City Council · 2018-08-14

 
City Council Minutes – August 14, 2018 (p.1)  
 
A complete video of the meeting can be found at www.orem.org/meetings 
 
CITY OF OREM 
CITY COUNCIL MEETING 
56 North State Street Orem, Utah 
August 14, 2018 
 
3:00 P.M. WORK SESSION – CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM 
 
CONDUCTING 
Mayor Richard F. Brunst  
 
ELECTED OFFICIALS 
Debby Lauret, Sam Lentz, Tom Macdonald, Mark 
Seastrand, and Brent Sumner 
 
APPOINTED STAFF 
Brenn Bybee, Assistant City Manager; Steven Downs, 
Assistant City Manager; Greg Stephens, City Attorney; 
Karl Hirst, Recreation Department Director; Richard 
Manning, Administrative Services Director; Bill Bell, 
Development Services Director; Scott Gurney, Fire 
Department Director; Ned Jackson, Police Captain; 
Charlene Crozier, Library Director; Jason Bench, Planning 
Division Manager; Kirby Snideman, Long Range Planner; 
D. Jacob Summers, City Prosecutor, Jonathan Ditto, 
Assistant City Attorney; Kena Mathews, CDBG/CNS 
Programming; and Jackie Lambert, Deputy City Recorder 
 
EXCUSED 
Councilman David Spencer, City Manager Jamie Davidson 
 
  
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the video was streamed without audio. Apologies for any 
inconvenience this may cause.  
 
INTRODUCTION – Parking Study Discussion 
Mr. Snideman began by asking the City Council what they often heard from residents about their 
areas of concern, with answers ranging from housing and other density concerns to parking and 
traffic concerns. Along with consultants David Proffitt, Diego Carroll, and Reid Ewing from 
Monument Engineers and the Metropolitan Research Center, Mr. Snideman discussed the 
purpose of the parking study and next steps moving forward. 
 
OREM PARKING STUDY 
 Introductions 
o Little remaining undeveloped land 
o Future growth through redevelopment 
o In the past, major projects used PD Zone (parking was a negotiation) 
o PD Zones no longer allowed in residential areas 
o With the Districts, we need solid standards 
o Protect existing development and neighborhoods when redevelopment occurs 
o Partnered with the best in the industry: 
 Reid Ewing – Metropolitan Research Center 



 
City Council Minutes – August 14, 2018 (p.2) 
 
 
A complete video of the meeting can be found at www.orem.org/meetings 
 Diego Carroll – Monument Engineers 
 Study Methodology 
o Accurate information about the “fit” between the amount of parking needed and 
the amount of parking provided at different land use types will help set evidence-
based parking requirements for new development and avoid case by case 
negotiation. 
o Methodology Overview 
 Identify Orem City Parking Requirements/Land Use categories to be 
updated 
 Develop/execute data collection plan (build on MRC experience, 
including Station Park and East Village) 
 Analyze data and make recommendations 
 Orem’s Current Parking Standards 
o Parking requirements vary widely, even for same land use 
o 60+ different codes – including 25 planned development zones – govern parking-
space provision in commercial, office, and high-density residential zones (chart) 
 Data Collection Methodology 
o County people and vehicles entering/leaving all 10 sites 
o Track parking stall occupancy over entire day 
o Ask individuals mode and reason for trip (map) 
o Count Day 
 Approximately 40 planning students from U of U will conduct 
 Counters 
 Surveyors 
o Example #1 – Parkway Lofts (student housing) 
 2 main entrances + 1 pedestrian entrance adjacent to FrontRunner station 
 4 students at site: 
 2 counters 
 2 surveyors 
o Example #2 – University Crossing (commercial) 
 8 entrances 
 11 students 
 8 counters 
 3 surveyors 
 Conclusions 
o The result of this study will provide empirical evidence of the “fit” between 
parking supply and demand for key land uses in Orem. This information will 
allow the city to set evidence-based parking requirements for new development 
 Next Steps 
o Complete parking count and surveys (September/October 2018) 
o Complete analysis and report to recommend parking standards for major land-
uses (multi-family focus) 
o Work with City staff to recommend amendments to parking ordinance (parking 
rates; shared parking) and enforcement strategies 
o Present recommendations to the Planning Commission and City Council 
(November/December 2018) 
 



 
City Council Minutes – August 14, 2018 (p.3)  
 
A complete video of the meeting can be found at www.orem.org/meetings 
 
Mr. Snideman said this was a complicated problem, and they were doing the best work they 
could for the area. The hope was to eliminate the need for case by case approach to determining 
parking requirements, but to use the Parking Study as the guideline for set parking standards.  
 
Mr. Proffitt said they would compare codes and data to cities along the Wasatch Front, as well as 
national data from comparable projects. Mayor Brunst suggested that they study the area near the 
Promenade Apartments on Geneva Road, as that was a point of friction and should be included. 
 
Mr. Lentz asked about retroactively renegotiating parking for existing projects. Mr. Snideman 
said they would not go back, but would set the standard going forward which would help save 
the time of renegotiating every project. Mr. Bench assured the City Council that the plan would 
be updated periodically to make sure that it was suiting the needs of the city.  
 
Mr. Snideman added that this would be particularly useful because it was tailor-made to Orem 
with Orem-specific data. In response to Mr. Seastrand’s question, Mr. Snideman said that this 
may be a good tool for other communities of a similar size and density. 
 
In response to Council questions regarding the inclusion of transit option in the Parking Study, 
Mr. Carroll said the utilization of transportation options like the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and 
FrontRunner would likely indicate a load reduction. Mr. Ewing added that they had looked at 
developments next to transit stations around the country, and found that the parking demand was 
about half the suburban average. 
 
 
DISCUSSION – General Plan Update  
Mr. Snideman said this discussion had two parts they would address, including housing in Utah. 
He introduced Brynn Mortensen, Public Policy and Special Projects for Salt Lake Chamber, and 
said she would be addressing the issues of housing and land use. Mr. Snideman said that as new 
projects in Orem were approved and added to the General Plan, they were entered in the order in 
which they had been approved. They planned to rearrange the chapters – which would stay the 
same – to make the General Plan easier to search, and keep similar projects in the same area of 
the plan and appendices. 
 
OREM GENERAL PLAN – Orem Planning Division 
 Introduction 
o What is a General Plan? 
 A general plan is a comprehensive long-term plan for the physical 
development of the city. In a way, it is a “blueprint” for future 
development of the city. 
o General Plan governed by Utah State Code (10-9a-4) 
 Must include at least: 
 Land Use Plan 
 Transportation Plan 
 Moderate Income Housing Plan 
 2011 General Plan included: 
o Chapter 1: Introduction 



 
City Council Minutes – August 14, 2018 (p.4) 
 
 
A complete video of the meeting can be found at www.orem.org/meetings 
o Chapter 2: Land Use 
o Chapter 3: Transportation 
o Chapter 4: Housing 
o Chapter 5: Urban Design 
o Chapter 6: Economics 
o Chapter 7: Parks & Recreation 
o Chapter 8: Public Services & Facilities 
o Appendix: (12 items) 
 Complete since 2011: 
o State Street Corridor Master Plan 2014 
o Economic Development Strategic Plan 2015 
o Transportation Master Plan 2016 
o Parks, Recreation, Trails, and Open Space Plan 2017 
o Street Connection Master Plan 2017 
o Neighborhood Plans: 
 Canyon View, Orchard, and Cascade 2015 
 Orem North and Sharon Park 2017 
 Northridge, Heatheridge, and Windsor 2017 
 Aspen and Timpview 2017 
 Geneva Heights, Orem Park, and Suncrest 2018 
 2018 General Plan 
o Chapter 1: Introduction 
o Chapter 2: Land Use 
o Chapter 3: Urban Design 
o Chapter 4: Housing 
o Chapter 5: Economics 
o Chapter 6: Transportation 
o Chapter 7: Parks & Recreation 
o Chapter 8: Public Services & Facilities 
o Appendix: (14 items) 
 Major Changes 
o Update with plans completed since 2011 
 Thousands of residents have participated in these plans 
o New Land Use Map 
 State Street Mixed Use Districts 
 Allow for strategic growth 
o New Moderate-Income Housing Plan 
 Required by State of Utah to be updated every 2 years  
 (This plan meets Utah State deadline of December 2018) 
 New Land Use Map 
o Mixed Use Districts: 
 Accommodate the State Street District Zones 
 Allow for strategic growth in the City as outlined in the adopted State 
Street Master Corridor Master Plan (map) 
 New Moderate-Income Housing Plan 
o Required by State code 
o Outlines the existing conditions in Orem 



 
City Council Minutes – August 14, 2018 (p.5)  
 
A complete video of the meeting can be found at www.orem.org/meetings 
 
o Presents options and strategies that the City Council can explore in the coming 
years 
HOUSING GAP COALITION 
 Landmark Study – “What Rapidly Rising Prices Mean for Housing Affordability” 
o First of its kind, getting ahead of the looming housing crisis 
 Utah Housing Unit vs. Utah Household Growth (graph) 
o Priced Out 
 Uncheck Housing Prices – by 2044, Utah Housing prices could be 
equivalent to today’s San Francisco prices 
 More than $700,000 in the next 26 years 
 What’s Driving up housing costs: 
o Housing shortage 
o Construction & labor costs 
o Local zoning ordinances & Nimbyism 
o Land Costs & Topography of Wasatch Front Counties 
o Demographic & Economic Growth 
 What now? 
o Possible Solutions 
 Transportation and Land Use Connection (TLC) & regional councils 
 Local Housing Authorities 
 Keys to Success program for construction and labor “Build to Success” 
 Awareness campaign 
 Next Steps 
o Call to Action and Discussion 
 General Plan Overview 
 Moderate Income Housing Plan 
 Zoning Overview 
o For more information or to become involved 
 For 
more 
information 
or 
to 
read 
the 
full 
report, 
visit 
SLChamber.com/HousingGapCoalition 
 Follow us on Twitter @UtahHousingGap 
 For sponsorship or membership information, contact Brynn Mortensen at 
bmortensen@slchamber.com  
  
Mr. Snideman said current data showed a 95% occupancy rate for multi-family housing. Ms. 
Mortensen said data showed that between the years of 2011 and 2017, the number of households 
actually exceeding the number of housing units available. Utah currently had the 4th highest 
home prices increase in the nation; a home purchased in 1991 for $125,000 would now cost 
$347,000. Ms. Mortensen reviewed the factors in the rising costs. 
 
Lynelle Smith, Director of the Housing Authority of Utah County, responded to a question about 
what defined affordable housing. She said the Department of Housing and Urban Development 
(HUD) guideline was that housing costs should not exceed 30% of the household income. She 
said that was becoming more and more of an issue as housing costs continued to rise. The week 
of August 20 through 25 was Affordable Housing Week, and said they currently assisted over 
400 Orem families with subsidies for housing. 



 
City Council Minutes – August 14, 2018 (p.6) 
 
 
A complete video of the meeting can be found at www.orem.org/meetings 
 
There was continued discussion about housing requirements from State legislation, economic 
growth in Utah and nationwide, actual costs versus types of housing and owning versus renting, 
and continued public outreach with the awareness campaign. Council suggestions for the study 
included: 
 Actual costs vs Types of Housing & Renting vs Owning 
 Regional growth in overlapping communities like Provo and Vineyard 
 Infrastructure and impact fees 
 Conservation of natural resources 
 Creative solutions  
 
Mr. Snideman said they intended to bring the updated General Plan to the City Council for 
formal adoption at a future meeting. 
 
     
PRESENTATION – United Way Utah County Community Assessment  
Mr. Bybee turned time over to Utah County United Way Director Bill Hulterstrom to share 
information related to growth and housing from the 2018 Utah County Community Assessment. 
 
Mr. Hulterstrom reviewed the Utah County Community Assessment report. He said that Utah 
County was the 2nd largest county in the state, representing approximately 26% of Utah’s 
population growth from 2010 to 2016. There was a misperception that this growth was from “out 
of town” people, when the data showed that it was internal growth, i.e. kids and grandkids, etc. 
Most of the growth in the job market was also linked to that same internal growth. Population 
growth was outpacing housing, and the bigger that gap was between the supply and the demand, 
the less sustainable the economy would be. 
 
Mr. Hulterstrom said different ages and family dynamics had different housing needs and 
desires. Utah County was the youngest county of its size in America, with the median age in 
Orem being 25.9 years old (Utah County average was 24.4 years old). Student populations and 
young families skewed some of the age statistics but 48% of the adult population in Utah was 
between 18-34 years old, and in Utah County 55% of the adult population was 25-44 years old. 
Shortages in affordable housing could lead to an exodus of young, single professionals in a city, 
and that was a demographic cities should want to maintain to help keep a robust economy. Older 
residents tended to be more organized about speaking to their issues than younger residents were, 
so those concerns were not always heard and addressed.  
 
Mr. Hulterstrom shared information regarding education, income, and health. He said Utah 
County was the 7th most educated county in the country, with nearly 8 out of 10 adults having at 
least some college education. Alcohol use and abuse, domestic violence, and depression and 
anxiety were all on the rise. Depression among youth was also increasing, and last year 1 in 8 
youth in Utah County had made a plan about how to attempt suicide. He said social media and 
cell phone use may have been potential factors, but generally the youth was not feeling safe, 
connected, or confident. Alpine School District was working with educators, students, parents, 
and community leaders to try and address this serious issue. Mr. Hulterstrom concluded that 
these were all important areas of discussion for the future planning and growth in Utah County.  
 



 
City Council Minutes – August 14, 2018 (p.7)  
 
A complete video of the meeting can be found at www.orem.org/meetings 
 
 
DISCUSSION – Proposed Nuisance Ordinance Amendment  
Mr. Stephens introduced city attorneys Mr. Summer and Mr. Ditto to discuss options for dealing 
with nuisance violations. Mr. Summers reviewed current processes, providing steps and 
estimated timelines for each option as well as sharing concerns with how things were processed 
currently.  
 
NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION 
 Easy Way or the Hard Way 
o Options for dealing with Nuisance Violations 
 Criminal Justice System: prosecution of Nuisance in the Criminal Justice 
System (Orem Code 11-1-10(D)) 
 Civil Litigation 
 Administrative Citation Process 
 The Life of a Criminal Case 
o Officer Interaction > Citation, Arrest, Referral > Screening Review by 
Prosecution > Filing of formal charges > Arraignment > Pre-Trial 
Conferences/Plea Negotiations > Trail > Appeal 
 Criminal Prosecution 
o Nuisance Timeline 
 May 1: Neighbors call OPD to complain of accumulations of debris 
 May 2: NPU Officer makes contact with complainant and homeowner 
 May 16: NPU Officer follows up with homeowner 
 May 30: NPU Officer follows up with homeowner 
 June 1: NPU Officer cites homeowner for Nuisance 
 June 25: Homeowner appears in the Orem Justice Court (OJC) for an 
Arraignment 
 July 18: Homeowner appears in the OJC for a Pre-Trial Conference (PTC) 
 August 15: Homeowner appears in the OJC for follow up PTC 
 Trial scheduled for October 8 
 Judicial Order to clean up property – 60 days – December  
o Total Time Elapsed 
 7 months to get Judicial Order 
 Enforcement – still may not get compliance effectively after Judicial 
Order 
 Injunctive Relief 
o Timeline 
 January 2018: Filed Case 
 February 2018: Notice of Opposing Counsel filed 
 March 2018: Answer to complaint 
 May 2018: Request for PTC 
 June 2018: Objection to request for PTC 
 October 2018: Substitution of Counsel 
 November 2018: Attorney Planning Meeting Report and Case 
Management Order 



 
City Council Minutes – August 14, 2018 (p.8) 
 
 
A complete video of the meeting can be found at www.orem.org/meetings 
 February 2019: Plaintiff’s Response to Interrogatories and Requests for 
Production of Documents 
 February 2019: Plaintiff’s Motion to Take Judicial Notice of Criminal 
Convictions and Motion for Summary Judgement 
 March 2019: Defendants’ Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Motion to Take 
Judicial Notice of Criminal Convictions and Motion for Summary 
Judgement 
 March 2019: Defendants’ Motion in Support of Defendant’s Motion for 
Summary Judgement 
 March 2019: Plaintiff’s Objection to Defendants’ Motion to Strike and 
Memorandum In Support Thereof 
 July 2019: Notice to Submit for Decision on Motion for Summary 
Judgement 
 August 2019: Order regarding Motion for Summary Judgement 
 December 2019: Order for Forced Abatement 
o Total Time Elapsed 
 1 year 11 months to get Judicial Order 
 Concerns with Current Ordinance 
o Due Process 
 No independent arbiter 
 Unclear what the City can charge violators 
 No financial cap on fines 
o Voluntary Agreement Requirement 
 Currently, a Neighborhood Preservation Unit Officer must first attempt to 
get the violator to voluntarily correct the violation 
 Summary of New Nuisance Ordinance 
o Enforcement official will use one or more of the following: 
 Voluntary Correction Agreement 
 Administrative Citation 
 Notice of Violation and Summons to appear at an Administrative Hearing 
 The violator can avoid having to appear at an administrative 
hearing if he/she corrects the violation before the set deadline 
 If the violator does not appear, the Administrative Law Judge will 
enter an order against the violator, the City can abate the nuisance 
and pass along cost to the violator 
o Creation of the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) position 
 Voluntary Correction Agreement 
o Timeline 
 May 1: Neighbors call OPD to complain of accumulations of debris 
 May 2: NPU Officer makes contact with complainant and homeowner 
 NPU Officer attempts to have responsible party enter into 
voluntary correction agreement 
 Responsible Party agrees to voluntary correction agreement 
 NPU Officer sets compliance date 
 June 1: Officer returns to property and completes compliance inspections 



 
City Council Minutes – August 14, 2018 (p.9)  
 
A complete video of the meeting can be found at www.orem.org/meetings 
 
 If property was not in compliance, Voluntary Correction 
Agreement becomes an Administrative Order and the City may 
abate the nuisance 
o Total Time Elapsed 
 Roughly 1 month, but will depend on the parties and the officer’s 
discretion 
 Administrative Citation Process 
o Timeline 
 May 1: Neighbors call OPD to complain of accumulations of debris 
 May 2: NPU Officer makes contact with complainant and homeowner 
 NPU Officer attempts to have responsible party enter into 
voluntary correction agreement 
 Responsible Party refuses to voluntary correction agreement 
 NPU Officer issues an Administrative Citation 
 May 12: Deadline to file request for Administrative Hearing 
 June 2: Administrative Hearing 
 June 12: Administrative Order 
o Total Time Elapsed 
 Roughly 2 months until Administrative Order issued 
 Notice of Violation 
o Timeline 
 May 1: Neighbors call OPD to complain of accumulations of debris 
 May 2: NPU Officer attempts to make contact with complainant and 
homeowner 
 NPU Officer unable to make contact with responsibly party 
 Notice of Violation and Summons served by mail 
 Notice of Violation contains specific date for Administrative 
Hearing and specific date to bring property into compliance 
 June 1: Compliance due date set in Notice of Violation 
 Property remains in violation 
 June 11: Administrative Hearing 
 June 21: Administrative Order 
o Total Time Elapsed 
 Roughly 2 months until Administrative Order issued 
 Benefits of the Recommended Amendments 
o More options for those enforcing the nuisance ordinance 
o Violations can be resolved more quickly 
o Efficiency – the City will be able to address more violations 
o Alleged violators will have due process protections 
 Policy Considerations for the Council 
o Fined/Recoupment of abatement costs/Administrative Costs? 
 Fines – Recommend the Council adopt a civil fine. The fine amount could 
be drafted into the ordinance language, $100/violation/day. 
 Recoupment of abatement costs – Recommend the Council adopt the 
mechanism to recover costs expended by the City to abate. 



 
City Council Minutes – August 14, 2018 (p.10) 
 
 
A complete video of the meeting can be found at www.orem.org/meetings 
 Administrative Fees – While other cities impose an administrative fee, the 
recommendation is not to adopt an Administrative Fee. 
o The draft language in the ordinance would withhold business licenses, permits for 
new structures, etc., until the violations are corrected. 
 Recommend the Council adopt this provision. While it may be a 
controversial provision, it will aid in the enforcement of administrative 
orders and encourage compliance with the ordinance. 
 
There was continued discussion on the proposed ordinance amendment. Options and tools 
available to NPU officers were discussed. Concerns and comments voiced by the City Council 
included timelines and weather, the water rate changes affecting dead or weed-filled yards, and 
violators’ being out of state landowners, having mental health issues, or general indifference to 
the process and the problem persisting. 
 
OPD Capt. Jackson introduced Sgt. Paraskeva who was taking over NPU. Sgt. Paraskeva said he 
had not seen a direct correlation to the water rate changes and more open NPU cases, but said 
they currently had approximately 100 active cases for dead yards and weeds. He added that 
Orem had mental health resources to help in those instances. 
 
Mr. Macdonald said he had concerns about setting a cap that may continue the cycle of 
indifference. Mr. Ditto said the cap was intended to keep the fine at a reasonable amount, and to 
avoid the appearance that the City was trying to control personal property. He said they 
suggested the cap be set to $1,000, which many cities used as their cap.  
 
Mr. Stephens said there was still the abatement process, which would help encourage violators to 
fix the problem. Mr. Summers said the City had never forcefully abated before, though it was a 
potential option. If the City did a forceful abatement, they could place a lien on the property to 
recoup some of the costs for the abatement as well as the $1,000 fine. Sgt. Paraskeva added that 
Provo City had changed their process to use voluntary agreements with violators and 90% of the 
issues were resolved without having to go beyond that initial step. 
 
Mr. Summers said the hope was to find the balance between correctional fines and punitive fines. 
They wanted to find faster and more reasonable solutions to these issues, and give NPU officers 
more flexibility in working with violators. 
 
 
DISCUSSION – Summerfest 2018 Recap and 2019 Planning  
Mr. Downs shared a video recapping the Summerfest 2018 festivities, and thanked all the 
volunteers who gave countless hours to making Summerfest a success year after year. He 
reminded the City Council that next year would be the Orem Centennial Celebration, and they 
had already secured Governor Gary Herbert to serve as the Grand Marshall of Summerfest 2019. 
They felt this was fitting as Gov. Herbert was an Orem resident and would be serving his last 
year as Utah’s governor.  
 
Mr. Downs said there were a few details for Summerfest 2019 the planning committee wanted to 
discuss with the City Council to make sure they were on the right track for the city’s 100th year. 
He said that they wanted to make sure that the celebrations were better, not necessarily bigger. 
The geographic expansion of Summerfest had, in some ways, come at the cost of some of the 



 
City Council Minutes – August 14, 2018 (p.11)   
A complete video of the meeting can be found at www.orem.org/meetings 
 
quality, and they wanted to refocus that. In recent years the festivities had been split between the 
City Center Park and the Scera Park, which had presented some challenges. He said they wanted 
to take some of the good things at Scera Park back to the City Center and expand there, utilizing 
additional space including the Senior Friendship Center. 
 
City Council feedback and ideas regarding Summerfest 2019: 
 Make Thursday more family-friendly by offering activities and entertainment for kids 
earlier in the day, and allow for early carnival ticket sales for Family Night 
 Change the location of the Baby Contest to the Senior Friendship Center, and stagger age 
categories to avoid overcrowding 
 Maintaining the Car Show at the Scera Park, but returning the majority of activities to the 
City Center Park 
 
Mr. Downs said there had been discussion with Adam Robertson of the SCERA to hold a concert 
with a bigger-named entertainer Memorial Day weekend as a kick-off to Summerfest. He said 
they would continue to plan and get specifics worked out as the year progressed.  
 
Shawn Lalliss, Chair of the Summerfest 2019 Committee, briefly discussed the possibility of 
eliminating politically-driven parade entries. There was continued discussion on the merits and 
obstacles to removing political parade entries, and Summerfest 2019 in general. 
 
 
5:00 P.M. STUDY SESSION – CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM 
 
CONDUCTING 
Mayor Richard F. Brunst  
 
ELECTED OFFICIALS 
Debby Lauret, Sam Lentz, Tom Macdonald, Mark 
Seastrand, and Brent Sumner 
 
APPOINTED STAFF 
Brenn Bybee, Assistant City Manager; Steven Downs, 
Assistant City Manager; Greg Stephens, City Attorney; 
Karl Hirst, Recreation Department Director; Richard 
Manning, Administrative Services Director; Bill Bell, 
Development Services Director; Scott Gurney, Fire 
Department Director; Ned Jackson, Police Captain; 
Charlene Crosier, Library Director; Jason Bench, Planning 
Division Manager; Steve Earl, Deputy City Attorney; Paul 
Goodrich, Transportation Engineer; Ryan Clark, Economic 
Development Director; Christian Kirkham, Long Range 
Planner; Kirby Snideman, City Planner; D. Jacob Summers, 
City Prosecutor, Jonathan Ditto, Assistant City Attorney; 
and Jackie Lambert, Deputy City Recorder 
 
EXCUSED 
Councilman David Spencer, City Manager Jamie Davidson 
 
 



 
City Council Minutes – August 14, 2018 (p.12) 
 
 
A complete video of the meeting can be found at www.orem.org/meetings 
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the video was streamed without audio. Apologies for any 
inconvenience this may cause.  
 
Preview Upcoming Agenda Items 
Staff presented a preview of upcoming agenda items. 
 
Agenda Review 
The City Council and staff reviewed the items on the agenda.  
 
City Council New Business  
The City Council discussed any new business. 
 
The City Council then adjourned at 5:54 p.m. to the City Council Chambers for their regular 
meeting.  
 
 



 
City Council Minutes – August 14, 2018 (p.13)   
A complete video of the meeting can be found at www.orem.org/meetings 
 
6:00 P.M. REGULAR SESSION – COUNCIL CHAMBERS 
 
CONDUCTING 
Mayor Richard F. Brunst  
 
ELECTED OFFICIALS 
Debby Lauret, Sam Lentz, Tom Macdonald, Mark 
Seastrand, 
David 
Spencer* 
and 
Brent 
Sumner 
(*participated electronically) 
 
APPOINTED STAFF 
Brenn Bybee, Assistant City Manager; Steven Downs, 
Assistant City Manager; Greg Stephens, City Attorney; 
Karl Hirst, Recreation Department Director; Richard 
Manning, Administrative Services Director; Bill Bell, 
Development Services Director; Scott Gurney, Fire Chief; 
Ned Jackson, Police Captain; Charlene Crozier, Library 
Department Director; Chris Tschirki, Public Works 
Director; Steve Earl, Deputy City Attorney; Jason Bench, 
Planning 
Division 
Manager; 
Pete 
Wolfley, 
Communications Specialist; and Jackie Lambert, Deputy 
City Recorder 
 
EXCUSED 
City Manager Jamie Davidson 
 
 
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the audio was streamed without video on orem.org. The video 
with audio is available in segments on the City’s YouTube channel. Apologies for any 
inconvenience this may cause.  
 
 
INVOCATION /  
INSPIRATIONAL THOUGHT 
Lisa Baldwin 
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 
Shawn Lalliss 
 
 
APPROVAL OF MINUTES 
 
Mr. Lentz moved to approve the July 17, 2018, City Council Meeting minutes. Mr. Macdonald 
seconded the motion. Those voting aye: Richard F. Brunst, Debby Lauret, Sam Lentz, Tom 
Macdonald, Mark Seastrand, David Spencer, and Brent Sumner. The motion passed. 
 
 
MAYOR’S REPORT/ITEMS REFERRED BY COUNCIL 
 
Upcoming Events 
Mayor Brunst reviewed the upcoming events, as listed in the agenda packet. 
 
Appointments to Boards and Commissions 



 
City Council Minutes – August 14, 2018 (p.14) 
 
 
A complete video of the meeting can be found at www.orem.org/meetings 
Mayor Brunst moved to reappoint Sheralyn Bennett and Tanya Harmon to the Beautification 
Advisory Commission, and to appoint Devin Rich to the Public Works Advisory Commission. 
Mr. Lentz seconded the motion. Those voting aye: Richard F. Brunst, Debby Lauret, Sam 
Lentz, Tom Macdonald, Mark Seastrand, David Spencer, and Brent Sumner. The motion passed. 
 
Presentation – Miss Orem 2017 
Miss Orem 2017 Amanda Flinders thanked the City Council for their support and words of 
encouragement during her time as the reigning Miss Orem. Her interest in her city and 
community had been sparked, and she was grateful for the opportunities she had to work 
alongside the Council, and to learn and serve. Ms. Flinders shook hands with the Mayor and 
Council. 
 
 
PERSONAL APPEARANCES 
 
Time was allotted for the public to express their ideas, concerns, and comments on items not 
scheduled as public hearings on the agenda.  Those wishing to speak should have signed in prior 
to the meeting, and comments were limited to three minutes or less. 
 
Jana Bauer indicated that she intended to speak about the proposed rezone on 1200 West. Mayor 
Brunst suggested that she wait to speak until the public hearing for that scheduled item. 
 
A resident who failed to identify himself spoke about building out the City’s fiber network. He 
said he had a home-based business that depended on the internet, and speed was a crucial factor 
in his success. He referred to a survey conducted some months previous regarding the public’s 
favorability on building out the fiber network, and said it had generated similarly positive 
responses to the one conducted regarding the Fitness Center and the Library Hall. He wished the 
City Council would reconsider including options for the fiber buildout on the ballot. 
 
Russ Bird said he represented a group of citizens that supported including a vote on bond options 
for the Fitness Center and the Library Hall. He recalled his time as a student living in Orem and 
using the Fitness Center regularly, and he said Orem had always been a city with a forward-
thinking mentality. The reality was that the once state of the art recreational facility was in need 
of overhaul, and the proposed bond was a great opportunity to accomplish that without an 
increase in taxes. He encouraged the Council to approve including this bond issue on the 
November ballot. 
 
Denise Devynck said she was a great admirer of the Mayor and wanted to share some 
information with the Council and the public. She had a permaculture food forest, which sustained 
itself with rainfall. She had used water systems similar to those used in dry areas of Arizona 
because the conservation of water as a resource was something she was passionate about. She 
likened running out of water to running out of air to breathe, and said water was nearly as crucial 
to survival as air. Ms. Devynck invited all to an open house she was holding on water 
conservation, and distributed fliers for the event. 
 
 
SCHEDULED ITEMS 
 



 
City Council Minutes – August 14, 2018 (p.15)   
A complete video of the meeting can be found at www.orem.org/meetings 
 
6:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING 
ORDINANCE – Amending the General Plan of the Orem City Code by changing the 
General Plan designation at approximately 540 North 1200 West from Medium Density 
Residential to Regional Commercial 
 
Mr. Bench reminded the City Council that this was a continued discussion from two previous 
City Council meetings. He reviewed the background information on this item from the agenda 
packet, including the timeline for the item. He reminded the City Council of the Planning 
Commission’s recommendation to deny the proposed amendment to go to commercial for the 
office building. Mr. Bench invited applicant Randy Farnworth and his representation Paul 
Washburn to come forward. Mr. Bench reviewed the two proposals Mr. Farnworth had 
presented, the first being to rezone the area to commercial and build a two-story office building 
and the second being a residential option to build 5 homes. 
 
There was discussion about the pros and cons of each proposal. General issues affecting either 
proposal included: 
 Building height requirements 
 Setback requirements 
 Expansion of 1200 West 
 Additional traffic 
 
Mr. Bench said the Planning Commission’s main concern was commercial creep into a 
residential area. If the City Council denied the commercial rezone and suggested that the 
applicant pursue the residential proposal, the Planning Commission would approve the 
subdivision but it would not change the zoning and would not need to come before the City 
Council again. Mr. Bench said residential structures could be two-stories and go to a height of 27 
feet in this area. A commercial structure could go to a height of 60 feet, though with the 
requirement that they must stay equal to the height of surrounding structures.  
 
Mr. Goodrich addressed questions regarding the expansion of 1200 West. He said that was a 
roadway identified in the Transportation Master Plan for expansion, but it was not currently 
slated for expansion. The setback requirements for either proposal would work for the future 
widening of 1200 West.  
 
As far as traffic, Mr. Farnworth said his guess was that residential would cause more traffic, 
though that was dependent on the type of business that would occupy the office building. Office 
traffic was usually metered and not as sporadic. Mr. Farnworth said he was not looking to 
continue his business. The structures currently on the property were old and in need of major 
repairs, but his business was legal, non-conforming so it made more sense to raze the existing 
structures to build new. He felt this was an opportunity to find new and better ways to utilize this 
piece of property. 
 
Mayor Brunst opened the public hearing. 
 
Jana Bauer said she had emailed all members of the Council but had not gotten a response. She 
agreed with the Planning Commission’s concerns about commercial creep, and said the 



 
City Council Minutes – August 14, 2018 (p.16) 
 
 
A complete video of the meeting can be found at www.orem.org/meetings 
neighbors would much prefer houses to an office building. She cited information from the City’s 
“Imagine Orem” website that said neighborhoods were a priority and would not change. She felt 
the current mindset of the Council seemed to be protecting the interests of developers and 
businesses, not the interests of the residents. Ms. Bauer said it would only take one zoning 
change like this to become a free for all. She added that 1200 West was still a residential 
roadway, and preferred that additional traffic be directed to Geneva Road, not through her 
neighborhood. She encouraged the Council to protect the residents and protect their 
neighborhood by leaving the zoning residential. 
 
Gary Anderson said he too was against changing the zone from residential to commercial. He felt 
this was an instance of “spot zoning”, trying to squeeze an office building or warehouse into a 
neighborhood. He asked if they would feel the same if the proposal was in their own 
neighborhoods. The residents did not want this change, and had appeared at several public 
meetings to state their opposition. Mr. Anderson echoed Ms. Bauer’s feelings that it seemed the 
City Council deferred to the requests of developers before protecting neighbors in Family City 
U.S.A. He asked that the Council follow the good judgement and recommendations of the 
Planning Commission and city staff and deny the rezone request. 
 
John Durrant said he was also against this rezone request, and he recalled standing before the 
City Council many years ago where the promise was made that they would not allow the 
encroachment of Highway Services and other commercial developments into the neighborhood. 
Now it felt like it was going that way piece by piece. He felt their neighborhood was viewed as 
“the armpit of the city” and asked the Council if it meant nothing when they gave their word. Mr. 
Durrant said he had lived in his home for 37 years, and he said things had changed a lot in those 
years. He challenged the Council to visit his home and stand in his yard to see what it was like 
living next to 1200 West. He said it made his skin crawl to hear them talking about widening that 
road, making things busier than they already were. 
 
Brian Schramm said he wanted to address comments made in previous meetings. He said Mr. 
Sumner had asked the residents why they were picking on a business owner like Mr. Farnworth, 
but Mr. Schramm wanted to reverse the question: why was the Council picking on this 
neighborhood? He did not feel the Council had neighborhood cohesion as a priority; dozens of 
families were apparently not as important as business owners. The building of a commercial 
building right in the middle of their homes would reduce the material value of their homes and 
properties. He agreed with Mr. Durrant’s question about the Council keeping their word, and 
asked that the current Council not change the social contract that had been made in the past. 
 
Richard Bauer said he appreciated living in a great republic with elected officials whose role was 
to represent the will of the people. Years back he had spoken to a Senator who had voted in 
opposition to will of his constituents and when asked why, the Senator stated that it was because 
he knew more. Mr. Bauer asked the City Council why they wanted to punish many residents for 
one business owner: who did you represent, the one or the many? He urged them to consider 
that.  
 
Julie Smith said Linda Harlow had asked her to appear on her behalf. Ms. Harlow said she was 
okay with the project. 
 



 
City Council Minutes – August 14, 2018 (p.17)   
A complete video of the meeting can be found at www.orem.org/meetings 
 
Harold Dale said he was encouraged to hear the proposal to keep that property residential, as 
they did not need more commercial. He said he had lived in Orem since 1984 and felt like the 
whole town had gone berserk. If today he was looking to move, he certainly would not move to 
Orem. Mr. Dale said that previous changes to their neighborhood, including the establishment of 
a commercial assistance house, had affected his service in his church with more and more 
neighbors needing assistance. They had been told the assistance house would not affect the 
neighborhood, but that had not been the case. He said having a commercial area in this 
residential neighborhood made no sense to him, and it seemed like someone just looking to make 
a dollar. He said residential just made everyone feel better. 
 
Mayor Brunst closed the public hearing at 6:59 p.m. 
 
Mr. Washburn said that the property had been zoned commercial when Mr. Farnworth first 
established his business, so he had just been doing what he was supposed to do. As for the 
expansion of 1200 West, Mr. Washburn said that was not just the decision of the City but MAG 
and UDOT and others would be involved. 
 
Mr. Lentz inquired as to why single family homes were in that area if it had been zoned for 
commercial uses. Mr. Bench said there was a time in the 1980s were conditional use permits 
(CUP) were allowed in residential zones, so Mr. Farnworth had gotten a CUP to allow his 
business there. 
 
Mr. Farnworth said if this proposed change was all about making more money, he would just 
stick to the residential options. But he did not imagine that people wanted to pay the amount 
these houses would cost to have one side of their property lines by a trailer court. He hoped to 
leave the neighborhood better than when he arrived, and for his part he felt developing the land 
for commercial use accomplished that. In his 30 years of business, he had never heard any 
complaints from the neighborhood. When he began this process, they sent out hundreds of 
notices for neighbors to come to a meeting regarding the proposal and only 4 came – 2 of whom 
voiced support for the rezone. Mr. Farnworth thanked the neighbors who had voiced their input, 
but he was in a quandary. He said the reality of growth was that the areas along 1200 West 
would likely become commercial in the future, no matter what had been promised in the past. He 
stated that he was not a big developer, but was a small business owner from the area looking to 
do what was right while allowing him to live. 
 
Discussion continued about growth in Utah County, and the best ways to manage that growth for 
all – residential and commercial alike. Mayor Brunst mentioned the discussions from the 
previous meetings regarding the need for smaller, more affordable homes in Orem and felt like 
that would be a better use for this property than an office building. 
 
Mayor Brunst then moved to DENY the request amending the General Plan of the Orem City 
Code by changing the General Plan designation at approximately 540 North 1200 West from 
Medium Density Residential to Regional Commercial. Mr. Lentz seconded. Those voting aye to 
deny: Richard F. Brunst, Sam Lentz, Tom Macdonald, and Mark Seastrand. Those voting nay to 
deny: Debby Lauret, David Spencer, and Brent Sumner. The motion passed 4 to 3. 
 
 



 
City Council Minutes – August 14, 2018 (p.18) 
 
 
A complete video of the meeting can be found at www.orem.org/meetings 
RESOLUTION – Fence Modification for Wiggy Wash Car Wash at 220 West Center Street 
in the C2 Zone 
 
Mr. Bench recommended that this item be continued to the next City Council meeting, to be held 
August 28, 2018. 
 
Mayor Brunst moved to continue the resolution to August 28, 2018. Mr. Macdonald seconded 
the motion. Those voting aye: Richard F. Brunst, Debby Lauret, Sam Lentz, Tom Macdonald, 
Mark Seastrand, David Spencer, and Brent Sumner. The motion passed. 
 
 
RESOLUTION – A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR A SPECIAL BOND ELECTION 
TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 6, 2018, FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUBMITTING TO 
THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF OREM, UTAH (THE “CITY”), A 
PROPOSITION REGARDING THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $24,500,000 
GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS TO FINANCE ALL OR A PORTION OF THE 
COSTS TO (A) ACQUIRE, CONSTRUCT, FURNISH, AND EQUIP RENOVATIONS, 
ADDITIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS TO THE CITY’S FAMILY FITNESS CENTER, 
INCLUDING FAMILY FRIENDLY CHANGING ROOMS, FAMILY ORIENTED 
FACILITIES, A SUSPENDED TRACK AND ALL ANCILLARY AND RELATED 
IMPROVEMENTS, AND (B) ACQUIRE, CONSTRUCT, FURNISH AND EQUIP A 
COMMUNITY LIBRARY HALL AT THE CITY CENTER CAMPUS, INCLUDING 
ALL ANCILLARY AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE 
PUBLICATION OF A NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING; APPROVING THE FORM OF 
AND DIRECTING THE PUBLICATION OF A NOTICE OF ELECTION AND THE 
BALLOT PROPOSITIONS; AND RELATED MATTERS 
 
Mr. Bybee reviewed the background information from the agenda packet. He said the full 
presentation had been given at the work meeting on July 17, 2018, and he would be giving a 
summarized review this evening. He said this proposal was continued investment in Orem’s 
families. Mr. Bybee shared a personal anecdote of going to the Recreation Center when he was a 
boy, and said the hope was to revitalize the family fitness options for future generations. 
Similarly, residents throughout the county and state came to the Orem Public Library to 
participate in programming. These projects would have great impact for Orem families. Mr. 
Bybee then reviewed information from a recent survey regarding general interest and support for 
these projects. The top two messages that resonated from the survey results were: 1) not having 
an increase in property taxes compared to current levels, and 2) seeing the specifics of what the 
funding would go toward. 
 
Mr. Bybee shared renderings of the proposed upgrades to the Fitness Center and the proposed 
Library Hall. The projects would allow for flexibility of programming based on current trends 
and demands. He said there was an existing General Obligation (G.O.) bond for street lighting 
that would fall off in the coming year, and the proposal was to continue a G.O. bond in the exact 
same amount so there was no net increase in taxes for the bond. Mr. Bybee said the City had 
already set aside $8 million from donations and CARE funds dedicated to these projects, which 
was essentially the City’s down payment for these projects. This would be a 30 year term on the 
bond, which could be paid back early if there was a surplus in city revenue. 
 



 
City Council Minutes – August 14, 2018 (p.19)   
A complete video of the meeting can be found at www.orem.org/meetings 
 
Mr. Bybee said they were before the City Council this evening to request that the option for the 
bond be included on the November 2018 ballot. If the bond was passed by a majority vote, they 
would break ground on the projects summer 2019. They would maintain the aquatic side of the 
Fitness Center and rebuild around that, with an anticipated reopening in winter of 2021. The 
Library Hall had an anticipated opening of 2020. 
 
Mrs. Lauret and Mr. Spencer asked about the square footage on the proposed Library Hall. Mrs. 
Crozier said it would be 20,000 square feet. Mr. Spencer reiterated his long held position that he 
was not a proponent of the Library Hall. 
 
Mr. Lentz said he loved both projects associated with this proposed bond, but had two main 
concerns. His first concern was the combining of both projects together, and asked why they 
could not be voted on separately. Mr. Bybee said they had not wanted to pit art projects against 
recreation projects, when data showed that 90% of residents used either the Library or the Fitness 
Center, or both. This would be paid with existing tax rates and directly benefit to the vast 
majority of residents. Mr. Bybee added that building the projects in the same timeframe would 
save on construction costs as well. 
 
Mr. Lentz said his second concern was trying to propose a way to get UTOPIA built out. He did 
not understand the rationale of placing this bond on the ballot before finding a way to build out 
the city’s fiber infrastructure. A UTOPIA bond would help pay for the other projects, potentially 
including these Library and Recreation projects. Mr. Bybee said that UTOPIA was important, 
and so were these. They wanted to find a path forward with smaller projects that had strong 
citizen demand to build confidence and trust, and that would help build momentum to tackle 
other big projects. 
 
Mr. Lentz said every year he had served on the City Council they had said UTOPIA was a 
priority, yet he saw no progress beyond the status quo. Mr. Seastrand disagreed with that, and 
said Mr. Lentz had been instrumental in helping to clean up some of the backlog and move 
things forward. Mr. Lentz said UTOPIA was moving forward, but it was not because of efforts 
Orem was making. From his perspective, the City had not been doing anything. Mr. Seastrand 
again disagreed, and said the City had paid back funds which they had the option not to pay. Mr. 
Lentz said that was not progress, but paying what was already owed. 
 
Mayor Brunst said these projects were not in competition with cultural arts options like the 
SCERA and the Hale Center Theater, or recreation options like VASA or other gyms and cross 
fit facilities. They served a specific function for families, and thought it was good thing to 
include this bond on the November 2018 ballot. 
 
Mayor Brunst then moved, by resolution, to provide for a Special Bond Election to be held on 
November 6, 2018, for the purpose of submitting to the qualified electors of the City of Orem, 
Utah (The “City”), a proposition regarding the issuance of not to exceed $24,500,000 General 
Obligation Bonds to finance all or a portion of the costs to (A) acquire, construct, furnish, and 
equip renovations, additions and improvements to the City’s Family Fitness Center, including 
family friendly changing rooms, family oriented facilities, a suspended track and all ancillary 
and related improvements, and (B) acquire, construct, furnish and equip a Community Library 
Hall at the City Center campus, including all ancillary and related improvements; providing for 



 
City Council Minutes – August 14, 2018 (p.20) 
 
 
A complete video of the meeting can be found at www.orem.org/meetings 
the publication of a notice of public hearing; approving the form of and directing the publication 
of a Notice of Election and the Ballot Propositions; and related matters. Mr. Seastrand 
seconded the motion. Those voting aye: Richard F. Brunst, Debby Lauret, Tom Macdonald, 
Mark Seastrand, David Spencer, and Brent Sumner. Those voting nay: Sam Lentz. The motion 
passed 6 to 1. 
 
 
COMMUNICATION ITEMS 
 
There were no Communication Items. 
 
 
CITY MANAGER INFORMATION ITEMS 
 
Mr. Bybee had no information items to share.  
 
 
ADJOURNMENT 
 
Mr. Macdonald moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Sumner seconded the motion. Those 
voting aye: Richard F. Brunst, Debby Lauret, Sam Lentz, Tom Macdonald, Mark Seastrand, 
David Spencer, and Brent Sumner. The motion passed.  
 
The meeting adjourned at 7:58 p.m. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
JoD’Ann Bates, City Recorder 
 
Approved: September 11, 2018