] the road should go?" And I said, "Well,
[1:11:03] I don't know yet." Um but that's a
[1:11:06] question we should all start to think
[1:11:07] about. Where is that next opportunity to
[1:11:10] open up? But at then was, you know,
[1:11:13] between the lands that that Kennot owned
[1:11:16] that became Daybreak, between what the
[1:11:18] Sorenson's owned that became a couple of
[1:11:20] big master plans what the church owned,
[1:11:22] you know, we're talking about 20 30,000
[1:11:25] acres probably of land that were in that
[1:11:27] quadrant of the Salt Lake County that
[1:11:29] are now South Jordan, Haramman,
[1:11:32] Riverton, Bluffale. uh and the
[1:11:34] population went from very little to we
[1:11:37] all know a couple hundred thousand in in
[1:11:39] those set of communities. So that that's
[1:11:42] the question that I think we should be
[1:11:43] asking about the green field. Where are
[1:11:45] those places? This, you know, are they
[1:11:47] Twilla County? Are they southwest Utah
[1:11:49] County? Are they somewhere else? Um on
[1:11:52] the infill, you know, it's it's a little
[1:11:54] bit of everything uh to quote Andrew and taking instead of two houses on a
[1:12:00] lot, we put four houses on a lot. you
[1:12:02] know, what what are the infrastructure
[1:12:04] challenges with that and what are the
[1:12:06] public policy and zoning challenges with
[1:12:07] that? Because I know every time there's
[1:12:10] an applicant in front of your city, uh,
[1:12:12] everybody wants to add units to the
[1:12:14] proposal, right? Not really. Everybody
[1:12:18] says, "Could you just take four out?
[1:12:19] We'll be happy." Um, so that's a a big
[1:12:22] challenge for us. And then the the
[1:12:24] transit, it it's really where we were 30
[1:12:27] plus years ago. Where is that new
[1:12:29] system? And then what are the trade-offs
[1:12:31] that we need to make? Because the
[1:12:33] assumption that the model has is that
[1:12:35] the market can only build uh stick frame
[1:12:38] over podium. In most of the market, the
[1:12:41] denser construction typologies are too
[1:12:44] expensive to be supported. But maybe
[1:12:47] with study and and understanding, maybe
[1:12:49] it's a better investment to subsidize
[1:12:51] the construction of denser units than it
[1:12:53] is to build another 100 miles of rail. I
[1:12:56] don't know. It's a good question. Um or
[1:12:59] is it a mix of the two? You know, in
[1:13:00] some places we we subsidize
[1:13:03] densification at transit nodes with
[1:13:05] construction typologies that are more
[1:13:07] expensive because it's more economical
[1:13:09] than just expanding the system or is it
[1:13:12] no, we need to find green field places
[1:13:14] to expand the system to um allow the
[1:13:16] next set of daybreaks. So I think these
[1:13:19] are some really interesting questions
[1:13:20] that that we should all start to
[1:13:22] entertain and think about and that will
[1:13:24] lead us to a similar type of effort that
[1:13:27] was 30 years ago for the next 30 years.
[1:13:30] So it it is solvable. Uh it's our
[1:13:32] baseline only because it's what happens
[1:13:34] if we do nothing. I don't think it's our
[1:13:36] baseline because that's what we're going
[1:13:37] to choose to do and that's the
[1:13:39] opportunity. So
[1:13:42] >> I we post questions to the group. Madam
[1:13:44] Chair, I'm I'm going to assume that we
[1:13:45] don't have a lot of time to take
[1:13:46] questions. We do have a couple minutes.
[1:13:48] Great. Let's go ahead and take some
[1:13:50] questions. Thanks.
[1:13:51] >> Um, thank you all of you who've helped
[1:13:54] with this part of the
[1:13:57] agenda. It's fascinating and so
[1:13:59] important. And I this what you just
[1:14:01] barely said about the transit
[1:14:04] reinvestment zones. And that's what I
[1:14:06] was saying that last year when we had so
[1:14:08] many groups come and explain, they
[1:14:10] talked about the additional housing
[1:14:12] units as part of those plans. And and it
[1:14:15] was quite impressive, right? how much
[1:14:18] more housing there would be with those.
[1:14:20] So,
[1:14:21] >> 108,000
[1:14:23] new planned units in certified station
[1:14:26] areas around transit right now.
[1:14:28] >> Yeah. I mean, and that's just amazing,
[1:14:30] right? For so many reasons. Anyway, like
[1:14:34] we're kind of seeing this start to go in
[1:14:36] the right direction. I would say
[1:14:38] >> we just need to do a lot more of it. And
[1:14:40] that's so encouraging because I think
[1:14:42] the station area plan as a collaborative
[1:14:44] effort with local jurisdiction has been
[1:14:47] a great success. Um and we got to a
[1:14:50] point of consensus that said yeah we can
[1:14:53] do a lot of density in these locations
[1:14:56] and most most jurisdictions were
[1:14:58] comfortable with that idea. Now there
[1:15:00] was some proddding uh of course but but
[1:15:03] it was not a a cradown in the sense of
[1:15:06] you just have to meet a minimum
[1:15:07] threshold zoning across your whole city.
[1:15:09] It was and so I think it the question
[1:15:11] that that it gets me considering is well
[1:15:14] what's the correlary for infill at large
[1:15:17] and and what is the sort of
[1:15:19] collaborative uh consensus solution for
[1:15:23] that I don't know but we did it with the
[1:15:26] transit station area plans and so could
[1:15:29] we do it again?
[1:15:35] So, one of the questions I have is like
[1:15:36] when you said put four houses on a lot,
[1:15:39] one of the biggest problems that we have
[1:15:41] out in Magna is we uh have no parking
[1:15:45] and uh the Little Valley Gateway where
[1:15:47] the new high school is where we had that
[1:15:49] incident two weeks ago where that
[1:15:51] 14-year-old girl got killed up there. Um
[1:15:54] we're continuing to write lots of
[1:15:56] parking tickets up there. So, I'm not
[1:15:58] too wellliked up in that area.
[1:16:02] >> That's difficult. Yeah.
[1:16:06] Any other comments or
[1:16:09] no? Okay. All right. Thank you so much.
[1:16:11] That was interesting. You've given us a
[1:16:13] lot of good information
[1:16:14] >> and happy to chat afterwards or or sit
[1:16:17] down with with any of your cities or or
[1:16:20] talk to you about this more. Thank you.
[1:16:21] >> Okay. Thank you so much. Have
[1:16:24] >> Okay,
[1:16:24] >> Professor Ying, popped his hand up
[1:16:26] again.
[1:16:26] >> Oh, okay. Professor Yuing.
[1:16:29] >> Yeah. Thank you. Transit adjacent
[1:16:32] development for a planner actually has
[1:16:35] sort of a negative connotation.
[1:16:38] Transit oriented development has a very
[1:16:41] positive
[1:16:43] uh
[1:16:46] kind of reputation among planners. you
[1:16:49] can you can have uh
[1:16:53] development near transit that doesn't in
[1:16:57] essence generate transit demand.
[1:17:01] Um one one example is station park where
[1:17:05] it's it's adjacent to a frontr runner
[1:17:08] station but it's uh not oriented that
[1:17:12] way. Is is that something we are are
[1:17:16] wrestling with now?
[1:17:18] Compare that to fire clay where the uh
[1:17:22] transit station and the multifamily
[1:17:24] housing is together and one complements
[1:17:28] the other. Uh could someone comment on
[1:17:31] that?
[1:17:34] Uh, Madam Chair, I I could note and and
[1:17:36] Reed, I think that's a perfect segue in
[1:17:39] a way to the next two items, which are
[1:17:43] the transit and land use transportation,
[1:17:45] pardon me, and land use connection
[1:17:47] program and the certification of a of a
[1:17:51] plan in Midvil because that's the level
[1:17:53] of detail where you get into that, where
[1:17:55] you get into this question of um what's
[1:17:58] the land use mix, what's the, you know,
[1:18:00] the urban design, what's the place that
[1:18:02] we're going to create and how does that
[1:18:05] place then relate to transportation
[1:18:08] infrastructure? I I don't think it's as
[1:18:10] much in the in sort of in the regional
[1:18:12] analysis
[1:18:14] uh side or in the you know was choice
[1:18:16] map side but they these two things are
[1:18:20] linked and so if you'll allow it I think
[1:18:23] it's a really great tea up actually into
[1:18:25] the next agenda item.
[1:18:26] >> Sure. Sure. Thank you.
[1:18:29] >> Thank you. All right. Yes. The next
[1:18:30] agenda item is transportation and land
[1:18:32] use connection program 2026 awarded
[1:18:34] projects. So part of what RGC does is
[1:18:38] helps is is help guide the WFRC's local
[1:18:41] technical assistance efforts. Once a
[1:18:43] year we announce the communities and
[1:18:44] projects that will receive
[1:18:45] transportation and land use connection
[1:18:47] TLC technical assistance um help. So
[1:18:51] I'll turn to Meg now to present this for
[1:18:53] us um the community and economic
[1:18:56] development director for WFRC. Thank you
[1:18:58] Meg.
[1:18:59] Thank you, mayor. The March meeting is
[1:19:02] an exciting one for the community and
[1:19:03] economic development team every year
[1:19:05] because we get to show you all of these
[1:19:06] new wonderful projects that we'll be
[1:19:07] working with your communities, your
[1:19:09] staff um to get done over the next um
[1:19:12] year or two. So, that these are our
[1:19:13] transportation and land use connection
[1:19:15] program awards for 2026.
[1:19:19] A little reminder for some and maybe new
[1:19:22] information for others about what is the
[1:19:23] transportation and land use connection.
[1:19:25] Ted talked about our various planning
[1:19:27] technical ex uh assistance activities.
[1:19:30] This is kind of our core program. So
[1:19:32] this is an an a program that cities
[1:19:34] apply to annually. Um cities all over
[1:19:37] our region that includes our association
[1:19:39] of governments area and our no area. So
[1:19:42] all of the cities that are part of the
[1:19:43] Wasach Front Regional Council are
[1:19:44] eligible. Projects can um always are
[1:19:48] some connection between land use and
[1:19:49] transportation. Some have an eye toward
[1:19:52] economic development and they always
[1:19:53] meet um some subset of these these four
[1:19:56] goals. So the goals of T TLC are to
[1:19:58] maximize the value of investment in
[1:20:00] public infrastructure, enhance access to
[1:20:03] opportunities, increase travel options
[1:20:05] to optimize mobility, and to create
[1:20:07] communities with opportunities to live,
[1:20:09] work, and play. And so this is what
[1:20:10] we're helping your communities with,
[1:20:12] right? Um read to your comment, you
[1:20:14] know, it's it's one thing to say we want
[1:20:15] this many units around our transit
[1:20:17] station. It's another to go in and think
[1:20:19] about how that's going to function, how
[1:20:21] those people are going to um park, get
[1:20:23] around, whether or not they have a car,
[1:20:25] right? The kind of lifestyle they can
[1:20:26] have there at that transit station. So,
[1:20:28] we help communities to think through all
[1:20:30] of those details through projects within
[1:20:32] um TLC as well as our station area
[1:20:33] planning work, right? Some some of these
[1:20:35] projects are near transit and many are
[1:20:37] not. And so, u there's considerations
[1:20:40] either way, whether you have transit or
[1:20:41] not in um these plans that we do. This
[1:20:44] program is a partnership with UD do and
[1:20:46] UTA. And then some of our in-house work
[1:20:49] that we're able to provide assistance
[1:20:51] for your cities um with is funded by the
[1:20:54] governor's office of planning and
[1:20:55] budget. So we have lots of partners in
[1:20:56] this work.
[1:20:59] Ted showed this slide, but this is
[1:21:01] essentially what TLC can fund. We can
[1:21:03] fund planning design, getting a little
[1:21:05] deeper into those details. Um somewhat
[1:21:08] like what Reed mentioned, ordinances. we
[1:21:10] can fund development and zoning
[1:21:11] ordinances in your community and
[1:21:13] implementation strategies beyond all of
[1:21:15] this. What is it going to take to make
[1:21:17] this neighborhood um start to come to
[1:21:18] life and tick? So, just get creative
[1:21:20] when you're thinking about what TLC
[1:21:22] might be able to help with um as you're
[1:21:24] thinking about your planning and your
[1:21:25] needs in your city.
[1:21:28] This is what we have this year. So,
[1:21:30] we're excited to announce 15 new
[1:21:31] projects. Um that's that's on the high
[1:21:34] end for us. That's really wonderful. um
[1:21:37] in total project funds. That's just
[1:21:39] under two million. We have 1.78 million
[1:21:41] in um project funds this year being
[1:21:44] awarded. Uh most of that comes from the
[1:21:46] TLC program and 300,000 of that is local
[1:21:48] match from your cities. So that helps
[1:21:50] the money go a lot um further when we
[1:21:53] have some match from your communities.
[1:21:54] Um but we hope that this is assistance
[1:21:57] that's welcomed by everybody. I'm
[1:21:59] showing a little screenshot of our map
[1:22:00] up here. Um, mostly to say that I'm
[1:22:04] going to go through these projects
[1:22:05] really quickly, but all of the
[1:22:07] information about them, descriptions of
[1:22:09] them, the the funding amounts, all of
[1:22:10] that is going to be available in that
[1:22:12] map along with all of the other projects
[1:22:14] we've ever funded. So, um, if you are
[1:22:16] wondering if your community has ever
[1:22:18] been supported by TLC, open up that map,
[1:22:20] put your city's name in, and you'll see
[1:22:22] everything that your city has ever
[1:22:23] worked on with us. Um, and maybe it'll
[1:22:25] generate some ideas for um, some
[1:22:26] follow-up planning as well.
[1:22:31] Maybe we can drop a link to that map in
[1:22:33] the chat if someone's on Zoom. Okay,
[1:22:36] here are the projects we funded this
[1:22:37] year in Salt Lake County. There are
[1:22:38] seven. The Copperton project is multiple
[1:22:41] small area plans throughout Copperton,
[1:22:43] kind of looking at the city's land use
[1:22:45] as a whole and then zooming in on some
[1:22:46] specific areas to do some more detailed
[1:22:48] planning.
[1:22:50] the Draper transportation master plan in
[1:22:53] Holiday. We're funding a citywide zoning
[1:22:55] ordinance as well as a deep dive in
[1:22:57] their northwest commercial district area
[1:23:00] um to kind of think through what that
[1:23:01] area should become prior to writing the
[1:23:03] ordinance for it. In Magna, we're
[1:23:06] funding a 2011 corridor research park
[1:23:08] and lifestyle center plan for a small
[1:23:11] area in Magna.
[1:23:13] In Midvale, a general plan land use
[1:23:15] amendment that will actually be done in
[1:23:16] house by our staff. So we'll get to work
[1:23:18] really closely with Midvail this year.
[1:23:20] In Mil Creek, a Parley's trail fe
[1:23:22] feasibility study. This is to connect
[1:23:24] kind of the urban portion of Mil Creek
[1:23:25] across 215, sorry, um Parley's across
[1:23:28] 215.
[1:23:30] And then in the town of Ela, we're
[1:23:31] funding their general plan update.
[1:23:35] In Davis and Weber counties, we have the
[1:23:36] Davis County Regional Trails Wayfinding
[1:23:38] Signage Plan. So Davis County will work
[1:23:40] with all the communities in Davis to try
[1:23:42] to think through how can um we help
[1:23:45] bicycle and pedestrian users of those
[1:23:47] that trail system get around and know
[1:23:49] where they're going. Um Far West general
[1:23:51] plan in Ogden, the Five Points area
[1:23:54] master plan. Another deep dive into a
[1:23:56] neighborhood in Ogden. In Pleasant View,
[1:23:59] a general plan in West Haven,
[1:24:01] transportation master plan, kind of
[1:24:02] phase two of some of the planning work
[1:24:04] we're doing with West Haven right now.
[1:24:06] And then in Ogden Valley, a new
[1:24:08] community in our region, uh general
[1:24:10] plan, transportation plan, zoning road
[1:24:12] map, recently incorporated city, right?
[1:24:14] So, lots of work to do there in planning
[1:24:16] and we're happy to support.
[1:24:18] And then this year, we have a couple of
[1:24:20] projects in Tilla County. So, that
[1:24:22] includes the Grantsville general plan
[1:24:24] and a general plan for Rush Valley along
[1:24:26] with some code work there, too. So,
[1:24:28] there's the 15 projects. It's like um
[1:24:31] it's like a party for us when we get all
[1:24:33] this this wonderful new work to work
[1:24:35] with you on. Um go look at that map.
[1:24:37] Take a look if you have questions about
[1:24:38] these projects. Um let us know. Some of
[1:24:41] these uh these applications started last
[1:24:43] year, right? So you may be um a new
[1:24:45] mayor with a a new fun project in your
[1:24:48] lap. Um your staff is all wonderful and
[1:24:50] they know about these awards. Um but
[1:24:52] give us a call if you want to talk
[1:24:53] through any of these
[1:24:56] and I'm happy to take any questions if
[1:24:58] there are any.
[1:24:59] >> Thank you. That's so exciting. I hope
[1:25:00] everybody is super excited. Quite a few
[1:25:03] projects and I know how much work is
[1:25:04] involved in just preparing the
[1:25:06] application for the project. So, thank
[1:25:08] you.
[1:25:09] >> Congratulations. Did you have anything?
[1:25:10] >> And I want to say thank you very much.
[1:25:12] Very impressive.
[1:25:15] Exciting.
[1:25:17] >> Madam Chair, question.
[1:25:18] >> Yes.
[1:25:18] >> Um, where does the money come from
[1:25:20] originally?
[1:25:21] >> Sure. So, this is uh it's a little bit
[1:25:22] of a mixed pot. A lot of the funds are
[1:25:24] surface transportation planning dollars.
[1:25:26] We call it an ounce of prevention. And
[1:25:28] it's a really small carve out of that
[1:25:29] money um that hopefully allows
[1:25:32] >> Excuse me.
[1:25:33] >> That's a federal bot. Keep going.
[1:25:34] >> Yes. Uh that allows for some better
[1:25:36] investment going forward. In addition,
[1:25:38] our partners UTA and UD do put some
[1:25:40] money into this program, too.
[1:25:43] >> Great question. Local match,
[1:25:47] >> sorry, there's local match money in each
[1:25:48] project. Yeah, I'll just note um we are
[1:25:52] we're so happy to be able to provide
[1:25:55] this type of assistance to all of our
[1:25:58] communities and I think I mean if not
[1:26:01] every almost every community in the WFRC
[1:26:04] region has received assistance through
[1:26:07] this program, you know, over the years
[1:26:09] that that we've been doing it. And I'm
[1:26:11] just I can't help but think I'm mindful
[1:26:13] of what uh Jason and Tai presented and
[1:26:17] me emphasized this this balance that we
[1:26:20] need to do um a mix of green field
[1:26:23] development, suburban infill and transit
[1:26:25] oriented development. And as you look at
[1:26:27] that list that Meg just went through,
[1:26:30] all of those are represented in there,
[1:26:33] right? from the new city of Ogden Valley
[1:26:36] to the you know the rapid development
[1:26:38] mayor that we noted before that
[1:26:40] Grantsville uh is having to some um you
[1:26:44] know more focus around transit stations.
[1:26:46] We're we're trying to help you figure
[1:26:48] these things out. Uh and the last thing
[1:26:51] I'll say is that in none of this work do
[1:26:55] Meg and Byron and the team and the
[1:26:57] consultants that we engage we never come
[1:27:00] in and say here's what you should do. We
[1:27:03] are not trying to tell you how to
[1:27:05] develop in your communities. Right,
[1:27:08] Mayor? You know Magna better than any of
[1:27:11] us. And so you you identify the
[1:27:13] challenges that you're facing and we
[1:27:15] want to help you with resources and
[1:27:17] technical assistance to figure out the
[1:27:19] best path forward and we're just
[1:27:21] thrilled to be able to do it.
[1:27:24] >> Well, and I I'm glad you added that
[1:27:25] because I wanted to make sure anyone
[1:27:26] who's newer or listening, these are asks
[1:27:29] from these cities, these communities.
[1:27:30] This is not any organization coming in
[1:27:32] and saying this is what you need to do
[1:27:34] or we expect you to do. They're wanting
[1:27:36] the help and they're able to get this
[1:27:38] assistance which is huge because it's
[1:27:40] expensive to plan for these things. So
[1:27:42] thank you.
[1:27:43] >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you Meg. All
[1:27:46] right. Stationary plan certification of
[1:27:48] Midville Fashion Place West. We'll now
[1:27:50] consider certification of a request for
[1:27:52] the station area in Midville in
[1:27:54] accordance with the station area
[1:27:56] planning program. We have the
[1:27:57] development director Adam Olsen from
[1:27:59] Midville here, but I'm going to first
[1:28:01] turn to Byron Head with WF WFRC to
[1:28:05] introduce this item. Thanks, Byron.
[1:28:06] >> Great.
[1:28:07] >> Thank you, mayor. Uh, good a or good
[1:28:09] morning, everyone. Um, I apologize my
[1:28:11] slides a little sparse today. The last
[1:28:13] couple times it's been a laundry list of
[1:28:14] cities and today we only have one, but
[1:28:17] um, yeah, station area planning. Um,
[1:28:20] you're all likely familiar with this.
[1:28:22] It's been around for a few years now,
[1:28:23] but for the benefit of our newer
[1:28:25] members, I'll provide a brief um summary
[1:28:28] of what the requirements are. These are
[1:28:30] for the areas that are a half mile
[1:28:33] around a rail station or a quarter mile
[1:28:35] around a BRT station that need to uh
[1:28:38] create a planning document that
[1:28:39] addresses housing access to
[1:28:41] opportunities, transportation options,
[1:28:43] and environmental conditions. Uh
[1:28:45] basically as we've been talking about
[1:28:47] all morning here, colllocating housing
[1:28:49] and services and opportunities with our
[1:28:50] transit infrastructure.
[1:28:53] Um
[1:28:54] to date, we've certified between us and
[1:28:57] um Mountainland Association of
[1:28:58] Governments to the South, we've
[1:28:59] certified 98 of the 127 plans that uh
[1:29:04] are required by the legislation. We've
[1:29:06] got one more to consider today. Uh this
[1:29:09] is for the Midvail portion of the
[1:29:11] Fashion Place West station area. The
[1:29:13] station is actually in Murray. Um, but
[1:29:15] the city has done a joint project with
[1:29:18] Murray to create a plan for the whole
[1:29:20] area. Murray had their portion of the
[1:29:22] plan uh certified at this uh at our at
[1:29:25] our council back in January. And so now
[1:29:27] Midvail is uh seeking their
[1:29:30] certification.
[1:29:31] Um and as Andrew mentioned earlier, uh
[1:29:35] and actually yeah, this number is uh out
[1:29:37] of date. um certified plans would now
[1:29:39] support over 108,000 homes in these
[1:29:42] stationaries all across the Wasatch
[1:29:44] front. Um so we're excited to have hit
[1:29:46] that threshold over uh getting to six
[1:29:49] digits. Um so yeah about the plan a
[1:29:52] little bit. Uh this is the whole station
[1:29:54] area uh in most predominantly in Murray.
[1:29:57] The only portion that is in Midvail is
[1:29:59] this little piece in the the bottom kind
[1:30:02] of center there. Um but it is
[1:30:05] interesting that this is almost an
[1:30:06] extension of the um Midville Fort Union
[1:30:10] Station which the city did a plan for a
[1:30:12] couple years ago and has already been
[1:30:14] certified by this uh body. Um and that
[1:30:20] plan that Midvil did, you know, was
[1:30:22] focused on housing. And here in the the
[1:30:25] Murray uh or sorry the Fashion Place
[1:30:27] West station area, again, this is an
[1:30:30] area that they're focusing on jobs and
[1:30:31] housing balance. Uh and then also the
[1:30:34] city is finishing up a uh Porter
[1:30:36] Rockwell Trail alignment um extension
[1:30:40] alignment study. And so this plan will
[1:30:42] also accommodate whatever that eventual
[1:30:45] alignment will be to bring the trail up
[1:30:47] uh from Sandy along presumably along the
[1:30:50] tracks line. Um, so that's all I have.
[1:30:53] U, Adam is here if you would like to
[1:30:56] come up and provide a comment or two
[1:30:58] about the the planning process and the
[1:31:00] outcomes.
[1:31:04] » Uh, thank you for having me here. I just
[1:31:06] wanted to say on behalf of Midville, our
[1:31:08] mayor and council, uh, thank you to WFRC
[1:31:12] for all of the support that we've
[1:31:13] received um, through the years. we have
[1:31:16] really we really appreciate working with
[1:31:18] you and look forward to working with you
[1:31:20] even more um in the future. So that said
[1:31:24] um our council has been very supportive
[1:31:26] of these station area plans. Uh we also
[1:31:29] partnered with West Jordan City a few
[1:31:31] years ago for the um Bingham Junction
[1:31:33] Station. Uh that station and the
[1:31:35] historic gardener station kind of
[1:31:37] overlap and so uh we partnered with West
[1:31:40] Jordan to do a study for both of those.
[1:31:43] Um, we also have the Fort Union station
[1:31:45] which is on the screen here and then we
[1:31:47] also have our center street station
[1:31:49] which is a little further south that
[1:31:51] overlaps a little with uh the Fort Union
[1:31:53] and then the small portion of the
[1:31:55] fashion place west. Uh, one of the
[1:31:57] things that our council has done since
[1:31:59] we've um approved or adopted these
[1:32:01] station area plans is we've gone through
[1:32:03] and we've amended our zoning um to
[1:32:05] provide incentives for development
[1:32:07] within um these uh transit adjacent
[1:32:11] areas, if you will. Uh one of the major
[1:32:13] things the council did was they did uh
[1:32:15] designate some areas that um rather than
[1:32:18] have a cap of density, they basically uh
[1:32:22] raised the cap on that to say that um
[1:32:25] the density that you can have there is
[1:32:28] basically what um what it can support.
[1:32:31] Um we've also lowered some parking
[1:32:33] requirements. So between basically uh
[1:32:37] having an almost unlimited density if
[1:32:38] you will and lower parking requirements,
[1:32:40] we're hoping that um you know
[1:32:44] development is spurred in these areas
[1:32:46] and especially in the center street
[1:32:48] area. Uh we've had some interest as of
[1:32:51] late and so I just want to say that the
[1:32:53] station area plans we feel are doing
[1:32:55] what they're intended to do. Uh they are
[1:32:57] spurring those discussions. The council
[1:32:59] is very supportive of density within
[1:33:01] these areas and we're looking forward to
[1:33:03] what we hope is the first um development
[1:33:07] to um occur in the station just south of
[1:33:10] this Fort Union one at Center Street. So
[1:33:12] again, thank you.
[1:33:16] » Thank you.
[1:33:17] >> Thanks, Adam. All right. Um so we have a suggested motion um for for the
[1:33:24] committee here um basically recommending
[1:33:27] certification of this to the council
[1:33:29] which will meet next week. Um staff has
[1:33:32] reviewed the plan and uh consulted with
[1:33:34] UTA and are supportive of certification.
[1:33:37] Um so I'll now turn it back to the chair
[1:33:39] for any discussion.
[1:33:40] >> Thank you. Would someone like to make a
[1:33:41] motion to approve this or to recommend
[1:33:44] this? I'll move.
[1:33:46] >> Okay. Thank you, mayor. Uh do we have a
[1:33:48] second?
[1:33:50] I'll second.
[1:33:51] >> Okay. Thank you. All in favor? I. Any
[1:33:54] opposed? Okay. Thank you. That will be
[1:33:56] recommended to the board. Appreciate
[1:33:58] your presentation on that.
[1:34:03] » All right, Andrew. Legislative update.
[1:34:07] >> Mayor, um I'm thinking that in the
[1:34:10] interest of time, I won't do a full
[1:34:14] legislative update. Um, oh, Mayor
[1:34:18] Overson is upset about that. Um, oh, uh,
[1:34:22] let me make a just a few brief comments.
[1:34:24] A lot happened. More bills introduced
[1:34:27] this past session than any previous
[1:34:29] year. Uh, former Representative Benian
[1:34:32] knows that. Maybe you were glad to not
[1:34:34] be part of that. Um, uh, but, uh, you, uh, somebody once a long time ago
[1:34:41] said, you don't judge a legislature, a
[1:34:43] legislative session by what's
[1:34:44] introduced. you judge it by what's
[1:34:46] passed. Um, and I think a lot of
[1:34:49] positive things happened this session
[1:34:51] and put another way, a lot of um,
[1:34:55] potentially problematic things did not
[1:34:57] pass. Okay. And I'm looking at Mayor
[1:35:00] Bradshaw. I'm going to put her on the
[1:35:01] spot and turn to her in just a moment
[1:35:03] here. There were notable pieces of
[1:35:06] legislation in transportation, in
[1:35:09] housing, in economic development. We at
[1:35:12] WFRC have provided uh a a lot of
[1:35:16] information to you. We will send that
[1:35:18] out to you again in the followup to this
[1:35:20] meeting. Um Mir Oh, and Miranda Jones
[1:35:23] Cox, our government affairs manager, is not here today. She's taking a little
[1:35:28] bit of very welldeserved and well needed
[1:35:30] time. Uh uh next week at our full
[1:35:34] council meeting, which is Thursday
[1:35:35] afternoon, we will do a legislative
[1:35:37] update. We've produced this uh
[1:35:40] legislative summary card that you all
[1:35:42] have around the table here. We've
[1:35:44] produced a very thorough full
[1:35:48] legislative wrapup that's all we've sent
[1:35:51] out and is also on our website so you
[1:35:53] can dig in as much as you want about the
[1:35:56] governance changes for UTA and the
[1:35:58] transit funding um modifications or
[1:36:01] increases uh the funding restorations
[1:36:04] for the local administrative advisor
[1:36:06] program. uh the reductions or transfers
[1:36:10] in funding from transportation
[1:36:14] to support uh infrastructure that helps
[1:36:17] housing. That's a notable funding
[1:36:20] shifted away from UD do
[1:36:24] fund grant or loans and grants for
[1:36:26] infrastructure. Funding shifted away
[1:36:28] from some of the local option
[1:36:29] transportation sales taxes in Salt Lake
[1:36:31] County to fund uh infrastructure to
[1:36:34] unlock housing. So, how do you feel
[1:36:36] about that? It's an interesting uh
[1:36:38] interesting dynamic, but lots and lots
[1:36:40] of bills um that I won't go into now
[1:36:42] unless anybody wants to ask me about
[1:36:44] something in particular. Having said all
[1:36:46] that, uh Mayor Bradshaw, League
[1:36:49] President Bradshaw, government affairs
[1:36:51] professional Bradshaw, would you like to
[1:36:53] offer any comments wearing any of your
[1:36:54] hats?
[1:36:56] >> Sure, Andrew. U this this was a a very
[1:37:00] robust legislative session. Um it so
[1:37:03] many bills were introduced and I think
[1:37:04] you're right to guide us to only judge
[1:37:06] it on what passed because there were
[1:37:07] some doozies introduced.
[1:37:09] >> Um
[1:37:12] I really enjoy that I get to have the uh
[1:37:14] interaction from my ULCT role with other
[1:37:17] groups. I've gotten to spend a lot of
[1:37:18] time uh with with Andrew this year and in sessions past. Um, I would maybe
[1:37:24] highlight just a couple bills that that
[1:37:27] I'm particularly um proud of and proud
[1:37:29] of when the process does the process the
[1:37:32] way we could be proud of instead of the
[1:37:35] opposite when we're not proud of the
[1:37:36] process. Um, HB425, this is the tough
[1:37:40] bill. This is Karen Peterson who worked
[1:37:42] for three straight sessions.
[1:37:44] >> Transportation utility fee.
[1:37:46] >> Yes. Sorry, should have uh said the
[1:37:49] whole name, not just the acronym. three
[1:37:51] whole sessions to then have that go
[1:37:53] through uh unanimously. Um I think this
[1:37:56] is a good and transparent process and
[1:37:59] codify is an important court win and is
[1:38:02] important for uh a lot of cities as we
[1:38:05] face um increased costs uh for
[1:38:08] transportation needs. Um the next one I
[1:38:11] would mention 492. We've already talked
[1:38:13] about this one a little bit in earlier
[1:38:16] presentations. Um, this bill, it's
[1:38:20] important as a standalone piece of
[1:38:22] legislation because of the funding it
[1:38:24] brings and unlocking so many
[1:38:26] opportunities uh for different housing
[1:38:29] projects. Um,
[1:38:32] but frankly, it was also important for
[1:38:34] helping us defeat many many bad pieces
[1:38:36] of legislation um that would have
[1:38:38] attacked and and eroded city's um land
[1:38:42] use authority. Uh often, um when
[1:38:46] legislators hear frustrations in the in
[1:38:48] the housing space, um their their first
[1:38:52] idea is to to go in and try and attack
[1:38:54] some land use authority that that cities
[1:38:57] or counties have instead of taking the
[1:38:59] time to understand kind of the
[1:39:01] underpinnings of how we how we get to
[1:39:03] building projects and all of the stuff
[1:39:05] that you don't see under the ground that
[1:39:06] makes those projects possible. So, um,
[1:39:09] the work that Representative Roberts was
[1:39:11] willing to do on this bill, um, thanks
[1:39:14] to having served on a city council, uh,
[1:39:17] and swinging big for this money and then
[1:39:20] the partnership from from many different
[1:39:22] groups, this group along with the
[1:39:24] league, um, helped us then hold that up
[1:39:27] as, as advances great, um, housing and
[1:39:31] infrastructure policy, uh, while
[1:39:34] knocking down some of the really bad
[1:39:35] ideas. Um, and then the last one, um,
[1:39:38] would would probably just be SB 242.
[1:39:41] That's Senator Harper. And this is the,
[1:39:44] um, uh, sorry, that may not be the one I
[1:39:47] wanted. The UTA one. No, that was 242.
[1:39:50] 197.
[1:39:52] >> Um, I think that one is going, uh, UTA
[1:39:57] 3.0 I know is going to be an interesting
[1:39:58] animal that I look forward to
[1:40:00] understanding
[1:40:01] um more and ensuring that it's um
[1:40:04] working uh with all of us to to do these
[1:40:07] important connections. So, those are
[1:40:09] three bills from uh just a a number of
[1:40:12] different bills that I thought were were
[1:40:14] particularly important and really took a
[1:40:16] lot of um dedicated groups working
[1:40:19] together to advance all the way through
[1:40:21] the the gauntlet that is the 45day Utah
[1:40:24] session.
[1:40:26] Mayor, thank you. Mayor, do you want to
[1:40:28] add anything about the session? I just
[1:40:30] want to spend a lot of time there.
[1:40:31] >> Well, just my appreciation. It takes I
[1:40:33] had no idea how involved these bills are
[1:40:36] and and how many people it takes on your
[1:40:38] weekly your weekly meetings and updates
[1:40:40] were so helpful. I super appreciate Kate
[1:40:42] and the ULC team. They're fantastic. The
[1:40:45] engagement from the mayors for the LPC
[1:40:47] meetings and the city council members. I
[1:40:48] mean, it just takes everybody to make
[1:40:50] everything happen. So, I'm very grateful
[1:40:51] for that. So, thank you.
[1:40:52] >> Mayor, quick uh quick one. I was I had
[1:40:56] the pleasure of attending the Urban Land
[1:40:58] Institutees um legislative
[1:41:02] summary
[1:41:03] meeting earlier this week and partly I
[1:41:06] just want everybody to know that this
[1:41:08] group is predominantly local government
[1:41:11] and sort of transportation agency but we
[1:41:13] do have some private sector and
[1:41:15] nonprofit people around the table and I
[1:41:18] just wanted to note the Kristen and her
[1:41:21] role with the urban land institute and
[1:41:24] you know love having you here and it's
[1:41:26] an interesting sort of different story
[1:41:28] you get when you hear from different groups and um wanted to just
[1:41:33] highlight uh highlight that aspect about
[1:41:35] our committee
[1:41:36] >> and to that agreed and to that point we
[1:41:39] partner a lot with the private sector um
[1:41:42] uh not least of which the the uh Salt
[1:41:45] Lake or Utah Chamber of Commerce who
[1:41:47] were really in is really involved up at
[1:41:49] the up at the capital and of course uh
[1:41:52] the counties in Utah Association of
[1:41:54] Counties. So it um it takes a real uh
[1:41:57] team. Mar let me take one minute to look
[1:42:00] at the at what's happening in Washington
[1:42:02] DC.
[1:42:03] >> Yes.
[1:42:03] >> Okay. When it comes to uh transportation
[1:42:06] related issues,
[1:42:08] uh I'm tempted to say there's a lot
[1:42:11] happening and there's also not very much
[1:42:13] happening at the same time. What I mean
[1:42:15] by that is that uh federal
[1:42:18] transportation policy and funding is
[1:42:22] developed through what's called a
[1:42:24] surface transportation authorization
[1:42:27] bill. And that happens roughly every 5
[1:42:30] years. The current bill, the
[1:42:33] infrastructure investment and jobs act,
[1:42:35] expires this year, September 30th of
[1:42:38] 2026.
[1:42:40] Um, I was just in DC for the last few
[1:42:42] days, not for the National League of
[1:42:44] Cities, uh, conference, but for the
[1:42:47] Association of Metropolitan Planning
[1:42:49] Organizations Policy Committee, and
[1:42:50] spent time on the Hill, etc. And here's the short story. Uh there's a lot
[1:42:55] of work happening on the next
[1:42:56] reauthorization bill, but uh it is less
[1:43:01] likely to happen actually happen this
[1:43:03] year by the time of the expiration than
[1:43:06] we might have thought earlier than are
[1:43:07] the intentions of Congress. It's more
[1:43:09] likely to get the can will be kicked
[1:43:12] down the road. There'll be a a temporary
[1:43:15] extension which means the policy and
[1:43:16] funding levels would stay in place. uh
[1:43:19] as we look ahead there's so much to say
[1:43:21] there but I'm just going to say we're we
[1:43:23] all WFRC all of our transportation
[1:43:26] partners the cities and the counties we
[1:43:28] come together as Utons identify shared
[1:43:32] principles for federal transportation
[1:43:35] policy and funding and then policy
[1:43:38] priorities and we do um it's actually
[1:43:41] fair to say that we Utah is known around
[1:43:44] the nation for being a model of
[1:43:47] collaboration we have Utah's unified
[1:43:49] transportation plan and also the fact
[1:43:51] that we work together to develop shared
[1:43:53] principles for what we want and our
[1:43:55] delegation so wellplaced. They're
[1:43:58] involved in the key committees and they
[1:43:59] are so appreciative of the way that we
[1:44:02] do this that we work together. We don't
[1:44:04] bring them something that another Utah
[1:44:06] stakeholder says, "Wait, we don't like
[1:44:07] that we we um we all row in the same uh
[1:44:10] direction." I do last thing I'll say. I
[1:44:14] do have one really cool thing to report
[1:44:16] to you. Um, one of the things that came
[1:44:19] out of the infrastructure investment and
[1:44:20] jobs act is lots and lots of grant
[1:44:23] programs, discretionary grant programs.
[1:44:27] And those of you that pay attention to
[1:44:29] these things will know that many grants
[1:44:32] that were awarded
[1:44:34] uh in previous years but had not
[1:44:37] actually moved forward yet. Like they
[1:44:39] make the awards and then there's a
[1:44:40] extended process for entering into
[1:44:42] contracts, grant agreements, etc.
[1:44:44] When the um presidential administration
[1:44:46] turned over, US DOT said, "Time out.
[1:44:50] We're pausing on many of those grants um
[1:44:54] to review them." Some got cancelled. Uh
[1:44:58] an $87 million
[1:45:01] uh grant um for uh reconnecting um under
[1:45:05] the uh expressway in St. George,
[1:45:07] reconnecting communities actually got
[1:45:09] cancelled. Um, one that was awarded
[1:45:13] earlier and that we have been waiting on
[1:45:16] uh is a $25 million grant from the for
[1:45:21] first last mile improvements around our
[1:45:25] region. So, this is making enhancements
[1:45:28] around transit stations uh to make this
[1:45:31] the sidewalks more safer, easier points
[1:45:34] of connection so that people have the
[1:45:35] ability to get to the transit station
[1:45:37] and then use it. We were awarded
[1:45:39] collectively. This was UD do was the
[1:45:41] applicant. We all worked on this
[1:45:42] together. We were awarded this. Gosh,
[1:45:45] where's Hugh? Uh, a while ago, over a
[1:45:48] year ago, we were awarded this funding.
[1:45:50] Um, two years ago, two years ago, and
[1:45:52] then it was paused and we were afraid
[1:45:54] that this $25 million grant was going to
[1:45:57] be rescended. We just got word yesterday
[1:46:00] that we're back in action and this is
[1:46:02] moving forward. We've been clear to
[1:46:04] proceed and and develop the grant
[1:46:06] agreement. So, that is going to move
[1:46:08] forward. And I it's like I don't know
[1:46:10] it's like Christmas again. Like we were
[1:46:12] super excited when we when the grant was
[1:46:14] award was announced and then we felt
[1:46:16] like it wasn't going to happen and now
[1:46:17] we get to unwrap the president again. So
[1:46:19] we're really we're really excited. So
[1:46:20] that's going to move forward. Thank you.
[1:46:22] >> Thank you. Thank you. That's fantastic.
[1:46:24] I know we are short on time but in um
[1:46:26] Commissioner Kamalu has a comment.
[1:46:28] >> Actually this is the other other
[1:46:30] business. Davis County's general plan
[1:46:33] update openhouse is this evening. So,
[1:46:36] for those who live and work and have
[1:46:38] interest in in this update, um there's
[1:46:41] very little unincorporated county left
[1:46:44] in Davis County, um just keep that in
[1:46:47] mind. And it um that's because as
[1:46:51] development occurs, it is incorporated
[1:46:53] into our cities. Nonetheless, this
[1:46:55] general plan update, as you all know, it tends to be a big deal. So, an open
[1:46:59] house for all invited from 5:30 to 7 in
[1:47:03] the county building in um on the main
[1:47:05] level down in an auditorium room. So,
[1:47:09] that is tonight. All are welcome.
[1:47:11] >> Thank you, Commissioner. All right. We
[1:47:13] have a webinar that was mentioned May
[1:47:15] 26th, so participate in that if you'd
[1:47:17] like to. And then
[1:47:18] >> we'll send details out on that in the
[1:47:20] follow-up email.
[1:47:21] >> Okay. Thank you. And then the next
[1:47:22] meeting is May 21st, and we just need a
[1:47:24] motion to adjurnn.
[1:47:26] >> All right. All in favor?
[1:47:28] >> Okay. Thank you.
[1:47:30] >> Thanks everybody.
[1:47:33] » Thank you. How are you doing?