City Council · 2021-09-14

Can you tell?

I don't know.

Um, even more reference there. Since she got her degree, I don't know where she focused on, but I got the impression that it was more STEM path stuff as opposed to tech-based stuff. Fred, would you turn your camera on?

Yeah. Are you able to hear me on your end?

I can hear you, but I can't hear them.

Okay, Debbie, yeah, I'm having a similar issue. Alrighty, so I've got the note here that I can start presenting. Stephen, maybe thumbs up if that's okay for me to get, get going. Okay, let me, let me share my screen here. Alrighty, so I'm presenting the update to the financial plan. The last update was done in 2016, and then I worked with the city and Bowen and Collins to complete an update to the financial plan. And I'm going to present a summary of that information for you. Our objectives, the key objectives that we looked at with regards to this update was ensuring that we had sufficient revenues to cover all of our operation and maintenance expenditures. We looked at updating the models and report based on historic revenues and expenditures and make changes to the projections as we move forward in the planning horizon. We also, also looked at maintaining bond covenants and looking at appropriate debt service coverage ratios, ensuring that we had net— sufficient net revenues after paying operations and expenditure expenses. that we could cover outstanding bond issuance. And the third point that we looked at is infusing an additional debt scenario. So looking at the updated master plan and capital improvement plan and ensuring that we had sufficient revenues to cover those expenses, but also look at the opportunity to capitalize on historically low interest rates in the bond market and see how that could help change the rate perspective as we look to the future rate increases. And then we also wanted to make sure that the proposed rates, while maintaining debt coverage and funding our operations and maintenance as well as all the capital expense, that we would have appropriate fund balances. to carry forward as we look to future years. And the objective here is— this is kind of a generic chart that captures the concept of what we're looking at. When you look at kind of the gray bar chart as well as the line chart, that kind of represents a pay-as-you-go approach. And typically when you utilize a pay-as-you-go approach, rates can stay low based on expense, but if you have high capital expense or need that rates typically have to go up substantially to cover that on a cash basis. What some entities will look at doing is then stabilizing that by generating higher rate and more rate revenues up front. That allows you to build up substantial reserves that then allow you to pay for those large capital infrastructure projects. And then, as you move forward in that, you continue those higher rates. What we looked at is, again, infusing the scenario analysis with the potential for bonding, which the city did implement in the form of this, the Series 2021 bonds. And what that was intended to do was to allow us to change that rate structure and potentially reduce those rates up front. By amortizing the cost of those projects over time rather than paying for all of that cost upfront. The next slide illustrates that by showing the trajectory of your rates under the 2016 study, as well as the rates as you adopted them over the last couple of years, and then compared that with what we were proposing— we've proposed as part of the revised rate structure. So you can see, this is what the lighter-colored lines represents what was proposed as part of the 2016 study. That dropped a little bit as you implemented those rates. There was some delay, or you pushed pause on some of the rate increases, but that trajectory was still showing that rates would continue to escalate. And then as we again introduced a new bonding scenario, it allowed us to pull that rate trajectory down while still showing increases over time to capture inflation. You can see that that trajectory was changed for both water and sewer. Now storm, we weren't able to change that trajectory just due to the capital needs within the Storm Enterprise Fund. But for water and sewer, we were able to, to change that and create some savings. Right.

Can I make a comment there? Yes. I think as a result of making this change, what the City Council has done is elected to spread off— spread across this burden across multiple generations. So I don't know if any of you have ever bought a home with cash that's $700,000 or whatever. I know I haven't. And so what this will allow us to do is to spread this burden across multiple generations, and, and we were able to soften our rates, but we'll also be able to accelerate the construction of some very substantial high capital cost projects upfront that are needed today. So we appreciate your support on that.

Yeah, so similar to borrowing for a home, that's in essence what we're doing. And then it— yes, it takes those projects that have a useful life of 30, 40, 50 years and spreads it over the demand that will benefit from those projects. So future generations contribute to the payment of that infrastructure over the useful life of those projects. So looking at it from a percentage perspective, this shows the adjustments to the water base rates and the usage rates. What we've recommended is for fiscal year 2022, there was no recommended change to the base rate, but there would be a change, an actual reduction to the usage rate. So we pulled that down. And then you can see in future years, there's a slight increase based on an inflationary growth with regards to the base rate and the usage rates. What we also looked at is ensuring that we compared AWWA standards with regards to usage by meter size. And so there's a slight difference with regards to the proposed increase for the 3/4-inch meter to get that more in line with those AWWA ratios, but Not a large difference there, and that percentage increase again is relatively small to account for those inflationary changes that affect the enterprise fund. The usage rates, once we make the initial reduction in those rates, then those continue to grow from that, from that new base. Again, going back to this slide, that, that was the objective here is to, as Chris mentioned, soften those rates. and then grow those at a more modest pace based on an inflationary increase. This slide shows you what those rates look like. Again, for fiscal year 2022, no change to the base rates, and those increase by that percentage every year. And then you can see for fiscal year 2022, the usage rates actually decreased. are proposed to decrease. So we also modified Tier 4 to create a little bit more of a softening on that. The Tier 4 was—

Brad?

Yes.

Tom McDonald has a question.

Yes.

Hey, I thank you. I wasn't positive you were being able to hear us, so thank you for taking a brief interruption. Yeah, I assume somewhere you have assumptions on how much we'll earn on our money, how much construction costs will go up, etc. That's where the, you know, all forecasts are wrong, some are useful. How do you feel about the assumptions you made on increasing costs, inflationary costs, et cetera? Could you talk us through that, or did I miss that somewhere? I didn't see it specifically.

No, I definitely, I can review that. So we did grow expenditures. So general expenditures are growing at 3% for most categories. We did look specifically So when I say we, myself and Chris, Neil, and Reed looked at each line item within the budget to grow those expenses and make sure we had what we felt were realistic assumptions with regards to those line items.

And haven't construction costs been going up higher than 3% for the last 4, 5, 6 years?

So the benefit of the bonding scenario is it helps mitigate some of that inflationary risk. As Chris mentioned, you're able to pull those projects forward and construct them at a more rapid pace than, than waiting until you have the cash reserves.

And I think you just emphasized the key point I was trying to make to the audience and others who might listen to this, is by pulling the trigger now, we are having the benefit of locking our costs over the next 2 years instead of over the next 20 years or whatever.

Correct. Yeah, so that was one of the benefits, is we're able to pull the projects forward and mitigate inflationary risk. But I will, you know, let you know that based on this approach, and the city's objective is to review this more frequently because some of those assumptions will change, you know, we're trying to predict the future here. And as we move forward in time, Staff will look at the pro forma and make sure that we're, we're hitting those targets. And if there are changes to assumptions that, that prove to change the outcome of this, then there may be updates that are required. But yes, the benefit of that bonding approach, it helps mitigate that construction inflation risk because that is a big impact. We did have We do have some inflation baked into the model, but, you know, right now we have, you know, 8% inflation, whereas historically we're more at 3%, 3.5% inflationary growth in construction. So, but that will require some more active involvement from staff to review the pro forma and just make sure we're hitting our targets. in future years. So again, looking at the rate recommendations, we are showing the base rate for water staying constant and then growing from there, and then an actual reduction in the usage rates by tier with a little bit higher of a reduction, or higher, a greater percentage of reduction in the Tier 4 rate. When we look at sewer, while we weren't able to achieve a reduction in the rates, we were able to slow that, that increase down. So in fiscal year 2022, there was no increase, and then just the inflationary increases thereafter for the base rate and the production rate. as you move into fiscal year '23 and beyond. You can see that in the, the actual rates below this chart. So the fiscal year 2022 rate staying at $1,233 and then going up to $1,239 in fiscal year '23 and beyond. The only area we weren't able to make adjustment again is in the storm. There we have substantial capital infrastructure that's required despite the bonding scenario. We weren't able to pull that rate down, and in fact, there may be additional discussion that will have to happen with regards to storm rate as additional capital projects are identified. So that rate we, we kept constant relative to the 2016 recommended rate structure. We've perpetuated that for this analysis. As with all financial plans, we look at projecting that out, what, you know, beyond the 5-year planning horizon, but the rate recommendations are isolated to that 5-year window. Again, staff will need to look at performance from year to year to make sure that we're achieving these targets and If there are substantial market fluctuations, for example, if a recession were to hit or you continue to see very high construction inflation, then those are types of assumptions that may require us to kind of open back up the black box, so to speak, and reevaluate and make sure that we're staying sustainable from a revenue perspective and hitting all of our targets. So looking at the evaluation of those rate objectives relative to the recommended rates, we do show revenue sufficiency. As we restructured the rates for water and sewer under that objective of maintaining revenue sufficiency, we were still able to achieve about a 10 to 20% Overall reduction, looking at that rate change for the water and keeping that sewer rate constant for fiscal year 2022. That's an evaluation based on a 3/4-inch meter. So actual water usage and meter size will change that percentage. So if you're using more water and you're hitting that higher tier, then you actually may get a little bit more of a reduction. Whereas if you're just using minimal amounts of water, then that that reduction may not be as pronounced, since that reduction that we're proposing is really affecting that usage category. But we are showing revenue sufficiency in our pro forma, even with those rate changes. We evaluated debt coverage and looked at all outstanding debt, as well as the new debt issuance, and are showing that we're maintaining sufficient debt coverage. As we look into the 5-year planning horizon and beyond. We're also maintaining appropriate fund balances, which represents that cash on hand at the end of each fiscal year. So our objective was to try to maintain at least a year of fund balance as we look at operating expense. So, so we were able to do that within the 5-year planning horizon. And then we also look at, you know, making sure that we maintain equity and ease of implementation. So in this case, we didn't have any structural changes to the rate, meaning we didn't change how you assess that rate with regards to base rate and the usage rates. We kept that constant, so, so no disruption there. But overall, again, our objective, if you go back Here, this kind of expresses that objective, as Chris mentioned, the softening of those rate increases over time through the issuance of debt to amortize that cost over a longer period of time. So that was the outcome of this process. Chris, I don't know if you want to address anything else, or I can take questions that you may have.

I think you've done a great job, Fred. I would like to mention that the city is also looking at additional funding sources outside of bonding and rates, such as grants and ARPA funding that's available. The state has issued $50 million of available dollars for this coming year, and they're going to be awarding that in the next few months. The deadline for that is tomorrow.

We've—

we were hoping to get about $2 to $3 million to help with the water reuse project, which we think is a great candidate from an environmentally sensitive project, so Again, I think, I think we have a very good, well-developed hybrid plan for funding into the next 5 years. We would probably be coming back to you, like Fred mentioned, about every 5 years. Based on changes that happen in the economy, whether it's COVID-related or shipping container-related coming from China, or construction costs or labor shortages or whatever we're experiencing, which we are most of those things today. We will, we will be coming back to you again. We also will be reevaluating our impact fees for sewer, water, stormwater, parks, police, fire, and so forth at this time. So this is the first step. The capital facility plan was the first step tied with the financial plan, which will now then lead into our impact fee studies and adoption in the near future. So are there any other questions or comments that you might have for us at this time?

Terry, go ahead.

Yes, a concern, because we, we heard loud and clear from the citizens that the rate increases were huge. And so, you know, the City Council decided, let's, let's go a different direction. And as you talked about, we did bonding. So it's kind of a— it's a little misleading. So we, we dropped the rates one year, you know, part of this year and 2022. And then we start raising them again every year. They're not huge increases, but that's— I'm a little uncomfortable telling people, yeah, we were able to freeze the water rates because we posted this bond and because we have a huge reserve now because of the increases we did. So for me, it's like, you know what, I hate to be sitting here saying, yeah, we dropped your rates. Oh yeah, well, I was just— I had my fingers crossed that was just for one year, and now we're going to start—

we'll start the process again.

Anyway, so I'm just— I'm a little concerned about that.

If I might, Fred, if you could pull up slide number 5, it does identify that we've reduced our, our tiers by 15% in Tier 1, 2, and 3, and 25% in Tier 4 prospectively. That will be moving forward into the future. The corresponding rates did reduce from 2021 on the next slide to 2022. They went down 15 cents in Tier 1. 18 cents in Tier 2, 22 cents in Tier 3, and so forth. And so what we were planning on doing and what we are proposing today are quite a bit different. In fact, if you look out 5 years from now, our rates will still be lower than what they were in FY21. And that's on the bottom of slide 6, if you happen to see that.

Under Tier 1, 2, 3, looks like you're at least 10 cents Lower all the way out 5 years.

So 5 years, and so we're— that is for water, and then sewer wasn't quite as drastic, but it was still a reduction, and we froze our rates for the last 2 years.

So I think that's prudent. Dave, you have a question?

Yeah, so I mean, I remember when we were talking about this, you know, water structure. And we had 15, 15, and 25. And my comment was, you know, I know and understand why you're doing 25 on Tier 4 because nobody really hits that, or if they do. And my, my point was I thought we should have put that 25% back into the 15, 15, and 15 and got a better discount for the citizens on 1, 2, and 3, but that didn't happen, so.

Well, yeah, so the 15% reduction did occur in tiers 1, 2, and 3, and then the 25% was in tier 4, as you see on the slide. The, the, the factors went from 1 to 1.25 to 1.5 and up to 1.75. We went into tier 2, it could have gone to 2, but we dropped it back down substantially to 25%. But you would have preferred a reduction in Tier 1, it sounds like.

1, 2, or 3. 1, 2, or 3. Because Tier 4, I think it's smoke and mirrors because it's 25%. Look at that. But it's how many people hit Tier 4?

In the summer months, a good number of people do irrigating.

Most people are in the 2 and 3, probably. So, or 1, 2, and 3.

Well, true. For 9 months of the year, 10 months of the year, you're in Tiers 1, 2, and 3. And in the winter months, you're primarily in Tier 1.

I mean, what, what would it have done if with this table if we had just been consistent on 1, 2, 3, and 4 and had the same rate? Do you know? Or how would it have done with our cash flow and reserve and all that stuff? Just consistent 1, 2, 3, 4.

I mean, that's a good question. I don't have that answer. We'd have to review the model, the financial model.

And Chris, my sense is it would have You know, had you eliminated that 25% reduction in Tier 4, it would have in a very de minimis way decreased the rate even further in 1, 2, and 3, because the volumes in our system are primarily in the first and second tier rates.

So—

Correct. So we would go backwards a little bit, but—

I don't, I don't think you would go backwards, but I don't I don't think anybody would realize any significant savings if we were to, for example, adjust Tier 4 down to 15%, because the volume in the system is based on really the first few tiers.

But that's where we make the money, is because that's the most usage.

So—

Or it's also where we're charging extremely high rates, so That's correct.

And typically people, right, most people don't get into that, into Tier 4, but they do on occasion. But there is a substantial difference there.

And again, I mean, I think the level of feedback that we are receiving from our customers is during the summer months. It's when they are irrigating outside. That's when you— that's when we as a water operator receive the complaints. We don't receive the complaints in the middle, for example, of the shoulder months because people are not watering their lawns. It's when they get that sticker shock in the middle of the summer because they are using a significant amount of water for irrigation purposes. So that sticker shock to some degree is tempered in the summer based on a significant reduction in Tier 4 rather than the other 3 tiers.

In my mind, it would just be— it was consistent if you did it equal amounts in Tier 1, 2, 3, and 4.

I do want to emphasize—

I would like equal amounts before. We got the heavy hit, right?

Right.

We raised them, so we're decreasing them out proportionately to how we raised it.

Correct, correct. And I do want to mention too that we were— the council and staff recommendations, I think we were quite generous In Tier 1, for example, we brought that up to capture almost 100% of everyone on a 3/4-inch meter at 11,000 gallons. Typically, the average is around 7,000 gallons in the wintertime. We didn't want anybody to get into Tier 2 in the winter, and I believe that 99.5% have accomplished that. So that was part of our direction. There are different ways to develop a fee structure. financial plan, a model, and a rate study or a rate structure. And so you offer some, some valid points. These are a little bit different from what you had recommended.

So, Chris, Jeff Lampson has a question, please.

Thank you for all of this information. I'm curious, and maybe not for today, but some future time, and maybe we've already done this, but would it be possible to look at The demographics of these 4 tiers, kind of how that breaks down throughout the city, and then also what percentages of water users would be in Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3, Tier 4.

We have data on a monthly basis to be able to do that. I would suggest that it would be feasible or more practical to do that after we have our advanced metering infrastructure in place, meaning our infrastructure where we'll be able to collect that data and more accurately analyze that and provide a good review of that. The meters right now are— Neil, how many are deployed right now? 11,000. So we're just under 50% of our total meters, and our goal is to have those completed on what date, Neil? December of 2022.

Okay.

So demographic-wise, I'm not sure what you might be recommending there.

I'm just curious what Tier 1 looks like and what Tier 2 looks like as far as— okay, as far as it's broken out into the neighborhoods.

Sure.

And like I say, not looking for that today, and down the road when we have that in place would be fine. I'm just curious what what those tiers look like on a neighborhood-by-neighborhood.

Yeah, I believe that irrigating— those that are irrigating properties, you know, if they have 5,000 square feet across the board, most people are very similar if they have 5,000 feet of grass, for example. There's some that are a little bit higher, some a little bit lower. Some are more careless, some are more responsible, some are more water conservation minded, and so forth. But there are definitely trends depending on the amount of irrigable area on their properties, not just by meter size itself, but actual irrigable areas. We could definitely provide demographic information for you.

Thank you.

Yeah.

All right, well, thank you, Chris. Appreciate it.

Thank you. We appreciate your support.

And thank you to Fred as well. Appreciate that. I will now go ahead and move on to our next discussion, which is the Crandall Orchard Conservation Easement Introduction, and Matt Taylor is our presenter. And Darren Hawkins as well.

Members of the council, pleasure to be with you today. My role is limited in this presentation. I'm just here to introduce Mr. Hopkins, Darren Hopkins. He is a member of our Natural Resources Stewardship Committee. However, today this proposal is an individual proposal. There is a recommendation from the committee in general on this topic, which we'll address in the presentation, but this has to do with property commonly referred to as the Crandall Orchard, just nearby here. And Mr. Hawkins has prepared a proposal with the property owner. And we'd like to go over that key points with, with you today. And I'm here just to answer any questions if they come up. Mr. Hawkins.

Yeah, thank you.

Push the button.

Okay, got it. Let's see. So, so Tim and Nat, thank you today for your time. I really appreciate it. Nice to see many of you who I've met with individually or on my committee. Great to be with you again. So Tim and Natalie Crandall are the main operators of the Crandall Orchards at 800 East Center Street, just right down here. I'm sure that I'm guessing that most of you have dropped by and bought some of their produce. It's open right now. It's— yeah, it's fantastic. Recommend the peaches right now in particular. They have about 10 acres and sell their produce locally at their fruit stand. I don't make a commission off this, by the way. The area was homesteaded by their family, by the Crandall family, in 1887, and they wish to place a conservation easement on the property, preserve its operation as a working orchard in perpetuity. So this is a—

Yeah, stop you right there and maybe ask the question to Heather and Jamie. I thought that we had put a conservation easement on this about 5 years ago. I remember it coming before the council.

My understanding is there is potentially an agricultural protection area.

So Jason, I think, can answer this.

That is, there is an agricultural easement on it, but it doesn't— basically, the conservation easement is a little different. It takes the development rights and puts it in the easement. This one is— it protects it as far as people complaining about sprays, things like that. That's what this agricultural easement does. The conservation easement is a little bit different, where it takes the rights and sells them to this conservation.

So it cannot be developed?

Correct.

Okay.

Under the current standard, they could develop it if they chose to.

Sure. And one question, what about the orchard in between these 3?

That, as I understand it, belongs to a different part of the family, and they are less interested in the easement.

Okay.

I think they might be interested in developing it, but I think they're also uncertain. I can't speak to that too well. Thank you. Those are very helpful clarifications. So conservation easements are binding legal documents setting aside land for particular purposes. All future property owners would have to operate the land as an orchard. It's a legal document that's binding in perpetuity. These easements are typically held by a nonprofit or a government agency that has the power to enforce the provisions. The cost of the easement is typically the value of the land if it were developed minus the value of the land in its less developed state as an orchard. And so you can tell that actually we don't know the cost of the easement yet, but it's going to be pricey, several million dollars. That's worth a lot of money, that property right there, if we developed it or if they developed it. Where will that funding come from? Private fundraising, property owner donation, federal tax credits and grants from nonprofits such as Utah Open Lands, which is a nonprofit organization, government agencies, or the state of Utah's McAllister Fund. That is, I'm going to discuss that right now. The McAllister Fund. So the Crandalls are seeking a grant from the McAllister Fund, which is a fund provided by the state of Utah, the Utah state legislature. that is dedicated to preserving agricultural lands and private ownership through conservation easements. This is precisely the purpose of the McAllister Fund. The Utah legislature has set aside money for this. It has for a number of years, and the Crandalls are seeking a grant from this fund to assist in raising revenues for this conservation easement. The McAllister Fund directors plan to make a site visit soon to gather information and to evaluate the application. Some details: the City of Orem would be the easement holder. That's a— it's a requirement by the McAllister Fund if they fund it that a local government entity be involved here. The McAllister Fund can only fund up to 50% of the cost. In this case, it's likely to be less because their actual fund is not that large, and they have other interests in the state to fund. Utah Open Lands and other non-governmental organizations would help fundraise, and the Crandalls are planning on making a substantial donation in kind to the easement. And one of the other requirements of the McAllister Fund is that it be open to public access, limited public access. It's going to be a working orchard, so we can't just have people wandering through at any moment. But, for example, you know, one idea is school field trips, right? Kind of a nice thing to learn about Orem's heritage or how agricultural— how farms work. This could be open to something like that. The McAllister Fund is legally required to determine local support for a conservation easement through a public hearing followed by a city resolution of support. And so our question today is fairly simple: does the City of Orem support the Crandalls in putting a perpetual agricultural conservation easement on their property?

If I may add one clarification or oversight that I think wasn't in the presentation is that the easement would be held by the city, but that does not necessarily mean that we have to, as a city, contribute to the acquisition of the easement. Hence the other funding sources that they're pursuing. Certainly, that could be a request from the applicants, but that would be a policy decision by this, this body. Another factor in holding the easement is that it doesn't necessarily oblige you, the city, to do anything other than have an obligation to enforce the provisions of the easement should there be a breach, or at least an investigation if there's a perceived breach in that agreement. which the state would ask us to do to ensure the ongoing, ongoing execution of the easement in years from now. If that was not to be enforced, that, that's something they're looking that the city would commit to as part of the easement.

Okay, Councilor McDonald, you have a question?

First of all, I think it's a benefit to the community to have some green space left, but it also appears that the city might incur some expenses, legal fees, etc., in the future. Is there funds set up to help the city offset those expenses should they occur, or how do we— is that— are we binding future councils to have expenses that we can't foresee at this point?

So the expectation of the property owner is that the provisions of this easement are perpetual. And that's also a requirement of the McAllister Fund, that, that expectation would be perpetual. In the case that an enforcement provision would occur, would— is if the current property owner or a successor of the property reneges or just fails to properly execute the provisions of the easement, meaning that it remains a working orchard in perpetuity. perpetuity. The legal costs— yeah, certainly there could be legal costs involved if the city felt there was inaction by the property owner. But again, this is a good faith agreement at this point, and, and I don't know if any agreement we enter into could be— could incur future legal costs. I suppose that's the answer.

Sure, although the Crandalls are getting the current benefit. And the city is getting a side benefit. I'm not arguing that, but future generations from now say, hey, it's not just— I don't care if my great-grandfather did get money. This work in this farm just isn't worth it to me. So it goes to, you know, disarray, and it is an eyesore in the community, and the city would have some responsibilities here. And I don't know how big that could be, and I don't know what we're committing a future city council to.

And I don't think the city's committing to anything at this point.

Well, you just said we'd have to support—

Well, if you, if you do. So what this— where we're at in the process, where Mr. Hawkins would be in the process, is making an application to the state for the use of McAllister funds. And that application would allow them to go continue to go through the evaluation cycle with the state.

At—

and so at this point, it's just part of the review process with the state. If the city and the— if the council fund is approved and the additional funding is secured that this easement could be obtained, at that point the city would have to make a decision to actually accept the easement on their— so this is part of the evaluation process. A resolution of support saying, yep, we think you should continue to consider this. But we're not committing to anything until actual funding is secured and the state has approved that funding and the easement is prepared to be signed over to the city. At that point, you would commit.

Hey, Councilmember Spencer has a question.

So the conservation easement, so that can never be broken after it's set up? It's forever?

My understanding is it can be, but it's costly. Uh, so let's say that in the future the City of Orem decides, yes, we want to develop that property, and there is a developer who comes in and says, yeah, we want that, and whoever owns the property wants to get rid of the easement. The developer would have to repay the costs to the McAllister Fund, uh, but it is possible.

From what the McAllister Fund gave, the 50%, or—

For whatever McAllister Fund gave, yeah. And presumably all the people who donated money that's gone.

At least—

so it's very hard to— it's very hard to break, but it is possible.

If I may, uh, for example, I'm familiar with conservation easements and road alignments. As obviously this area has expanded, you've actually seen jurisdictions and UDOT actually work around these conservation easements because they are so challenging to work through. So if you are looking to expand a road, you have seen roads like the Vineyard Connector and other facilities— Pioneer Crossing, another one— where they actually have shifted the alignment of the road around conservation easements to accommodate essentially not having to work with them. So, you know, they are very difficult to work with. One of the concerns the city would have is obviously, prospectively, we have some concerns relative to utilities, to transportations, and the acquisition of right-of-way potentially in the future. That all comes into play as part of this conversation. And so in bringing this to you tonight, our suggestion was, are you comfortable with us exploring this going forward? If, if you weren't willing at the onset to have this conversation, then it kind of saves us the, the effort of having to go through and move through this channel in hopes of, of making some of this a reality. But there are some very tight restrictions that are tied to these easements. That doesn't mean that it's not appropriate to adopt the easement, but once you adopt it, there are very, very limited opportunities for you to break that commitment.

Okay, Councilmember Pedersen has a question.

So, so we honored Tim Crandall this last summer. I think Tim and his wife are 2 of the gems in this community, their family. And could you do some bullet points for me and just say what's in it for the Crandalls and what's in it for the city? Could you just hit me with 3 or 4, both, you know, the negative for the city and the positive for the city, negative for the Crandalls and positives for Crandalls?

Absolutely. Positive for the city is a memorial of our heritage and an ability to educate schoolchildren and others on the importance of agricultural lands and where our food comes from, and continued green space in the heart of a thriving metropolitan area. Cost to the city, as Jamie just articulated, I would say. The benefit to the Crandalls, keeping family heritage, kind of a similar thing. It's sort of just a point of pride with their family that they've been operating an orchard here for 150 years. And they do have children and grandchildren. In fact, they have an interested buyer in Tim and Natalie's son. and, uh, and, and, uh, who want to keep this going. Um, and this helps them keep it going by, uh, providing some funding to, uh, upgrade facilities and ensuring that, uh, they can continue this. Um, cost to the Crandalls? Um, it does tie their hands. They could eventually sell this property for 20 years from now, even more money. So they are incurring a cost here.

Tax-wise, is there a benefit to the Crandalls currently?

I don't know much about the tax situation here.

I mean, I think if they were to participate in that difference of the value of the undeveloped land versus the value of the developed land, then yes, they would receive tax.

You save property tax money.

Yeah.

There are federal tax credits for people that donate properties to open space easements, and those are based upon the valuation of the donation, but they're significant and they can be paid over a 15-year period to the property owner. That's one way that a property owner can receive compensation for their donation. in-kind from the federal government for these grants.

Thanks.

So, question, you had mentioned that the Crandalls would give some in-kind donation to the city on this. So does that mean that then we become titleholder to some of the land?

No, what I meant was that, for example, let's say the cost of the easement winds up to be $10 million, just to pick a round figure. The Crandalls might say, we'll donate $1 million of that, and so we only need $9 million from the various other funding sources.

And where does that money go once it's collected?

It goes into the— I mean, the Crandalls are selling their right to develop essentially. So they get—

So they receive the money?

Yeah.

And they still hold title.

They will hold—

they'll continue to hold title to the property, but they will relinquish all the development rights.

Right.

But they'll receive this money in lieu of relinquishing the development rights.

Yes, they receive money. They are selling their development rights. Yes.

Okay.

They are selling their development rights. They receive the money.

Yes. That's a better way to put it, is they're selling their development rights.

Yes.

Can't be developed, but they still own title and receive the money.

Yes, that is correct.

But they're selling their development rights at present dollar.

I understand.

As compared to future opportunities to develop. So, the idea is that this property would appreciate over time, but they're making a conscious decision to sell it.

Well, anytime you sell property at present day, the price is going to be different than what it would be in the future.

So, right.

And Councilmember Sumner, you have a question?

Yeah, I was just wondering, do we have any plans in the future to widen Center Street there, or 8th East, is it?

Yeah.

Yeah, I mean, obviously we have a, we have a master transportation plan, and one of the questions we would need to look at is how does this request overlay with our future transportation needs. And, and so yeah, I would anticipate that that would be part of the review and part of the discussion.

There's—

Because if, for example, we can't— if we need to, for example, expand the roadway and we have an easement on one side of the roadway, then obviously the full responsibility of expansion would rest across, you know, on the other side of the right. Yeah. So yeah, that, that would be a concern.

Thank you.

So I would, I would be in favor of exploring this. I don't know what the rest of the council feels, but if they're comfortable with it, then we could move forward. Anybody want to tell me their thoughts?

I'd love to explore it.

Jeff?

I would be in favor of looking into this.

So, Jamie, is there a cost to explore? I mean, is there a certain amount of money that it's going to cost us to explore, or just cost of doing business?

Or really what it requires of you is your endorsement to move the process forward, and then that responsibility I think would primarily rest on the Crandall family.

And then of course there'd be some staff time associated with an endorsement, but not a commitment, given these other concerns we have about widening roads.

And okay, so I'm fine with moving forward.

Yeah, with the exploration. Yes.

So my understanding is you would require something formally by resolution of the City Council.

The McAllister Fund requires a formal statement of support without a commitment.

Right.

And that would follow a public hearing.

Yeah, we need to have a public hearing.

So at a future council meeting, correct, we bring that up. Okay. I think we're in favor of supporting it.

Mayor, I'm, I'm comfortable moving forward with it. I think we get the complaint that we don't have orchards anymore, and the green space is some reason I think is worth pursuing.

It's nice to keep a few orchards in the city, so it would be lovely. All right, well, thank you. Appreciate it.

Thank you. Appreciate your attention. Thank you.

We'll now go on to a presentation of Orem Connected Vehicle Project. Sam Kelly is our presenter.

Yeah, if you can.

And Sam, do you want to introduce who you have with you?

Yes, uh, thanks for taking the time. I have with me today Blaine Leonard. He is with UDOT and he has a presentation on the Enclave Project. Which is the connected vehicle project that we are piloting with UDOT here in the City of Orem. It's a project where we will have connected vehicles, those being emergency vehicles, as well as some maintenance vehicles as well.

What does a connected vehicle mean?

I'm gonna let— I'm not gonna steal Blaine's thunder. I'll let him go ahead.

You're gonna drive 2 vehicles down the road that are connected to each other?

Yeah, they're gonna be in tandem. We're gonna hook up together.

Yeah, sidecar.

But you can't hook up with Councilman Lamson, he drives too slow.

He has been known to get a ticket for going below the speed limit.

I believe it.

Ladies and gentlemen of the City Council, thank you very much for taking a few minutes here today. You've been having a fabulous discussion about preserving the past in the past few minutes. I'd like to cast your mind forward a little bit into the future and talk a little bit about an opportunity that we're working on with your city, the City of Orem, to look into the future. Again, I'm Blaine Leonard. I'm UDOT's Transportation Technology Engineer. My job at UDOT is to look at, explore, and implement technologies that can help us improve traffic, specifically automated and connected vehicles. We hear a lot of press about automated vehicles, vehicles that can drive themselves, this and that. We don't hear a lot of press about what we call connected vehicle technology. And so I'd like to introduce you to that just a little bit. and then talk about what we're proposing to do here in Orem. The idea of a connected vehicle is a vehicle that wirelessly communicates with other vehicles and with the infrastructure and potentially with other travelers— pedestrians, bicyclists, etc. It's a wireless system, and the idea here is to provide better information into the cockpit of the vehicle for the driver, whether that be human today or machine later, but for the driver to have better information about things the driver specifically can't see. Activities going on with a car that's 4 vehicles in front of you or around a corner that you can't see, and this provides— excuse me— that kind of information to help the vehicle move on. The idea here is focused on safety. We believe that since most crashes have an element of human error in them. If we can help the driver with better information and better visibility about what's going on, we can help reduce those kinds of crashes. We can also, as I'll talk about in a minute, facilitate quicker response time to crashes that do occur and to improve mobility. And so that's really sort of the premise here. Basically, in this kind of a system, the car has on it a small wireless radio that's on a particular dedicated spectrum, and it communicates with the environment around it. It basically sends little bits of data out of the car to other cars or to the roadside infrastructure or other travelers that talk about what the car is doing. We call that the basic safety message. So for instance, the vehicle may The vehicle may say, I've just engaged my brakes. Well, if we see a lot of vehicles in one area at one particular moment engage their brakes, we know something's going on. Is there a crash? Is there debris in the road? Is there some other kind of an event? And we can start to— I say we, it's the computer because it's happening really quickly— we can start to interpret what's happening. The vehicle may say, I'm losing traction. Today's modern vehicles know a lot about what's going on, and as the wheels are spinning at slightly different rotations, there's some indication that maybe the road is icy. And so we can then— that vehicle can then send that information out and tell other vehicles, hey, at this location on the road, the road's slippery, and we can try to prevent some icy road crashes. Those kinds of things.

Those are just—

Question for you.

Yeah.

So we as a city, do we receive that same information?

Yes.

Okay, and do we know whose car that is?

No, I'll talk about that in a second. Okay, I'll get to that. Yep, yep. So the vehicle on the highway may get a message that there's a crash ahead that allows the vehicle to, to make some kind of a diversion, or there's a work zone, or there's some other kind of an activity closing the road that allows the car and/or the vehicle to make some kind of a change. The vehicle, i.e., a fire engine, an ambulance, can send a message that says, my sirens are on, I'm in a hurry, I'm headed to someplace that's important, I need the traffic light to turn green for me. And the traffic light can do that. Or a transit bus could say, I'm running behind schedule, can you give me just a little extra green time on that light to try to get me back on schedule? And the traffic signal can think about whether it can do that. So those kinds of messages are possible. So getting to your question, there's 2 elements to these messages that are important. The first side is the security side. These little bits of messages that are sent back and forth are authenticated through some computer systems that are very similar to what you use and I use when I go online and buy something with my credit card. That credit card information you're sending through the ether to the company on the other end is secured with these little security credentials that make sure when they're received on the other end that the message is authentic and it came from a trustworthy source, that it's an authorized message, it wasn't fabricated by some bad actor, and that it hasn't been tampered with along the way. So we've got that part built in. We call it security credentialing. But secondly, the messages that the cars send out are private. So when the car sends out a little message and says, I'm at this location, I'm going this direction, this is my speed, my windshield wipers are on, the temperature is this, my brakes have just been applied, that message has no information about the vehicle. No make, model, color, VIN plate number, driver identification. So nothing about the vehicle except its length.

Question there. So if you have an emergency vehicle coming to the site, and he needs to know where the danger is, then you're not giving him that information.

Have you seen my slides in advance?

I haven't.

As I'll mention in a minute, in the case of vehicles we're giving priority, we have to tell the traffic signal what kind of vehicle it is. So in that particular case, we'll say, I'm a fire engine, or I'm an emergency response vehicle, and we have the option to also say in that message, I'm vehicle number E27. So if you in the city vehicles have designations like that, we can put that in there so the traffic signal knows this isn't the mayor asking for a green light, this is the fire engine asking for a green light, and I'm going to give them a green light because they're not going to give it to them.

But I mean, if, if a vehicle's in the intersection and they're in trouble, there's a fire on board, and the emergency vehicle comes and doesn't know which one Has the fire on board, how do they find that out?

Oh, no, that's a good question. That'll happen just like today when the, when the fire group shows up, they'll go, well, that car's on fire. So they're not getting information about that specifically about the vehicle other than the location. So they would get a location and say there's been a crash here and they can show up. We're just gonna have to rely on the firemen to say, well, the crash is right there because I can see it. Yeah, that, that specific information isn't there. Let me back up to the big picture here just for a second. We've been deploying— we, UDOT, have been deploying this technology in Utah since about 2015, for about 5 or 6 years. This technology was invented in 1999. It was really sort of matured to the point where somebody could use it until about 2010. We started exploring it in the late 2000s, 2008, and started deploying it at about 2015 with our first operational corridor on Redwood Road in Salt Lake. in 2017. And the blue dots you see on this chart are the original deployments we made in Salt Lake County. The orange dots going up I-80 in the Park City area were ones that were deployed last year. The blue dots next door here is the UVX line, the UTA UVX line that runs from the Frontrunner station up into downtown Provo. And, and that was deployed in 2018. So that bus system has the ability to ask the traffic signals for a little extra green time when it's behind schedule. And so that's what we've been using this system for, for the past couple of years— bus priority, snowplow preemption. We haven't done emergency vehicle preemption yet. We've been using this on our snowplows to say if they're actually plowing, let's give them a green, let's keep them moving, let's get the snow and ice off the road. We've been doing that. And then in the last year or so, we've been developing applications to say back to— to get information from the car and to say back to the car, there's weather, there's an adverse weather condition, rain or— I'm sorry, ice or wind, or there's a curve ahead of you and you're going a little too fast for that curve, let's give you a warning. When we come into Aurum, we'll bring most of those use cases with us, plus we'll add this emergency vehicle use case. We haven't done that before. We'll start doing that here. And then as we move forward beyond this, we're going to start looking at some other safety applications around intersection safety and some other things. This is sort of a constantly evolving project for us.

So how many other cities are involved doing this with you?

Well, if you look at this map, all of the corridors we've done so far are linear. So it's all been on state roads, and it's all been sort of linear corridors. We have not yet gone to an individual city and said, let's blanket your city. And that's a good lead-in to the next slide. You're the first for that particular approach. And why did we choose to come and introduce this in Orem? Well, first of all, we know that Orem City has a good, competent, proactive traffic management system with traffic signal engineers and traffic signal engineering that's really on top of things. Since most of this equipment will be installed at traffic signals, it's important that we work with a city that's got that sort of in tow, right, has that figured out. Secondly, we know Orem is a place that's progressive and forward-thinking, and this is a game-changing technology that's evolving. We need somebody that's sort of open-minded to help work with us as we move this forward. And we've always felt that UDOT and Orem City have a good relationship. And so it just sort of was that mix. We looked at other places and kind of said, you know what, Orem makes sense for this. And so that's what brings us here.

Well, you've come to the right city. A question I have is the equipment itself. What does it look like? How much room does it take? Where is it placed? Besides putting, you know, the proper computerized equipment on the cars.

So I've got a couple of pictures here in a second where you can see that. Um, let me mention here the goals for what we're trying to achieve here. Um, the idea of doing this in a concentrated city environment as opposed to linear corridors is to really work towards a safe and livable neighborhood. We know that's important to you. We want to improve vehicle mobility with snowplows and emergency vehicles. And we want to demonstrate that this kind of technology can work in an urban environment, concentrated urban environment. We sometimes call this an enclave because it's sort of one limited area as opposed to long corridors. And this is how we see being able to do this. So the plan here would be to deploy this equipment on essentially all of your traffic, your signalized intersections. We've identified 52 intersections. It's not all of them, but pretty close, and a couple of places that aren't signalized intersections. And here's what that instrument looks like on the traffic signal pole. You've got the pole that comes up, and then you've got the traffic signal arm that comes out. Up on that pole, we put that little bar that sticks out about— I think it's about 18 inches. And we've got that radio out on the end. The radio is about the size of my clipboard. And we call that a roadside unit, and that would be out there. And then we go to the vehicles, and we've identified about 100 vehicles. 20 of those would be emergency vehicles— fire department vehicles, ambulances, and snowplows. And then the other 80 would be a mix of Orem City vehicles— utility trucks, administrative vehicles, traffic department vehicles— and some UDOT Region 3 vehicles. And we install in the vehicle, we use professional vehicle installers. They come in and put the onboard unit, which is a little smaller than this clipboard, up underneath the dashboard. They connect it into the vehicle CAN bus to get data out of the vehicle. And when they're done, what you will see is a little shark fin antenna on the roof. And everything else will be hidden behind the dashboard and concealed. in the vehicle because the professional installers kind of do it that way. In some of the vehicles, we may end up putting some kind of a display unit on the dashboard so the driver can get the information back. We might not do that with all vehicles up front, but there would also be that element.

So, Jamie, what are your thoughts as staff on this?

So obviously staff is supportive of this. We were approached by UDOT a number of months ago and began exploring this use of this technology. We think prospectively this is important for us as we continue to grow into an urban environment, especially for our public safety services, for snow removal services, and for essentially servicing our customers. We see this as an enhancement to our levels of service and our ability to meet the needs of our customers. And do it with you know, technology rather than just manpower.

So say this is successful in Orem and you'd like to try it out with regular residents' cars. How does that happen? And what happens if a lot of residents don't want to do it?

So we haven't given real serious consideration to sort of getting into public into private residence cars yet. I've got colleagues in Florida and New York who have done that. And what they've done is they've just sort of put an invitation out and said, here's the system, here's the product, here's what it looks like. If you would like to volunteer to bring your car in, we'll, we'll install this in your car. And, and you can kind of go your merry way. It doesn't matter that everybody doesn't do this. It's only those who choose to. Now, that being said, Ford has told us, has publicly announced, that by the end of 2022 or 2023, there's some regulatory things messing around there, they'll start putting this kind of equipment on every one of their new vehicles. So this would be standard equipment. That's what we're— that's really the long game plan here for us, is when vehicle manufacturers start putting these communications devices on all of their vehicles, then we'll start getting all kinds of data and be able to push all kinds of information back. And We right now have a little project going on up near Park City where we're working with Ford and GM and Nissan, who are 3 of the automakers that are very interested, on perfecting this system and making sure that the data we're sending from the roadside gets into their cars in the right way, in a way that's useful for them and they can trust. So that's kind of evolving a little bit, but that, that could be a future step.

And have the results come back that you're seeing a 10 or 20% reduction in accidents that could have occurred, but due to this information, they were delayed or stopped or whatever?

So half a dozen years ago, the USDOT did a bunch of studies in Michigan, and their conclusion was that 83% of all non-impaired crashes could be mitigated. And there's a couple of keywords in there. And so there's, there's sort of proof in the demonstration that it's possible. We haven't seen measurable results in crashes yet because we've been mostly focusing on bus priority and snowplow preemption, right? So that hasn't been something we've been able to measure. What we have seen is an improvement with UTA's bus lines in Salt Lake County an improvement in their on-time performance. So we've been trying to measure that. Part of the problem we have is we don't yet have enough vehicles equipped to really give us enough data to do really detailed evaluation of some of the data. We've got a couple of guys at BYU that have been working on that with us, trying to parse that data.

But— To some degree, you see some of this technology in the consumer world, you know, Google Maps, Waze, some of these, these tools and resources that we take advantage of, some of what's driving it are some of these kind of same ideas, you know, same ideas when you're trying to, for example, get home from a, for example, a football game at 1 o'clock in the morning. You pull up your Google Maps and you look at the street network to see, okay, what are the busiest streets? And what can I do to get around them?

And, and as we get more and more vehicles equipped and are able to get that kind of data during the football game exit, and our traffic control people can say, well, here's some issues, here's some issues, let's move some traffic around, that's just going to give us a lot more data to be able to work with.

So we've talked about in the past trying to help route traffic throughout the city, maybe on Roads that are not as heavily used as other roads. So you have some main corridors, but other roads parallel to that are wide open. And if people would start to move some of their traffic over there, traffic would flow much better, much smoother. I could see this being a real help towards that.

So at some point in the future, yes, yes, that's kind of out there. That's where we're headed.

Yep.

Can you give us the— you got the red, yellow, or blue, yellow, and red. What does that say? We're all blind up here.

Yeah, yeah, and it's too small for me to read. The blue dots are the places, and there I've got a couple too many on that map. It's an older map. The blue dots are the Orem-owned— the Orem and UDOT-owned intersections inside the city of Orem that we're proposing to equip with this equipment. The red dots generally are coming down the main drag there on Highway 89. Those are being equipped under a different funding source to help UTA largely, but, but it's the same project, it's just a different funding source. The red dots are the UVX line that we installed in 2019— 2018. Does that make sense?

Yeah.

And there's been a bit of a technology shift between when we did that and what we're doing now. And, and so we've designated those different. But yeah.

Councilor McDonald has a question.

Thank you.

Does a— I assume our police and fire would have some kind of gadget in their car to, to talk to the community, to talk to the Wi-Fi area. Would individual cars need that, or would they find it out some other way?

So actually, what we are proposing here is we believe that the driver of these vehicles has enough to do.

Okay.

And so, for instance, if I'm driving the fire engine, the fire engine knows whether the light's on, the siren's on, and it knows it's going someplace. We're not going to bother the driver. If the siren's on, the radio inside is going to send a message to the traffic signal and say, please give me a green. And the driver will see that it's either green or not and keep driving. So we're really not interacting with the driver intentionally. We don't want to give them another thing to have to worry about. They've got a lot of gadgets in their car already. Now—

But do they have to put something in their vehicle?

Well, yeah, they'll have an onboard unit up under their dashboard. Now, now that I've said that, for some of these other messages— ice warning, curve speed warning, and those kinds of things— there is a need to put a message to the driver in the car. And what we've done with that in several of our vehicles to date is either a little heads-up display on the dashboard or a tablet on the dashboard, or we've replaced the screen in the dashboard itself and put the message there. In the long term, the automakers will figure out how to do that, but in these early deployments, we've got to do that ourselves. Does that make sense?

Yeah, I wonder if you can interface with some of the autos who already have, like, you know, alert or whatever, some assist. I have a couple vehicles that have that kind of thing. Yeah, the OnStar.

Yeah, not directly. This is, A, this is a different technology, uses a different broadband, a different wireless spectrum. And B, General Motors isn't going to let us into their OnStar system, for instance. They look at that as proprietary. And so what we are trying to do is talk with people like General Motors to get data out of their OnStar system directly, which would augment what we're trying to do here. But But we wouldn't interact with that directly.

Okay, keep going.

Just a last couple of points. We are— we have been working with Orem City staff and will continue to work very closely with Orem City staff. And as we progress through this project, which, which we are proposing will, will occur over the next 12 months or so, the deployments in the vehicles and on the roadside, we'll work very closely and they'll have input to and sort of approval authority on all the steps. But I did want to point out that as long as we're doing what we're specifically proposing, we've got funding to do that. So other than staff involvement, there's no monetary impact to the city unless the city says, well, we'd like to do this over here that's not part of your plan, we'd like to do these extra vehicles, and we'll entertain that. But we don't have funding for that, but we've got funding for the program we're proposing. And that's, that's really the end of the slides.

So do we need approval from the council for moving forward, or are you just bringing this to us for information?

This, this is just coming to you for information. Obviously, it's not a budget appropriation that's required. It's a relationship that UDOT approached us with. We believe that there's merit to it, but we just also wanted you to be mindful of it and aware of that we're proceeding in this direction.

Sounds like a good program.

We hope so.

We appreciate you, Dot.

And we're excited to work with Orem. We appreciate Orem being willing.

You bet. Well, thank you.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

We'll now move on to our next presentation, which is the Farley property water tank discussion, and Sam Kelly and Keith Larson, our presenters.

Maybe if I just may add something there.

Sure.

One of the other advantages we see to partnering with UDOT and this technology is some of our existing technology that helps facilitate, for example, signal preemption for fire trucks and things like that is aging or has come to the point where it's no longer operational. So this gives us an opportunity to replace aging or non-functioning technology with new technology that we think is a great benefit to, to our Public Safety Department. So some of you might have heard of the Opticom system that we've had in the past, and we have sensors up on signal masts currently that allow fire engines and such to preempt signals as they go through intersections. Not all of our signals are set up To accommodate that Opticom system, and a number of them have outdated infrastructure, outdated technology, where it doesn't work to the degree that we need it to. So there's also a cost advantage to us to partnering with UDOT and getting this new technology to replace existing and sometimes non-functioning technology that we have in place.

Sure. All right, Sam, we'll turn the time over to you.

Thanks for your time. We have Keith Larson here with Bowen Collins, and we are here to present an option we have to have the, the 10 million gallon tank at the Farley property at an at-grade type scenario. So I'll turn the time over to Keith so he can present that.

Yeah, so just in terms of what our goal in being here today is, we're preparing for a a community meeting, a public outreach open house coming up here at the end of September, currently tentatively scheduled for September 29th, pending our discussion today. So the goal is to get some of your input on the concepts that we have and make sure we're okay to proceed with that. So with that in mind, just a quick progress report of where we're at right now. We've been working closely with city staff to develop design criteria for this tank and associated pump station and well. The details of those facilities are shown there. I'll note that the pump station capacity, that 17,000 GPM, gallons per minute, that's at build-out. That won't all go in immediately, but that information's there. We've also completed some initial public outreach, delivering information. And talking to residents within a 1,000-foot radius of the property. So that has been completed, gathering initial information, and as you can guess, there's a whole host of different opinions relative to, to the property and the tank, and the goal of this next meeting is to give a little more— put a little more flesh on the bones and be able to get a little more direction. We also have environmental clearance.

Keith, just a question. Are you receiving some negative public returns?

I don't know that I would necessarily characterize things as negative, but there's very different opinions. For example, some residents would like to see the property not have access, basically just fence it off and keep it as a tank site. Don't create any traffic on the site next to residential properties. Other residents have indicated that they would prefer to have access to the site. They like the idea of a walking trail to be able to use the property. So they're obviously equally valid opinions, but they're diametrically opposed to each other. And so that's— That's the kinds of things that we're seeing.

Okay.

We have environmental clearance scheduled for next week and geotechnical drilling for September 29th. And then we've been exploring a lot of design concepts over the last month and a half or so. So as mentioned, our next step is to have the public meeting, and our goal today is to kind of receive your, your blessing, your okay on taking these initial concepts to the public. So with that, anytime that you're designing a facility, you're going to have some competing priorities. And so a couple of the things that we are trying to weigh and balance are the appearance and the public acceptance of the tank. How much usable park space do we have around the tank, or do we have any at all? Constructability issues are important, cost. System operations— how does this tank operate relative to the, the water system? That's its primary function, so we've got to make sure that is accomplished. Maintenance, both of the tank itself and the property, is important. And then currently city code has a limitation to keep any tanks at 4 feet above grade at a maximum, and so that is The current code.

At any grade?

If the property slopes, you have to be 4 feet at either end?

So the way I understand the code is written, and maybe I can get some help from the city, is that it's 4 feet above the back of curb for the average elevation along the property. And so what we're going to look at here is some concepts that look at 4 feet above the lowest spot, and we'll look at that here in just a second. So one of the things that we did was initially we wanted to stick within that city code, and so we have identified a concept that focuses strictly on keeping that down low below that 4 feet. So With that in mind, what are some of the design challenges associated with the tank site and this particular tank site? Number one, there's really no space for parking currently, and so there's concerns about traffic or people trying to access the site. So we got to think about that, what we're going to do with that. We have limited options for the use of the top of the tank, so First and foremost, this is a water— a potable water storage tank, and so having water ponded on top of the tank is something that we don't want to have happen for water quality and sanitation reasons. And so we really can't do any kind of deep-rooted vegetation, which means no trees. We can We also need to kind of limit our irrigation on top of that, so we can do some sort of plantings, but long-term irrigation would not be recommended. So that's a challenge. The size of the tank— in order to fit 10 million gallons, we're going to be using about 50% of the available property. So that's just— it's a very large tank footprint on the site. Visual openness is a challenge with this site. It has historically been an orchard which has 20-foot-tall trees that kind of provide a visual barrier from the residents to 4th South and other areas. And so when we put the tank in, that's a concern, is if we open this up, does that visual openness become a challenge? And then finally, uncertainty of future property use. And what I mean there is the specifically the, the, the Farley property that is not— has not yet been purchased by the city. How that gets used in the future is unknown at this time. And so we want to preserve flexibility to be able to meet the future needs of the city. So with that said, what we've done is we've come up with a concept to try to address that. And so we'll look at it here real quick, but to address each of these issues, we've done our best by doing the following things. We've designed this as— or, and it's not even designed, this is a concept. I want to really emphasize that this is just a concept for public feedback and council feedback as well. But the concept would be to use this as a passive park with focusing on exterior walking path and quiet natural space. The top of the tank would be decorated with native grasses, perennials, and shrubs that could have some initial irrigation and perhaps some additional drip irrigation, but not broad fertilization and irrigation, and also gravel mulch. We would use a number of trees outside the tank footprint But then just limited on limited irrigation and stuff on top of the tank. On the— for the relative to the size, we would focus on that exterior trail and making that as attractive as possible from a landscaping point. But then you'll see our concept also has some additional historic features and points of interest that we've put in. put up on top of the tank to try to break up that large space. And then we've also used multiple materials to soften our edges, some trees for screening to kind of cut down that visual openness a little bit. And then you'll see we've also focused most of our features on the west side of the tank so that the east side of the tank has some room for repurposing in the future if needed associated with that property. So with that said, let's go ahead and unveil the concept here. Yeah, let's do it, let's do it. Okay. So a little difficult on this side, but hopefully you can see it on your screen. As mentioned, well, I'll just point out the future— Future park concept that could be used for the, for the Farley property later. But if we go to the next slide, Sam.

There we go.

Just the, the key issues that I identified. We have the walking path, natural space around the exterior. We have a mixture of native grasses, shrubs scattered throughout. The concept would be to have some additional historic features, points of interest. Small trellis pergola shade type structures to break up the top of that tank. Put multiple materials— you see that we have some gravel, different rock, some native plantings around the exterior. And then on the east side, we've kept any permanent structures off of that just in case there needs to be repurpose for— let's just say we wanted to put a playground on there in the future in association with a park or something. So at least that open area.

Sorry, question for you. So on the top of the tank, there would be no open or visible steel? It would all be covered with something?

Pretty much. You'll notice there's a couple little squares that are vents, access into the tank.

These are small, but I mean the actual flat steel.

But yeah, there is no— right now the plan is that this would be 100% buried, no visual to the concrete or structural steel.

Probably to reiterate too, it's going to be a concrete tank, Mayor. It's not going to be a steel tank like our $3.5 million. Sorry, probably a post-tensioned or prestressed Concrete type tank.

Okay, good.

Tom?

Thank you. The dotted line is, is the circumference of the tank, is that correct?

Yes, the tank is the— it's one of those dotted black lines there. Those are actually contours, but your contour is not quite—

oh, it's a little more oval than straight round, is that right? Or—

yeah, so what we've tried to do is instead of having a very visible circular tank. We've tried to grade it just a little bit to try to soften those edges.

And when you, um, you talk about some plants on top, I understand fertilizer and concrete don't get along real well. Uh, there'll be limited fertilizer or no fertilizer on top. Could you help us with that?

I would suggest that these are native plants with basically no fertilizer.

Yeah, may need some to get it started, but then nothing.

Correct.

Okay.

This is Debbie. So there won't be a fence preventing people from being on top of the tank?

So this current concept does not show a fence. That's, that's correct.

Okay, I know that I've, I've looked at the Sago Lily Gardens up in Sandy, and they did have a fence around the tank, even though they had walking paths. I'm wondering if there's advantage to— will there be paths across it? Looks like maybe across the middle. Is there any concern about having people on top of it?

Yeah, so that you bring up a great question, and there's kind of a— I mean, there's a different way to approach this depending on what you want to do. One is that you keep it low, as shown here, and then you— that allows you to access the top for Whatever purposes you want to put on there. But what that does mean is that means that you now have to maintain the top. So even though it's mostly gravel, you still have the native areas and things like that. And maybe you have 16-year-olds who like to throw rocks like mine does, picking up rocks and things like that. So, so, but you have access to the top. The alternative would be to limit access there, and then you could potentially— you wouldn't need some of the landscaping and some of the points of interest. Obviously those wouldn't be on there. In that case, you might want to raise this up a little bit to bring it out of the visual. Instead of looking down on it, to bring it up a little bit out of the visual. And then that would allow you— you would want to fence that off and limit access. So that is an option that, to be honest, I think that's something that we would like to talk to the community about, but that would require a change in your current code to allow that to come up a little bit.

So, Keith, on the other pros and cons of having it Submerged? I mean, with our— the way our connectors are?

Absolutely. So I want to just talk about that really briefly. I want to make sure you understand that we've, we've met what the current city code is, but pushing the tank down into the ground costs about $500,000 a foot. So right now we're, we're at 4 feet above the bottom corner, conservatively within your code. If we could come up another 4 feet, for example, to about 8 feet above, we could save in the neighborhood of $1.5 million. I can't— I'll go into any of the engineering you want. But bringing it up does allow us to save. If we push down even further, that again adds cost to go, to go down.

And I think to clarify too, we are pretty close to being at grade with the back of sidewalk up at the northwest or northeast corner. I know it's kind of hard, hard to tell on that diagram where the contours are, but regardless, we're pretty close to at grade there. But at the southwest corner, we will always be partially out of the ground. So I mean, that's where we're about 4 feet out. We'd have to slope up to go up and then go across the tank. So I guess to clarify, a portion of the tank will always be kind of mounded. Now, next to the road, you may not see that, even though we are going to go out to the middle because we're going to have to build this so water sheds off of it. But to think that this tank will be flat and match what's there, it's not going to happen because Farley's parcel is in a hole. You go out there, that southwest corner, it's, it's lower than, than the rest of it. So there is going to be a challenge, and that's why we're going to develop these concepts, because come September 29th, these homes in the back will be lower than what's out there now because they are lower than 4 South the way it is right now, just the way the geography is. So to help us get up out of the ground is going to help on an engineering side, but there are some other things that we're looking into as far as what is the impact to the neighborhood.

And we don't want to create drainage problems from us into the neighbors' yards. Right. Question, you talk about it costs, you know, half a million dollars per foot difference, but if you're 4 feet up, can you not just ramp up some dirt on a slope around there rather than burying it Further underground? Yes, southwest corner.

Yeah, so, so if we can ramp up, we get the same savings by bringing it up. The challenges with cost are the depth of the pipelines coming out. And specifically, we— the state of Utah requires us to have an overflow from this tank. And if we can overflow on site, there's a lot of savings. Otherwise, we've got to run down the road until we can Catch grade daylight and be able to overflow elsewhere. I did want to make one, just one thing really clear, and I think, Mayor, you've touched on it, is in all of these concepts we are not talking about bringing the tank up out of the ground. In all the concepts, the tank would still remain buried. But whether we slide it down to 4 feet above the corner or 2 feet above the corner or 6 feet above the corner, we would, we would grade it so that it's covered.

Okay.

Mayor?

Yes. I know that—

I know this is not a destination walkway, but parking— where are the people going to park if they want to go to this walking path or whatever? There's nowhere to park.

Yeah, understood. And that's—

that's—

yeah, okay, so good, good point. A couple of things I did not point out, but the northeast corner does have the pump station, is the larger building. The well is the smaller building. And then we have been able to fit in a Small amount of parking in that area. So what does that look like? About— I can't remember, it's 9, 8 or 9 parking stalls. Yeah, and that— and this is the primary concern, is not making this a program space where we have soccer games or we have, you know, a whole bunch of traffic. That's what we can fit if we want to do it.

But you are going to have people who want to walk the property and look at it, and, you know, it will be a space for people to exercise.

So—

One, one would hope so. If we do this, that's, that's what we would be targeting. And as mentioned, some of the residents have indicated a desire to not have any access here. And that is, that is an option that you could consider.

I would hate to personally see this property in this space and not have access to it and not allow our residents to walk around and enjoy it. So I understand neighbors may want to have everything closed off so nobody's around, but I think this would be a nice open space for our residents.

Is this—

will this end up— there's an elementary school right across the street. Will this end up teachers send them over there for their playground and that kind of thing? I'm—

I wouldn't guess so, but I would imagine that elementary school children will use this path for getting to and from school. I suppose a class could come and walk around the path for exercise, and— but I don't see this being a playground destination because it's— it hasn't been proposed as designed that way. Okay, so if there's no more questions, I think what I want to make sure is that everybody's okay with us proceeding to meeting with the public and gaining additional insight. And would the council be open to us showing a couple of different elevations for resident comment, meaning higher, lower on the site?

Yeah, I think so.

Mayor, City Council, I think my biggest concern has been we have represented to the community that this is going to primarily be something that's buried. At the same time, my concern with what Keith is suggesting is, even if we pull it 4 feet above the ground, as we get to the southwest corner, we would then have a structure that would exceed, for example, the fence line of some of the neighbors. So we would have, for example, a 6-foot fence and an 8-foot tank. So I'm trying to manage, and we are trying to manage expectations, because I know you have represented that this is going to be a buried tank. But given the topography of the site, obviously the site already slopes to the west. And I'm concerned that if we represent, and we have represented, that this is going to be a quote-unquote buried facility, and then we show elevations that show a tank above a neighbor's fence line, they're not going to see that as a buried tank.

They're going to see it as—

But if we're at a 4-foot height, how do we get 8 feet?

Because of— if we start off with a 4-foot— if we start off 4 foot above the ground, above back of curb, and then we move to the south and the west to the deepest corner, then you're going to have a structure there that is— because the—

I understand what you're saying. Does that then come in at 8 feet tall at the very southwest corner?

Just to clarify, at the, at the southwest corner, it would— if you're at 4 feet at the northwest, at the southwest, you would be 6 feet above.

Okay.

You're—

so if I'm a— if I'm at a fence line of 6 feet and I'm a 6-foot person and I'm on a walking trail that goes around the site—

But does the walking trail have to be the height of the tank, or can it be the height of the ground around the tank? So in other words, lower than the tank.

It could be in, but you'd have to obviously cut into the 3-to-1 slope that you would build away from it for drainage purposes.

Currently, we show both. That outside walking trail is down at the level of the property, but we do show trails up on top of the tank, which would play to Jamie's concern.

And maybe we don't want a trail on top of the tank, so.

And that's, you know, that is— These are the balancing design concepts. Which, which is why—

so can you show it both ways when you're talking to the public?

And I thought we already had, we already had decided this.

Decided what?

That we were going to do our best to bury this into the ground.

I think, I think you're right. Um, I know, I know when Tom and I were talking to— we thought it was like 2 feet, and, uh, somebody took some stuff around to the neighbors and it was like a fence around it with 8 feet or something, and it's like That's not what we were told back in the previous meeting, so I think you need to keep it.

So yeah, so just the east side, it should be definitely—

yes, low as possible. And then as it goes out, then it's maybe 4 feet, but that's probably max.

So at current city code, it would be 4 feet in the northwest. It would be about 2 feet in the north East, and then 6 feet in the southwest, and 4 feet on the southeast.

The way it is now, if it's—

that's, that's, that's, that's how it, that's how it would—

because of the grade of the ground.

Correct. Right now we could, we could push it flush if it's— if it's 2 more feet, which is about a million bucks.

But if it's flush on this end, then you're going to be 4 feet at the lowest part.

Correct. And some challenges with drainage up at that corner. So I wouldn't, I wouldn't suggest we exactly flush, but we might be able to bring it down a little bit.

So like from 4 feet to 2, or?

Yeah, we could go from 4 feet to 2.5 or so.

And I think that's probably what you want to pitch then and see what it looks like on the end. But this picture doesn't—

we can't really see Isn't there an elevation slide?

For today, we've cut this off at this. Yeah, we just left it here.

That'd be helpful. Well, I think it would be helpful to have some options when you hold a public meeting. So, Jeff, did you have a question?

Well, my question was— Jamie's question is, what does this look like from the neighbors' from their backyard looking in, or people there looking down into their property. And so I think we've had that discussion. But the other question is the fence around the outside.

Is there—

it's probably different kinds of fence, and would we be putting a different fence up as part of this project? And perhaps maybe even— I mean, the illustration shows trees all the way around, and maybe that provide some privacy and some barrier as well.

And, and would you— could you put up a wall, like a 7-foot wall around the property?

We could. What we were anticipating putting up was similar to what we did at Westmoor, which would be a black poly coating with vinyl slats.

But for example, we have, uh, like a similar 7-foot fence behind, uh, Nissan dealership where the Golden Corral used to be and matched up, and, and that's blocked it off from the neighborhoods and done a very nice job.

So, right, right.

And we could—

and we can add that. And I think too, I guess, to everyone's point here, we can put all these together so you guys kind of have an understanding of what the cost is for that.

Sure.

So yeah, we can have an option, keep that option open. But we have, from what I had, you know, If we look at the aerials of the property to the south, they're already— a good majority, if not all of the neighbors, already have fence structures in place. And so I'm not sure we would want to ask them to tear down or to tear down the structures and then to put in additional structure up there.

No, but I'm just saying—

Or for us to put a fence structure that abuts up to the existing fence.

But if we put in a nicer facility than they have, I don't think they would mind it. And if it was one that helped to block the view or keep them private, that might be helpful as well. The other thought I had is if you have people walking on top of the tank, then they can look over whatever fences into others' yards. So we really need to look at what makes sense and what will help segregate this from the neighbors.

And I think that's why we have— that's why we had the conversation of trying to get this tank as low as it could be, and that's why you agreed that that was the best course. And that's why I'm a little confused that we're having this conversation now.

Well, I think it's— I think it's due to cost, and which has been brought up here. That it's going to be another $1.5 million, $2 million if we bury it further. So the question is—

I think you're right. I mean, I think we want to spend the money there.

We want to spend the money on a wall. I think it needs to be as low as possible, personally. Tom, did you have a comment?

Yes, I did. Obviously, the mockups will help this conversation a lot. But if I understand the dotted lines, the tank is a pretty big tank. It fills Big round around it.

Yes.

Um, I think I would be more in favor of a walking path that does not go on top of the tank, so we don't have people up 4 to 6 feet above the neighbors and being able to peer down. And we, we have some protection of whatever we put up there. I just would love to see people stay off the tank. I think Debbie mentioned earlier a fence around the tank and then a walking path outside it, which keeps us lower. This is going to be lower than any, any development might have been in this neighborhood. So I think if we can make the mockups look good, but if we keep people off the top of the tank so I'm not peering over a fence into a neighbor's yard, I think that would be a more responsible way of handling this. So is there still walking path room if we go outside around the tank?

Yeah, yeah, yes. All of that path is on the outside.

Yeah, that's what—

yeah, that's what I thought, Mayor. Thank you as well. So Anyway, the mockups will help see it when we can get a visual, and then I think if we keep people off the top, we have, we have less impact on the neighbors.

So one question would be, before you hold the neighborhood meeting and show them the sketches and the elevations, it would be nice if you actually showed that to us as a council and staff first to get our blessing on it before you go to print with it and we don't really— haven't really seen it and maybe don't agree with it. So I would request that.

Okay.

Okay.

You've seen it though, haven't you, Sam? I have.

I've looked at some, yes, and there's a little bit of a scale factor off on some of the sections. So we can polish those up and internally meet and make sure we have something.

And I think elevation-wise it'd be helpful if you had all 4 sides of this area for an elevation view.

Okay.

Mayor?

Yes.

So just a couple comments. One is I kind of agree with what Jamie's saying. We were trying to do this with as little impact on the neighborhood as possible. So I hate to see us open up a can of worms about— because what this whole conversation, we were talking 4 feet. I didn't realize that was 6 feet until Jamie commented about the southwest corner is different than the front. I mean, if I would, if I would have sat in your presentation as a neighbor, I thought, well, I guess I can live with 4 feet if I have to. But so I support that we dig the hole deeper and we don't even have this conversation as far because it just becomes more of an aggravation. The people in this neighborhood have been extremely supportive of the city. We haven't had much. I haven't heard much from people in this part of the area.

You have You haven't been listening to all the arguments on the park itself when we were going to put the tanks over there.

Hang on, Mayor, let me finish. No, that's a different neighborhood. The people in this neighborhood were very quiet. The people in the other neighborhood, you're right, we've heard a lot. So I give them credit for saying, you know what, we'll live with it as long as it's buried. And a couple other suggestions is I think a fence needs to be, you know, a beautiful black wrought iron or something like that. I think for safety reasons, I hate to see a fence that we can't see through the fence for people along that 4th South area and people along behind Arlen's, where Arlen is currently. I don't know how long Arlen's going to stay there, but for me, for safety-wise, I'd hope that we can see through the fence so it's not something that, you know, your, your wife is walking with a stroller and you can't see anything there. And then my last comment is during the summer, although there's a lot of baseball games across the street, There's, there's some nice parking at Orem Elementary right across the street, which, you know, sometimes that's pretty full, but a lot of times in the summer, that would be additional parking we could do. And there's parking along the street, people park along parallel on, on that same street for baseball games. So just a couple comments.

Okay.

And I want to add, the Snaggletooth property had a really lovely wrought iron fence that he was talking about. black. It was very attractive, and I thought— I agree with that. I would like to have it wrought iron. It may be a little more expensive, but I think long-term it looked really nice. And when we did that, it really fit nicely into the, to the, the whole landscaping.

So to clarify, Debbie, this is Sam. You're talking about the wrought iron fence that went around the tank that separated the path from accessing the top of the tank?

Correct. Yes. Yeah, and I believe— I don't know, I don't remember how high a fence it was, but I remember I looked at it and I thought it was attractive and people were not on top of the tank at all, but it, it still felt nice with the paths going around it. So maybe you can take a field trip. It was really nice.

All right, well, I think you've heard enough of our suggestions, and again, I would just ask that before you bring any elevations to the public that you bring them to us first.

Okay, so, yep.

All right, well, thank you. Appreciate it.

Thank you.

We'll now move on to a presentation of city code by Heather Shriver and Aaron McKnight. Maybe you'll shed some water on city code for us.

While Ernesto is getting us hooked up and ready to go, I just wanted to take a second and introduce to you Aaron McKnight. I don't know if any of you have had an opportunity to meet him yet. He's our newest assistant city attorney. Aaron's been with us for— with the city for 6 or 7 years.

6 and a half years.

But he was working in the Criminal Division, and we were lucky enough to get him to come over to the Civil Division in May. So this is Aaron, and I'm—

So you gave him a get-out-of-jail card free?

I had all those in my pocket.

Aaron is a— well, not a lifetime, but a very longtime resident of the city of Orem. Yes. And he still lives here. So, okay, everyone can see this. As you know, Council, periodically we go through our city council— our city ordinance— what are we calling it? Our ordinances? Our city code. And we update it. We haven't done this. We missed doing it in 2020, so this is going to be a little bit arduous to get through tonight. But we will go through it as quickly as possible for you. As you can see, we've categorized our proposed changes that we'd like you to consider enacting into 6 broad categories: general cleanup, some gender-neutral updates, some, some very simple renumbering of ordinances. The real meat to this are probably the last 3. There are usually I would say every year after the Utah State Legislature is done enacting bills, we are required to make updates and amendments to our city code. So we'll probably spend— I will probably spend the lion's share amount of time on that. Aaron is going to walk you through the transitions that are required in our code dealing with the change in nuisance enforcement from our public safety and police department to our civil code enforcement. I know we've had some presentations on that. And then we'll just quickly have some general modifications that we'll show you. So I'm going to give this to Aaron so he can scroll through this. Okay, so the first modifications are just simply cleanups of outdated terms that we've found as we've been going through the code. As you know, the Public Safety Department used to to be comprised of both the fire department and the police department. We broke those apart a number of years, and unfortunately we keep coming across references to public safety in our code. So we'll just go through these. If you— I think we'll just scroll through them. If you're concerned about any of them, please let me know.

Just go slowly through them and we can see.

Yeah, so changes in the alcohol beverages provisions, animal control provisions, business licensing. There were references to the Oregon Department of Public Safety. We've changed that to the police department. In business licensing continued, towing and parking enforcement companies, we just wanted to clarify it's police officers who enforce that and not the public safety officers. Continuing on through business licensing. Just clarifying that it's the police department who reviews application permits for races. Parking traffic enforcement. Police and fire emergency vehicles have an exemption to park in fire lanes. Clarification that it's the police department that deals with impounding vehicles. And the legislative findings related to why we have parking and towing enforcement rules here in the city, just clarifying that it's the police department's purview to deal with that. So the one amendment that we do have in this section that will have to go to the Planning Commission is a clarification of who the members of the Development Review Committee are. It used to say public safety. We're just clarifying it's a member Of the fire department and a member of the police department. Okay, general cleanup number 2. Kind of the same issue. We reorganized and renamed the administrative services department to the finance department. So these are just changes in the code to codify that modification. Temporary interim succession of city manager, you can see that. Clarification, that's the finance department that deals with water disconnection issues. I think we're gonna be a lot faster than 45 minutes.

I think so.

Okay, gender-neutral update. We have gone through our code before to try to extract any reference to specific genders. We just caught a couple more as we were going through. powers and duties of the mayor in here. Chairman of the council has been changed to chair, and we've made the same modification in the Board of Adjustment provision. Okay, this is a— 3 is just renumbering. We renumbered our code, and it requires not only— we didn't catch all of the modifications in the Public Safety Advisory Commission citations. So this modification just changes the numbering within Section 235-5 and 6 to, you know, to recognize that recodification into article— into that particular article.

Okay.

We are going to get into the updates to comply with changes in Utah law. These changes came out of the legislature probably within the last 2 to 3 years. And so we are just implementing them into our own city ordinances. If you have any specific questions, let me know. The first is an amendment to the campaign finance disclosure rules. Essentially, this modification— the state decided that it would be adequate if a candidate wanted to provide contact information that that did not include his, his or her residential address. So this amendment to 2-3-4 just takes that, puts it into our code so that we're all aware if a candidate doesn't want to use their residential as their contact, they don't have to. The next amendment to Section 2-6-5 is just a clarification that cities can issue for its elected officials, appointees, or employees fidelity bonds, or we can purchase crime and theft insurance. It used to be that the state code required just, just fidelity bonds, but the legislature decided, you know, there are other products out there that might be cheaper for cities, so, and it's essentially the same coverage. So those amendments incorporate that change in the state law. Amendment to Article 2-7, subsection 9. The state went ahead and renumbered their own procurement code, and we have specific citations in our city code to the procurement code, so these amendments just capture that recodification in the state code. Okay, the next one we added based on changes to GRAMA, a new protected class of records, and that new class, which will be found in, in subsection 39 of 226-9, are recordings, transcripts, reports, and written minutes of our closed meetings. This just clarifies and lets everybody know that if we have those, and we do have them, they are protected records. So we are just adding that. Okay, I'm going to turn the time over to Aaron to address the changes that we're proposing to the animal control ordinance.

So our animal control code provides several violations, criminal violations of the law related to animals in the city. Recently, the state legislature passed a bill that allowed— that forced cities to change their animal violations involving pets to infractions unless it involves safety issues. And so in subsection A here, there's a number of subsections of our animal— or sections of our—

Excuse me.

Yes.

What does the word infraction mean?

That's a good question. So Under the criminal law, there are varying levels of penalties. The most severe felonies, then you have your misdemeanors and infractions. In the city code, we're only allowed to have Class B misdemeanors, Class C misdemeanors, and infractions. An infraction is punishable by only a fine. Misdemeanors are punishable by fine and jail, and then of course felonies involve time in prison. And so these sections here are all being changed to where they are infractions. They fall under basically 3 categories. One is animal licensing, so someone doesn't license their animal with the city, that's it, that would be an infraction. If, if someone's animal is at large or, you know, off of their property and unleashed, essentially there's, there's a number of variations of that. that would become an infraction as opposed to a misdemeanor. And then there's also one where if an animal does its business on property that doesn't belong to its owner and it's not cleaned up, then that would be an infraction as well as opposed to a misdemeanor. Now, having said that, the state code does allow for misdemeanors in situations where it happens more than 4 or more times in a year, and we felt that was appropriate as as a prosecution team, it's very rare, very, very rare to see that many violations from the same person in a year. And so we, we left an enhancement so that if someone commits one of those infractions 4 times or more, then they're, they're looking at a misdemeanor. Subsection B relates to our code, making it a violation of the law to not provide a rabies vaccination for your animal. This is a vaccine mandate that we have. I know it's kind of a big issue right now, but we're changing it so that it is just infraction. Again, this is a fairly common thing that we see. People usually, when they realize, or, or it's brought to their attention that their dog is not vaccinated and they should have done that, they'll usually do that right away. But we have also created an enhancement in this case where if they're caught multiple times without having vaccinated their animal, it will become a misdemeanor due to the safety issues involved. Subsection C refers To our section in the animal code that refers to nuisance animals. Previously, that was a Class B misdemeanor. We felt that it would be more appropriate as a Class C misdemeanor, where other nuisances within the city are classified as Class C misdemeanors, so that, that lowers that offense a little bit. Subsection D, you'll see there is any other violation of the chapter will remain a Class B misdemeanor, so no change there for things such as dog attacking people or other animal violations that involve safety issues. Subsection E creates a mandatory minimum fine for these violations. For an infraction or Class C misdemeanor, the minimum mandatory fine is set at $100. For Class B misdemeanors, it was set at $500. The purpose for that is that previously, with, with all of these being classified as Class B misdemeanors, the judge over in our Justice Court, Judge Parkin, had them listed as mandatory appearances, which means they had to come in and see the judge and address things together with the judge and the prosecutor. Now we anticipate that these offenses that will be changed to infractions, at the very least, will be— he'll change to what's called bail forfeiture, which means they can just come into the front counter and pay their fine and move on. And this kind of sets a standard so that fines aren't done arbitrarily. The amounts that were chosen were significantly less than the recommended amounts for most infractions and Class B misdemeanors. Under the state fine schedule. And then subsection F there is just kind of creates a definition for those subsections A and B where subsequent violations can be enhanced.

Thank you, Aaron. Our next amendment is to Article 9-1, where we just adopt the state code. And this is just a clarification and notification to the public, which is required by state code, that if we are prosecuting someone for, um, an offense that could require imprisonment, we actually required to provide them a public defender. So that's that amendment. Let's see, registration required to operate an alarm business. The state code changed their numbering. We're just updating our code to reflect that numbering on the alarm system provision. Okay, this proposed amendment to Section 11-5-3, the city manager's authority, is just a catch-all provision to ensure that we have incorporated appropriately All of the city manager's authorities, emergency authorities. As you all know, those were modified significantly during the COVID pandemic. So what we wanted to do is just, just point our code to the state code to say our city manager has all of these authorities and all of these limitations that have been enacted within the last year by the Utah State Legislature. The next amendment is to Section 12-5-3, which is also in the business licensing. State code prohibits us from imposing a fee on home occupations unless those home occupations have a significant impact on the surrounding community. So this proposed amendment just codifies that limitation of the City of Orem to impose an additional fee on home occupations. And Aaron has, has done a Herculean effort in going through our towing ordinance to update it. Over the last 3 years, the state has been very busy in attempting to preempt the area of towing. So it's been a bit of an undertaking for him to do this, but I think these are really good amendments, and I'll let him run through them.

Thank you. So most of the amendments here, as Heather says, are related to just coming into compliance with state law. You'll see in subsection 3 here of our towing and parking enforcement company section, we just clarified what kind of certification it is that towing companies need to provide when they're applying for a business license with the city or registering with the city. Subsection 4 is kind of yucky looking, but basically we're not allowed to do criminal background checks on tow truck operators because they will have already had one done through the state now. And so we will— we're still requiring criminal background checks and information for that for employees who will still have access to vehicles that are towed for concerns that we have regarding them stealing items from the vehicles or whatever. And this just clarifies that we need that information for those people, but not for operators of trucks who are certified through the state. Yeah, so this is— In subsection H1 here, we're talking about— we just kind of expanded— or I'm sorry, this is a general gender-neutral change, as Heather explained, where we've been doing that as we've been going along, and that was one that we caught. Subsection 2 here talks about, again, criminal license or criminal background check not applying to people who already have licenses according to state code. And subsection 3 here, which kind of bleeds onto that second page there on the screen, you can see we, we allowed appeals regarding background checks and registrations to go to the city manager or to his designee. We wanted to give our city manager a little bit more flexibility and also allow this kind of review of an appeal to be designated to our administrative law judge in the future, if that's the direction we decide to go. This administrative law judge that we've had has been focusing just on nuisances. There's, there's been talk about expanding that to other things, and it's been really helpful in this, in, in the nuisance realm. And so we believe that kind of creating some, some flexibility there for that to become a thing for other sorts of judicial reviews would be helpful.

And that'll keep us from coming back and giving you another presentation that's as exciting as this one.

Uh, let's see here. So here we've got another in subsection 4, another gender-neutral change. Gender. Yeah. And that's it for that particular section of the towing code. There's another part later on, but kind of in the middle, just because Sequentially, number-wise, it fits in. We have a slight change to our sexually oriented business code. The state wrote a bill that criminalized certain violations regarding sexually oriented businesses that did not previously exist, and a violation of, of that code is a Class A misdemeanor. Violation of our code is a Class B misdemeanor. Cities are limited to Class B misdemeanors and below, and we can't, we can't go as high as a Class A misdemeanor. And so we just added something in there to say, hey, if there's a difference between our code and their code, well, theirs will be the A and ours will be a B, and there won't be confusion in courts with defendants claiming that they should be charged with a B rather than an A. And then back to towing. In subsection D here, you can see we just added this clause in there to be consistent with other portions of the code that require towing companies to be in compliance with our licensing code, which we addressed before. We got a couple here in subsection E of our gender-neutral Changes. Another one here in subsection 2. And quite a bit here in subsection 3. Here in subsection 3, we also added some language to allow appeals to be made to the ALJ, should we determine to go that way, by allowing the city manager or his designee to address appeals regarding the revocations of parking or parking and towing enforcement licenses. Subsection 4, same thing there, and in subsection, subsection 4 up here, same thing, allowing the ALJ to get involved, and then subsection B, we've got a gender-neutral Um, down here on our duties of companies on our towing list, uh, we, we have in the city a list of towing companies that the police can call when they need a car towed. And that can happen in a variety of situations where there's an accident, um, where a vehicle cannot be removed from the scene without a tow truck. You have situations where, um, uh, a vehicle must be towed due to a criminal violation that occurred, such as a DUI. And then you also have situations where a vehicle is being towed because maybe it's, it's, um, been parked on the street for too long illegally. And, um, when a situation comes like that comes up, our police department goes to this towing list and picks the first towing company on the list and says, hey, this tow is yours. And then that towing company comes and does it, and they're able to collect funds from that. And then that towing company is moved to the bottom. Well, the police department has run into an issue where some of those, some of those tows are worth more money than others. And so for the, for the tows that are worth less money, some of the towing companies are not showing up. They're saying, hey, we're not going to do that. The code, the way it's written, we believe it is already written in such a way that if a tow company says that, they just go to the bottom of the list. But this change here makes that extra clear, just so that everybody understands what the consequence is if you decline to arrive on scene and make a tow.

Well, and this is really important because this is actually quite lucrative for towing companies. This— it's very desirable to be on this list. Because you get a lot of tows that are officer-generated.

Yeah.

Okay, and subsection E here, this is again regarding appeals for tow companies who have been removed from the towing list, and we've also made some gender-neutral changes as well as changed it so that it can be the city manager or his or the city manager's designee who can, who can do it, allowing the ALJ to potentially take over that in the future. Subsection D here is related to the signage requirements. Utah State Legislature recently passed a bill that modified that and kind of created their own requirements for signage for towing. So we just pointed to that statute and said it has to comply with that and deleted ours since the state code requires it to comply with theirs.

And it's my understanding that all of the property owners in Orem have been going through the process of updating their signage to comply with state law for the last 2 years.

Subsection E also has to do with that change in the state law where we're just making it explicit you can't tow unless you have appropriate signage. Subsection F, again, we're requiring towing companies to comply with this section as well as state law.

And then—

In subsection H, towing or booting fees used to be calculated one way. They've now been changed to be calculated a different way under the state code, and so we've just made a change to reflect that.

Okay, the next proposed amendment that will need to go to the Planning Commission is found in 22-1-3. This just clarifies that Under state code, code enforcement personnel are not authorized to issue criminal citations anymore. So we have just extracted the misdemeanor classification there and put in non-criminal citations. They can still issue non-criminal citations, but no more will they be issuing misdemeanors. So we're back to you for nuisance.

Okay, so recently we've made a transition with our neighborhood preservation unit to a neighborhood improvement team. I don't know how much you know about this already, but essentially we had a team of police officers who were assigned to go around and, and basically respond to calls that someone isn't watering their lawn or that there's too many weeds, there's an accumulation of junk. And we've transferred those responsibilities from the police department to the city manager's office and created a neighborhood improvement team with civilian ordinance code enforcement officers who go out and do that. That obviously allows our police officers to do things that are more suited to their, to their skills, abilities, and certifications. And, and we have these, these other civilian ordinance enforcement officers who, who can, can focus on this and really do a good job on it. And so in our, in our code regarding health and sanitation nuisances specifically, there's a lot of references to the police department and to police officers, and we've basically just gone through and made a lot of changes to allow that to align with the organizational changes that we've made. So one change that is not included in that NPU to NIT transition is in 11.1.3. We just added state authority for us being able to define nuisances. to more solidly firm up the nuisance enforcement that we're doing. Here on this page, you can see we— these are all changes related to the transition. And all of these changes are also related to that, changing it from police chief to assigned enforcement official, changing it from police chief to neighborhood improvement team. We've changed the ability to perform emergency abatement. It used to— that power used to belong with the police chief. That's now been transferred over to the city manager or his designee. And so another significant change. And then the last change that again doesn't have to do with the transition that we made to our nuisance code is this municipal inspector section. Under the state code, there, there is a statute regarding abatement of nuisances, and in order to do that, we need to appoint appoint a municipal inspector. And so this section does that. It appoints all of our civilian code enforcement officers as municipal inspectors and gives them the direction and authority to go and abate nuisances, which will help us as we work with our administrative law judge and he gives us abatement orders.

We are almost done, I promise. So changes— the proposed changes to Article 2-22 have actually already been presented to the City Council. For disciplinary issues, under state law, we are required to provide, provide our employees with an opportunity to appeal certain disciplinary issues. In the past, we have used the Employee Appeals Board, which has been made up of a group of employees, a group of membership individuals, and then a member of city management. We will be replacing that board with a hearing officer. That hearing officer will have an HR background or a law background or a human resources background. We anticipate this is going to save the city actually money because under the current form of our appeals process, we have had to hire outside counsel to represent the city. During the disciplinary process, this will remove that cost and replace it with what we're hoping is the lesser cost of a hearing officer. So we'll just flip through those modifications. Again, it's, it's just inserting hearing officer where we used to have an employee appeals board, and we did already present to the city council on that. So, Aaron, if you'll go down to 12.9.12. This modification and proposed amendment just clarifies that violations of the rental dwelling license ordinance will be treated as infractions instead of Class B misdemeanors. We thought that was a little draconian to have that done as a Class B misdemeanor if you fail to comply. The changes to tree stewardship you find in Section 13-3-6. are what you've already seen before. This allows a nuisance tree to be appealed to the ALJ instead of the city manager. Let's see, another change we found in Article 19-1, adoption of state law, was actually a reference to the 8th Circuit Court, which hasn't been in place for 10 years, so we changed that to refer to our Justice Department.

This court.

So, and the last proposed change that we have is to Section 22-14-28, garage sales. And this just clarifies and removes the garage sale sign definition that no longer exists in our sign ordinance. We actually refer to those now as accessory residential signs. And that is an amendment you'll see at a later date because because it has to go to the Planning Commission. And with that, if there are no questions, we are finished. And I will make the promise to the council that you will not see a code update until next year. So thank you so much for your time and your patience.

Thank you.

Can I just make a comment? I just want to say kudos to whoever went through and made all of those changes. I mean, having done some editing, that was a major task. And without so even a hope of a plot twist anywhere along the way.

Well, thank you, Councilman Hudson.

Tried to throw vaccine mandates in there, but—

Thank you. Well, it looks like we have a break here for a meal, and the meals are here, so maybe we could have a prayer. Brent, could we have you give a prayer over the food, please?

Our kind Eternal Heavenly Father, we're grateful for the opportunity we have together this evening as City Council and staff and members of our community. And we ask Thee to bless us with the decisions that we make will be able to help our community be a better community. And Father, please bless this food that may nourish, strengthen our body, and do the good we need. And we're thankful for all our wonderful blessings. In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Amen.

Amen. So do we walk down there? They all— okay.

Maria, you can have—

you don't just don't eat. 162 over 98.

Now, did you take—

did you take your high blood pressure medicine today? You had some, right? Okay, let me find out when Sharon's coming. We never called service drug, did we? That's the one thing I forgot to do.

Hi, you can hear.

I'm glad.

Yeah.

Will you put on your oxygen? Let me— tell me what your oxygen is at. Put that little thing on your Okay, no problem.

Thanks.

Uh-huh.

Hello?

Hey, Dad's had high blood pressure today. I've taken it 3 times. He's been as high as like 180-something over like one— I can't remember the bottom number. And he's down to like 160-something, like 115. But is that— is that— can blood pressure go high when you're trying to fight a disease, or— What's your, uh, what is your medication on your blood pressure? Can you bring me that orange sheet that Karen worked up? Hold on a second.

I'm—

I want to say valsartan, but that's maybe what I take, so let me look. Still never heard from Intermountain for Dad. Maybe he's just not sick enough.

His age qualifies him. He doesn't have to have anything else.

Really?

Yeah.

Did you talk to your doctor?

Um, I left a message with my doctor. I have not heard back. I'm gonna follow up with them. Yeah, my blood, my blood pressure has been high. Like, I just took it, 189 over 130.

I'm really high.

But I'm on 2 medications. I know I'm on— okay, here's, here's Dad's. I think Losartan, 100 milligrams, 1 pill in the morning. Atorvastatin, I don't know what that one's for.

That's cholesterol.

Okay, then he has oxybutynin.

That's for urinary.

Baby aspirin.

Okay.

B12. And then his Carpa Dopa Lopa, that's his dopamine. I know what that one is.

That's it.

Oh, so you don't have the Losartan for blood pressure?

Yeah, that's in the morning.

I think he took it.

I don't have any more.

I'm out.

Yeah, we're hoping to— Sharon's supposed to get us some. He's, he's, you know, he runs out of medication tomorrow. He only had his— brought his week, his week pill box up. So supposedly they're supposed to bring it up.

Okay.

Anything I should do? Obviously low salts. What, hydration?

Yeah. Um, just relax.

Take it easy. I— the best you can.

Um, He has been. I don't know.

I know he was having the low blood pressure before, right?

Yeah, that was kind of the opposite. And he's been pretty good, and he's been pretty good right on it. I said, we haven't taken your blood pressure for a while.

I didn't, so we just did it.

So yeah. How's, how's he been feeling otherwise today?

I know, he's right here.

Hi, how are you doing? I'm glad somebody is. Are you feeling pretty bad?

No, no, I don't, I don't feel bad.

I just kind of unsteady and I'm, I'm weak and been coughing and some of that kind of stuff.

He's not worse at all from when he first— well, I think his worst day was Friday when he was really fatigued and He's like, I, I can't even drive today, he was telling me. So I think— what are we, day 5 with you? Day 5?

Yeah.

I don't think he's getting worse. What was your oxygen? Did you just put that on?

Terry, could we get you to come forward? We're going to start up.

You're on the phone.

I know. All right, we're going to go over our agenda and for review. We're going to start out this evening with a presentation by the Library Advisory Committee. Mary Richards will bring that forward. Um, and Pete, I don't— uh, if you could bring forward in a few minutes the, uh, personal appearances, that'd be helpful. Our consent items are approval of the meeting minutes of August 9th, 2021 and August 24th, 2021. Appointments to board and commission. We have an appointment of Vanessa Sewell To the Summerfest Commission. Ann Turner to the Summerfest Commission. Does anybody here know either one of those people? Well, Steve Downs would know, but he's not here either.

So—

Mayor, did you want me to make my presentation today? I was scheduled.

Yes, but we're not to you yet.

Okay, you're just reviewing the agenda?

Yes, and then we'll come back to you.

All right, sounds good.

I'm sorry, Pete, do you know these 2? Can you speak to her character?

Well, Debbie chairs Summerfest, so she may know them. With Summerfest these last 3 years, just kind of in a volunteer role, not on the committee. Okay, she's helped mainly with the parade and with the kickoff event, so she's very familiar with the things that we do, and we're recommending that she be on the committee to help out with children's crafts on the Friday and Saturday of Summerfest.

Okay, uh, Debbie, do you know, uh, Vanessa Sewell for being appointed to Summerfest committee?

I know the name, but I don't, I don't know much about her, so I don't— but I don't have anything negative to say, so I think it's fine.

Okay, and then Debbie, also, can you speak to Liz Wolf and Ashley Mann for reappointment?

Yes, Liz Wolf did our parade this year, the grand parade, and she was outstanding. And she was going to be moving, but luckily their plans changed.

Jim, don't do anything.

And she was able to continue, so she's excellent. Ashley has been our I can't remember specifically what she's been doing, but she's been very active, and I believe she was in charge of— she was the chairman this year. She might have done the boutiques. Um, Stephen would know for sure, but she's very— both of them are very good, would do a great job, and we're grateful that they will continue.

All right, uh, is everyone on the council, uh, in agreement to appointing these people to Summerfest? Okay, then we have a resolution authorizing the mayor to sign a water supply agreement between the City of Orem, Central Utah Water Conservancy District, and the Metropolitan Water District of Orem. Everyone okay with that?

I don't know.

Those are our partners. Not sure about the guy who's signing it. Okay, let's go to our scheduled items. First is a public hearing resolution. on receiving public comment on CDBG funds. And is Kenneth Joe going to be here? Do we know when we start? Okay. The next is a public hearing ordinance amending Appendix A of the Orem City Code by enacting Standard Land Use Code small pediatric neurophysical therapy and making such use permitted in the R-7-5 zone. Enacting Section 2269, small pediatric neurophysical therapy within the R-75 zone. Jason Bench is the presenter. Jason, what can you tell us?

This is a new code that allows in the R-75— it's not specific to this location. This location, which will have a slide showing, it works well for this location, but it does open it up for other locations in the R-75 zone. But it is specific for the small pediatric neurophysical therapy.

Okay. Next one is a public hearing amending sections, portions of 221156 PD-43 Auburn Meadows zone on 2000 South Geneva Road pertaining to that zone with updated concept plans and elevations.

Jason.

So they're proposing to eliminate 40 of the adult active adult units that are within Area B, the proposed Area B. They're wanting to shift Area B and have a larger commercial location for a grocery store or some type of strip mall, which we'll show you. And that's, you know, strip retail. So they're proposing that amendment tonight.

So there isn't— I mean, is there a resident building there for resident care right now, or—

No, that's across the street. It's, it's vacant right now.

Okay.

Yeah.

All right. The next one's a resolution designating a portion of 150 North, 668 West, and 800 West as Parkside Lane and 150 North. You're the presenter. Tell us the reason why.

So Suncrest Elementary Has a name change. They're now Parkside.

They're now Parkside.

So instead of the, the Suncrest Stallions, they're now the Parkside Panthers.

Right.

The principal would like it to be named Parkside Lane rather than the Stallions. So that's, that's the only point. The 150 North will be part of that designation. So anybody that has a home on that will still have the 150 North, but it'll also be known as Parkside Lane.

Okay. Good. Thank you, Jamie. Any items you have?

Mayor, just a reminder that we have scheduled a closed-door meeting with the council after the formal council session, and we will meet in Room 107.

Okay.

For a discussion regarding litigation.

Okay. Um, hold on one second. Debbie, do you want to go ahead and tell us about your areas of responsibility?

Yes, I'd be happy to. I'm over 3 areas: Summerfest, Arts Council, and the Natural Resource Committee. I think most of us could agree that Summerfest was a welcome festival this, this summer, and I think it came off without a hitch. Some of you have read about that our carnival company that we've used in the past had some— was holding passports and having some problems with their workers, so They are not going to be doing the carnival for us, and we are going to be sending out an RFP, um, I believe very soon, and to find a new carnival company. We have a couple in mind, and we think we're going to have a good substitute. We do have the dates for next year, June 6th through the 11th of 2022, if you want to put that on your calendar, and it should be a, should be a great experience again. The Arts Council had a successful summer with Summerfest entertainment and 5 concerts at the city, city center stage there. Everything from classical rock, country folk, traditional Mexican dancing, the big band. They do have The Real Doug Lane, which will perform this Saturday, September 18th at 7 PM. So if you're not going to the football game and want a great evening, it's going to be a lovely— this was a makeup from having poor air quality in August, and they've had over 2,000 people who have, who have come and participated there at the city park. Cindy Clark has also, who's a member of the Arts Council, has participated in the review of the art-themed playground for Sierra Park, where we're going to be honoring the art of James Christensen with some fantasy fun things. So we're excited about that, and that'll be a great asset in the arts districts. Utility boxes that you have seen, um, Nate Prescott—

They look good.

Who, um, helped with this project is also going to be— he works currently in the economic development. He will also be working, um, to get some more non-city-owned boxes. And if you know Cassandra Barney, Jim Christianson's daughter, she's prepared a companion piece for her box. in Sarah Park. So we're getting ready to get that photograph so it can be applied with the vinyl. The Arts Council also has their Orem Stories, which they usually do in the winter, and this is where they— the kids are able to nominate someone and draw a picture of someone that they want to honor in Orem, and it's about the residents of Orem. So, and then it goes on display in the library. So they've been very active. The Natural Resource Committee If you heard, I talked about us going on a field trip. We did do that with all the members of the committee to Segal Lily Gardens up in Sandy and also the Conservation Gardens in West Jordan. We did a lot, took a lot of notes, and certainly want to be part of developing the heritage park over our water tank. Lots of good ideas, education things, how we would do things. So just want to let the— when we get to the point when we're serious about exactly what that park's gonna look like, please involve the Natural Resource Committee. They have great ideas and some great strengths that would help. One thing that they, that they're interested in is rain barrels for people to buy. Many cities will subsidize these rain barrels, and it's something we might want to consider. I know it's kind of a funny thing to be talking about in the drought, but some cities, if you order 100, you subsidize it by a third and sell them for $100. And I guess they're very popular in many communities and something we might want to consider for—

I would like to get more information on that.

Okay, I can talk to Darren Hawkins and he can send that to you.

Okay.

And so that's, that's what I have. 3 great committees and they're doing great work.

Well, appreciate your good service, and we had a great Summerfest this past year. Thank you and the committee for it.

You're welcome.

Okay, any other comments from anybody on the council? Go ahead, Councilman.

So I want to make a comment. I go back a few months on the Christensen property. So I want to ask Ryan and Jason that the city filed an application to put their property back to C-2 out of the edge zone. And I think I have Quite a few people on the council are okay with that.

So you guys okay with that? What their concern might be, I don't know if Jamie's prepared to discuss that, or we, or we could bring that up once you're prepared. Yeah, we're happy to do that if that's the direction from the council. Just so you're aware, we have had a conversation with the county assessor and they've represented to us that it's currently assessed as a residential zone, so it won't make any impact to their property taxes.

And that's fine. I just think that if she wants it, then I think we should go ahead and do that if she wants to go back to C-2, and that's, that's our whole thing. So if—

Okay, so is there direction from 4 then?

So Jeff, you okay with that?

I'll support that.

Yeah, I'll support it as well.

I'm good.

Okay, thank you.

Debbie?

Debbie?

Um, that's fine, that's fine.

Okay, thanks.

Thank you, Ryan. Jason.

All right, we'll have 5 minutes before we start. We'll start at 6 o'clock sharp, so anybody wants to go anywhere, hurry and be back by 5 minutes or by 6 o'clock.

I'd like to go to Maui, but yeah.

Test, test.

We would like to welcome everyone out to our City Council meeting this evening, and I would like to call this meeting to order. We are— would like to begin with a prayer to be given by Robert Murdoch, after which the Pledge of Allegiance to be given by Linda Murdoch. So Robert, if you could come up to the podium.

Oh yeah. Father in heaven, we bow our heads in gratitude. We appreciate the opportunity to gather in the capacity of this city council meeting. We're grateful for this wonderful city, Father, and we ask that thy blessings will be upon council members, staff, and employees of this wonderful city. Volunteers who assist to make this city so functional and operational and pleasant to be. We're especially grateful for law enforcement and first responders. We ask that thy blessings would be with them and their families. We're grateful for the opportunities to meet in the capacity of this government setting. To be able to discuss issues that are important to this community. We ask that thy blessings will be upon those who— residents who live here and those who visit here. We pray that the things which are discussed this evening might be understood by all, and that there will be a spirit of camaraderie and, and pleasantness as we discuss various issues this day.

Amen.

Once again, we're grateful for this community, this wonderful country, and the government that helps us function so well.

These things we say with gratitude in the name of the Savior's name, Jesus Christ.

Amen.

Amen.

Please arise. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you, Robert, for the wonderful prayer, and thank you, Linda, for the pledge. We appreciate it. We now would like to hear a presentation on the— from the Library Advisory Committee, and Mary Richards, the chair, will be our presenter.

Thank you very much. Can you hear me?

Yes. Uh-huh.

Okay. As you said, I'm the current chair of the Library Commission, but We have other commissioners that I would like to recognize: Suzanne Stratton Whitaker, Courtney Burns, and Ken Bonney. And for simplicity's sake, I'm going to be the one who is presenting this. I understand that you have a handout from the library, so I won't go over the overall library statistics since you have those, and reading them gets kind of tedious, so we'll skip those statistics. But I want to focus on some of the important things that the library has done this year. This year, as you all know, is a continuing challenge because of COVID but the library has been, at least in my opinion, quite innovative in being able to offer numerous important programs while also trying to keep the community safe. And one of the important things that they have done is the storytime program, and this is for all ages from babies, preschoolers, and whole families. They have a music and movement storytime. They have bilingual storytimes. And to keep all of the people safe, they decided to move storytime out to this stage at City Center Park this summer. And that has provided not only an open-air environment and the safety of being outside, but it has also allowed the library to reach additional people that had not been able to reach previously. Further, the Boys and Girls Club has provided thousands of lunches to children who have needed those lunches, and it has been a resounding success. The storytime will continue in the park through September, and then in the fall we'll move back into the library, into Library Hall. The summer reading program is also a very important program. The number of participants increased 41% since the depths of the difficult year of 2020. We had 2,187 participants in 447 teams. Those teams are generally families, and the storytime focused on a fairy tale. But storytime is not just reading books. The library has been incredibly innovative in doing all sorts of things to bring in people who are not necessarily readers and get them involved and comfortable coming into the library. They have take-home kits that are games and other opportunities that family can take things home and complete those things together. They had a fairy tale escape room. They had a fantasy quest event, which was an event that participants could come anytime they wanted to the library and direct their own adventure through a series of choices and decisions. They also had a care of mystical creatures, which was a partnership with Scales and Tails. We hope we didn't have any more of the alligator events that we had on television. But this was getting children to see exotic animals, and then there was a Great Scott magic show, and then finally there was the Knight Night Finale. First Knight with a K, second without a K, which was a demonstration of authentic armor, weapons, and technique. And not surprisingly, 97.9% of the participants who were surveyed were satisfied or very satisfied with their summer reading experience. One of the great things that happened this year was the dedication of the library hall, which has been an incredible asset to the community. There have been a number of important groups that have come. The Bonner family, Cantorum, the Sears Acting Up, the Delbert Anderson Trio, the Grupo Folklórico, and Donald Davis have made presentations. But the library is also open for numerous programs for the community. Meetings, training for city employees, and other uses. And I think we are all incredibly grateful to have this beautiful building in our community. One of the other things that the library does is to try to reach underserved populations, many of whom simply do not have access to any sort of Wi-Fi. So the library has partnered with Orem's Community Development Block Grant Program and the Utah State Library to receive grants to circulate T-Mobile hotspots to households who lack internet access. And since the beginning of the year, the library has provided over 75 households with free access to Wi-Fi. They can check out these devices, they can keep them for 6 weeks, and if nobody else wants them, they can renew those. And then we have the Orem Reads program, which is a wonderful idea which allows people in the community to all read the same book and then discuss it and then have numerous programs that are related to the book. So this year it is Sharon McCrum's book, The Ballad of Frankie Silver, which is the combination of a historical novel and a contemporary novel and the juxtaposition of those events. It's really a Very, very powerful book set in Appalachia in the 19th and in the 20th centuries. And as supplementary to that book, there will be quilting shows, there will be food shows, and then lastly, we will get a presentation by the author herself who will be coming and giving a reading and then talking about her work. And finally, as speaking for the library, We really appreciate our incredible community, city council, and city administration support of the library. The library is strong because of the strength of the support that we receive from all of you. And speaking for myself, I have always said that one of the ways that one can judge the health of a community is by looking at the strength of its library. And if that is the case, then Orem is in a very good spot.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mary. I just want to say that I agree with you on that. The library is a wonderful asset for our community, and it's very highly used, and we appreciate Char and the entire library staff, and we appreciate you and the board. This is a wonderful, wonderful community resource that we have, and it's interesting that every time I walk into the library There are a lot of people there, so again, we thank everybody involved.

Thank you.

Okay, let's go ahead and move on to our— yes, go ahead, Terry.

So, so question, Mary, is there ever a, uh, is it ever appropriate to say that there's a book that's not appropriate for the library, or is every book out there appropriate for a library?

Um, Well, that is— that's a very difficult question, and obviously it probably is a question that has more depth than we have time to delve into. I would say that not every book is appropriate for every person. Obviously, some books that are appropriate for adults are not going to be appropriate for young children. I think it depends on how the subject matter is treated. and how well the author has done his or her research, how well-supported things are, how well-written things are. Obviously, the library is not going to buy every single book that's published. The Library of Congress used to try to do that, but I'm not sure that they— even they can keep up with that. But there are a number of books that probably are not worth buying simply because they are not Well done, but librarians are trained in trying to assess how well the books have been have been written. They look at reviews. They look at community questions about can you get this book, and they don't necessarily order a book just because somebody wants it. They still have to go through the review process and see if this is a book. that contributes to the overall library. So I don't know if that answers your question or not, but—

Well, yes, thank you. I just, I have a comment about books for children versus books for adults. In the, in the Orem Library, 2 books I checked out, these are for 8 to 10-year-olds. So I'm going to be graphic, Mary, but these are books that are for a 10-year-old. So I guess if a 10-year-old can read it, we can talk about it. The one book shows naked men and women very graphically. So, it shows women in different proportions. It shows men standing frontal nudity with different proportions. This is for 10-year-olds. This is in the Orem Library. Also teaches young girls how to masturbate. The next page shows little boys and teaches them how to masturbate. Then it has a section about— it's pretty much pedophilia, saying if you can't do this with other people, if you can find adults, you can do it with them. Then the book shows 2 men having gay sex. It has another picture, very graphic, 2 women having, you know, gay sex and a man and woman in different positions. Is that appropriate in the children's section for a 10-year-old in the Orem Library?

From your description, I would say not. I would I would like to look at the book myself to see, to see the reaction to it. I certainly think that if you object to something like that, that you should take it up with the acquisition librarian, take it up with Charlene, bring that to people's attention and, and ask them why that book was chosen and see if there's a reason for having that.

there.

So one thing you mentioned, the American Library Association recommends both those books. So sometimes there has to be somebody, you know, there has to be an adult in the room saying this is not appropriate for a 10-year-old. Now, I'm not talking about adults. I'm talking about 10-year-olds.

Right, right. Yes, yes. And again, I haven't seen the books. So I can't really, I can't really respond to that. But I mean, certainly from your description, I would not want a 10-year-old to see that.

We do have a title review process, and we would be happy to put those books through the title process. Just let me know the titles, and I will be happy to do that.

I can't hear you.

Just give me the titles, and I'll be happy to do that, and I can get those from you anytime. We'll put through the title review process, and it will be reviewed, and then if it needs to go to the Library Advisory Commission, it will be taken to the Library Advisory Commission.

As part of a group of books that you had during the Pride Month, but these are 2 that I just noticed. There's others that are teaching that the middle section of your body is not your private part, it's your middle part, and don't listen to your pastor or your parents, you do what you want. And I mean, there's just a number, but I would hope we have Mary's group and others that are saying that's not appropriate. It's not appropriate, by the way, in Coeur d'Alene, and it's not appropriate in Pennsylvania and other places where I've talked to people and said, is this in your library? No, but it's in ours.

We do have a title review process and we are happy to, to take a look at any book that concerns anyone and make a response to them.

Well, I'd hope that the review process would catch that before the citizens have to check it out and ask about it.

We will go over that as a staff as well.

Thanks, Mary.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you, Mary. Appreciate it very much. We'll now go on to our personal appearance portion of our meeting. I'd like to just mention what it states. Time has been set aside for the public to express their ideas, concerns, and comments on items not scheduled as public hearings on the agenda. Those wishing to speak are encouraged to show respect for those who serve the city Comments should focus on issues concerning the city only, not people. Those wishing to speak should have signed in before the beginning of the meeting. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes or less and give us your name. So we'd like to start out first with Byron Taylor, after which we'd like to hear from Sam Lentz.

As stated, my name is Byron Taylor, and I do appreciate the opportunity to express one of my big concerns with Orem City, and that is apparent deficiencies in communication. On September 1st, I got this notice in the mail.

I see that on September 1st at 4:30, there's a Planning Commission meeting.

Too late for me to attend the meeting. So I think that's a very obvious deficiency that prevented me from attending a very important meeting that was very important to me.

So yesterday I thought, well, I want to be prepared for tonight's meeting.

later on in the agenda. And there's a path that tells me that I can go to aurum.org/planning and then look under current planning. I went there yesterday so I could learn everything.

Dead end.

It had folders for 2 other topics, but not for this topic. So then I called Cheryl Vargas, couldn't reach her, emailed Cheryl Vargas, didn't get a return.

That's fair.

I learned she's out of the office.

That's fair.

This was the day before, so that's— I don't have a real problem with that. However, I thought, well, I guess I'll have to drive down to Orem City and get the information.

So I walk in the planning office and present my case.

The first person there went to the same spot. No, it's not there. She tried to go various other places. Finally, she came up empty. She couldn't find it. Somebody else came up to assist her. This went on for some minutes. They couldn't find it. Finally, another person finally came up and finally found that information. Regrettably, this is not my first experience with poor communication procedures and technology in Orem City. I won't go into the others, but can you understand just a little bit my frustration as a citizen wanting to find out information and having to endure this kind of experience. I'm just— please try to work on this and make it so that we can get the information we need. Thank you very much for your time.

You bet. Thank you.

Hello, my name is Sam Lentz. Good to be with you again. Tonight, I'm simply going to read a statement to which 2,217 individuals recently signed their name in support. We stand united with the Orem Public Library's efforts to uplift our community with light and understanding. In keeping with the theme of Orem's 2021 Summerfest, This Is Where You Belong, we are proud our library staff put those words into action. Library displays frequently highlight media relevant to the current season, such as holidays, pop culture trends, scientific topics, and social issues, to name a few. While the displays contain only a small sample of the library's resources on a given topic, patrons are often inspired to study new ideas and perspectives. No other institution in our community serves this purpose for all residents the way our library does. Following Governor Cox's proclamation of June as Pride Month in Utah, the library's display on Pride offered patrons an opportunity to learn about LGBTQ topics and perspectives. While no display ever forces an individual or family to delve into the materials, this display provided a valuable resource to those interested in learning about these topics, including parents seeking age-appropriate materials to support them through uncertain conversations with their children. Depression and suicide rates in Utah are among the highest in the nation, particularly among our youth. We need to be better at cultivating a climate of inclusion At extending a hand of friendship, especially to those who feel isolated or marginalized. LGBTQ residents are among the most, most vulnerable, and we need to do more than simply tolerate our differences. To develop empathy, we must first seek to understand. Every July, Utah celebrates the pioneers who fled here to escape various forms of persecution and bigotry. With that heritage, one might expect our culture to be particularly sensitive to the persistent challenges faced by marginalized populations. For a sense of belonging, we each need to feel loved and respected. We need to feel like our unique identity is valued, even when our perspectives and opinions differ. As we consider how to respond to those who perpetuate bigotry and exclusion in our community, let us ask ourselves, am I also casting stones of hatred and intolerance? Am I watching in silence from the sidelines, or am I stepping forward to support and comfort those in need? Our hope, plea, and expectation is that our community, especially those to whom we look for leadership, will choose the latter. That Orem will truly be a place where we all feel welcome, that they belong. That members of this council will use your platform to express love and understanding rather than disgust and outrage. That each of us will use this moment to reflect on how we can better learn from and appreciate those with life experiences and perspectives different than our own.

Thank you.

Thank you. Would now like to hear from Richard Davis and then John Livingston.

Thank you for this opportunity.

I'm following up on what Sam was talking about.

Sam and I actually were the instigators of this petition, and we were pleased that so many people expressed their support for the library and its display during Pride Month. Many years ago, our family lived in Minnesota. There was a group that came into our city pushing a documentary called The Godmakers, and it was an exposé of the Mormon Church. And those of us who were in the LDS community in the city were disturbed by this, and we were pleased when the Catholic newspaper, which was about as well read as you could have it in that very Catholic community, issued an editorial condemning this prejudice against Mormons.

We were pleased that someone stood up for us. And I think the same thing is happening here. These people who signed this petition are standing up for a community that they may or may not be part of themselves.

The LGBT community. I'm not part of that community because we don't like the kind of prejudice that they face, just like Latter-day Saints didn't like that prejudice in Minnesota. We, we, they don't like that prejudice here. And so we felt that it was important to signal to them and to you that we're standing up against that kind of prejudice and the purveyors of prejudice. So when the library board or the library put up this display, we were very pleased by this. We were disturbed by some of the reaction in some quarters to this because we were afraid that sent the wrong signal, the signal that, that Orem was not welcoming of these people. And I can tell you that there were many people who signed our petition, who made comments saying that they had lived in Orem or still lived in Orem and felt marginalized.

And they were so appreciative of what we had done.

And I just wanted to say that the— that support that you give to the library and their efforts to include marginalized citizens is so important to these people.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you for your comments. Now hear from John Livingston, followed by Neil LeBaron.

Thank you very much.

Appreciate what all of you do on a regular basis serving this community. I serve on the board of Now I Can, a 501 organization that services primarily children struggling with neurobiological issues. A young couple in the community put together this to serve their daughter, and Tracy and Joel Christensen are here. Their daughter that they took all the way to Poland for this therapy and then came back and brought the therapy here.

And this little 501 serves people from all over the country. I've served on several 501s, some national, some international, and this is just my favorite. Just a wonderful experience for these young people to have them strapped into little suits where they can sort of learn to stand, walk, sit, whatever the need may be.

Anyway, they would like to purchase a property that's in Southwest Orem. Others may talk about that as well, but I would certainly support anything that they would like to do in the facility that they would like to acquire.

Anyway, that's about all I have to say.

Thank you again.

Thank you. Now hear from Neil LeBaron.

I'm Neil LeBaron. I'm also a board member of Now I Can. A former vice president of the US said the moral test of any government is how that government treats those that are in the dawn of life, the children, the twilight of life, the elderly, and in the shadow of life, those that are sick and in need or handicapped. And for over 40 years, I have owned a marketing company, helping real estate investors principally succeed in making money. But my heart is really drawn out as a member of this board to those that are principally interested in making a difference, vastly different. And so whatever consideration that we can give to the group, uh, would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We'll now hear from Patty Henwood.

Hello, as stated, my name is Patty Henwood. I am not a board member of Now I Can, but I do live in the Cherry Hill neighborhood and very close by to where this property is that would like to be acquired. I also am the neighborhood school secretary and get to see children and work with children, hundreds of children every day, and I will always stand up for children and those who care for them. Being a member of the Cherry Hill community, we are thrilled to have that property Acquired, if that can be possible with the zoning that needs to happen. We are grateful to have any services that do help children in our neighborhood. I know several other members of our neighborhood have spoken at other meetings and have, have really wanted this to happen. We're grateful for the Now I Can Foundation and for the services that they provide to our kiddos. And just hope that that consideration can be, can be taken and that what needs to happen will happen with that property. Thank you.

Thank you, Patty. I have never heard of the Now I Can Foundation, so I would appreciate if one of your members would email me some information on the foundation. Okay, well, now I'd like to hear from—

Mayor, if I may, I believe the conversation that several have noted here is item 9.2 on the agenda this evening, which is a consideration of a code amendment. Okay, that will allow this. So if there are additional individuals that are wishing to comment, they will have an opportunity during the public comment period, the public hearing period of item 9.2.

I still would like to get information on the foundation. Katie and Rebecca, are both of you here to speak to Now I Can or something different? Yes. Okay, if you want to wait till we move to 9.2. And the other person? Okay. All right, we'll go ahead and close our personal appearance portion of our meeting and move on to our consent items. First one is approval of meeting minutes, the minutes of the City Council special meeting August 9, 2021, and the meeting minutes of City Council meeting August 24, 2021. Next one, 8.2, is appointments to boards and commissions. Summerfest Commission, Vanessa Sewell appointment, appointment, and Turner appointment. Liz Wolf reappointment and Ashley Mann reappointment. And then 8.3 is a resolution authorizing the mayor to sign a water supply agreement between the City of Orem, Central Utah Water Conservancy District, and the Metropolitan Water District of Orem. Is there anyone on the council that would like to move one of these items to a scheduled item? If not, I go ahead. I will go ahead and move that we approve the consent items. Is there a second?

Second.

Okay, we'll start with Jeff.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Okay, our consent— Debbie, thank you. Our consent agenda passes and we'll move on to our scheduled items. The first one is a public hearing on a resolution for the city to receive public comment on the Community Development Block Grant projected use of funds for the CARES Act CDBG-CV funding and consider approval of a substantial amendment to the 2019-2020 Annual Action Plan. And Kenna Jo Matthews is our presenter.

Thank you for having me tonight. Ken wanted me to give you his regrets. He is on the— he's one of the coaches for the mountain bike team here in the area, and they have mountain bike practice tonight.

So he just didn't really want to read all of this again.

Probably after— this would have been our 13th— this is our 13th time presenting on CDBG-CV money, so we'll make it really quick. You should know this by heart. So, um, so our initial allocation was over the $400,000, and those were for the initial projects. The second allocation was for a little under $300,000, and those are the ones that we— you can see those projects. So that has left us about $39,000, a little over $39,000 to allocate. Funds are to be used to prevent, prepare for, and respond to the coronavirus pandemic in our community and to mitigate the impacts of COVID-19. They cannot be used to offset revenue shortfalls. Shortfall or for duplication of benefit. And some of the priorities that you have given us for this is projects serving our residents, first responder support, mental health, and domestic violence. And tonight we have 2 recommendations. One is for Community Action Services and Food Bank. They are wanting to purchase a new cooler, a walk-in cooler at their facility down in Provo. Provo did give them some CDBG money towards this, but it was not enough for the purchase and the installation. So they've come back to us and asked us for $20,000 to help them respond to their increased need. They've had increased donations, but they've also had increased need for food at their organization. So that's our first recommendation. The second recommendation is to reallocate some money we've already allocated. I feel like we're never going to get rid of all this money. We'll keep doing it, though. So we had allocated $20,000 to a sewer and plumbing project at the Warm Senior Friendship Center. Unfortunately, because they needed to do that immediately, they weren't able to follow some of the CDBG required guidelines for Davis-Bacon and things like that. So they were— we were not able to use that funding on that particular project. So our recommendations tonight are to provide $20,000 to Community Action for their cooler project and reallocate the senior money back to Public Services for us to reallocate. So that leaves us again with $39,681.68 to allocate, so we'll be bringing more back in a month for that funds. So the next steps would be for you to adopt and approve a substantial amendment to our annual action plan for fiscal year 2019 and 2020. Any, any questions?

Councilor McDonald, do you have a question?

It's really more for the citizens. Oftentimes we're asked how we can be of more help to the poor and needy, and city funds are really not used for that. But this comes as a grant from the federal government that we can apply to various good causes. And, and so, Ken and Joe and others who are involved with this, I'm I'm thankful for your watchful eye of a way we can help citizens that normally are outside the purview of the city budget. So thank you, and I, I have no other questions.

Thank you.

Thank you, Tom.

And let Ken know we missed him tonight.

I will.

This is actually a public hearing, so anyone else on the council have a comment you want to make? All right, well, we'd like to open this up to the public for anyone who wishes to make a comment. Please hold your comments to 3 minutes. And please give us your name when you come forward.

I'm Karen McCallister from Community Action, was unable to attend tonight, but wanted me to let you know that she expresses her appreciation for your consideration.

Good.

Anyone wishing to make a comment? Seeing no one coming forward, we'll close the public comment portion of our public hearing and bring it back to the council. Would anyone care to make a motion?

Mayor, I'll take a stab at this.

Where do I—

the—

I moved that the city— where am I going?

Where?

We're right there.

That we accept the projected use of funds for the CARES Act CBDG-CV funding and can approve the approval of a substantial amendment to the 2019-2020 Annual Action Plan.

Is there a second?

Second.

Second.

Okay, let's go ahead and vote. Debbie, we'll have you vote first.

Aye.

Okay, Jeff.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Okay, the resolution passes. Thank you. We'll move on now to 9.2, which is a public hearing on an ordinance amending Appendix A of the Orem City Code by enacting Standard Land Use Code 20 6264 for small pediatric neurophysical therapy and making such use permitted in the R7.5 zone, and enacting Section 226-9L, small pediatric neurophysical therapy, to establish requirements for a small pediatric neuro— neuron physical therapy facility. in the R-7-5 zone. And Jason Bench is our presenter.

Thank you, Mayor. I do have Tracy Christensen, who's the owner of Now I Can, okay, here. And let me do a presentation, then you're welcome to address her and ask any questions. So, Mayor, as you announced, this is an ordinance amendment to create Standard Land Use Code 6264, which is small pediatric neurophysical therapy and, and making it a permitted use in the R-75 zone. And we'll go through those changes. So the R-75 zone, excuse me, is the bright yellow. So it does affect certain areas of the city, not just this particular property. The property in question is at 1940 and 1950 South, 375 East. It was built many years ago, probably 5 or 6, I believe, the one we discovered. He came in— the owner of the property came in and wanted to build a hospice care. We told him at the time that it was probably too big. It was overbuilt. They're allowed only 8 per side, but he persisted and insisted on building a large facility. The facility itself— or the business didn't last very long, and it's been sitting vacant for several years. Tracy and her team would like to purchase that and put their business in that location. Currently, under the current ordinance, therapy uses typically as more of an outpatient type medical use is not permitted in a residential zone. So this is why they're here before you tonight, to create a specific use that would allow it as a, as a use. Several of the items that are outlined at Like other issues that are other ordinances that we have kind of outline the requirements and rules that would apply. It's for children 17 and under. It's specifically for no more than 5 children and various things that you see there— parking access and different things that would be limiting what they can and can't do as far as the time of operation, number of children, people actually staying at the facility. It does allow up to 8. adults, so they do have people that come in from out of town that stay in the facility while their children are getting therapy. So this does allow for that, kind of like a Ronald McDonald House, I assume, something like that. So they're here tonight to request that the council adopt this. And this is of course the Standard Land Use Code that would create that use specifically in the R-75 zone.

Jason, I was reading that. Is there any way you can go back About 4 slides for you. That one right there.

Sorry, I went too fast.

While you're reading that, Jason, would this affect all R-7.5 zones?

It does.

Thank you.

Yeah. So this one is the current one that's vacant, but there could be some other, you know, beehive homes, other things that potentially could have that. Tracy can explain, I guess, her business and the fact that there's not a lot of these in the valley. So as far as the use itself may be limited, but it does open the door for those types of uses. So medical uses, outpatient uses, you may see others come in. If, you know, this gets approved, then you may see some others that have similar type uses come in and request the council to make that change. So it does kind of open the door for those uses to come in.

Anyway, so I have a lot of questions. First of all, I would like to hear from you. to explain what the foundation is and what it does. But I'd also like to know how much parking space there is at this facility. How many parking stalls?

So I believe there are—

I think there's 11. There is a little flower bed area that if we took it out could be a few more.

And how much square footage is in the building that you're purchasing?

There are 2 buildings on the property, and together they're 16,000 square feet.

16,000. And what's the cost of the building?

$1.8 million.

$1.8 million. Okay. And so you're well financed? You have backers behind you to, to pay this $1.8 million?

Yeah, we're trying really hard. We have a, we have a clinic right now in Provo that is, we're selling. And we have a small residence also where our families who have traveled and stay when they come for therapy. We're selling both of those properties and raising funds for the rest.

Okay. So tell us a little bit about your foundation.

Yes.

And I— you do have an email from me in your inbox too.

Okay. Thank you.

You can read.

Sure.

My husband and I founded Now I Can 15 years ago. And We did that because we have a daughter with cerebral palsy and we found a kind of therapy that was more effective than anything else that we tried. And the main feature of that was the duration, just being able to spend more time practicing skills. So when a typical child with cerebral palsy or other neuromuscular challenge goes to physical therapy, they get 1 hour a week or maybe 1 hour every other week. And that's just not enough for their brain to learn these new skills. So we brought this therapy here. So our therapy is typically 4 hours a day, 5 days a week for 3 weeks. And as Jason said, it is very unique. And there is only one other pediatric physical therapy clinic here in our whole county. And that has been the case for the past 20 years. There's not been any, any others that have opened. And our, our therapy model is so unique that there's not even any in any surrounding states. So the way that this ordinance has been written is so narrow that I am confident that even though it would apply to other residential 7.5 zones, I don't— there's, thankfully for everyone, there's not any other facilities like this, and there's not any other therapy.

Thank you.

that's offered like ours.

So does government funding pay for people who come to use a service like yours?

No, not a bit. But we might be interested in some of Canada's CDBG funding.

But no Medicare? No Medicaid?

No. Well, we do— we have patients that come to us that have Medicaid, but they don't— they pay $25 a day. So for 4 hours, that just— we just give grants. We just rather give grants.

And what does it cost for someone for treatment at your facility?

We bill insurance if they have insurance. It's about $100 an hour, so $6,000 for a 3-week section session.

And you're looking at 5 only residents at a time?

We wouldn't have 5 residents at a time, but we, we would have up to 4 or 5 at the very most patients in the morning. from 8 to 12, and 4 to 5 at the very most from 1 to 5.

So they do not stay overnight?

When our families come from out of town, they do. I brought our little map where we let the kids put a pin up when they come to see us. And this just shows the different places that our patients have come from. And we do have a lot of Utah patients, and we don't— we just love being able to provide therapy for them because it's such a big need. But when our families come from out of town, like I said, we've had the one facility where we can just have one family stay. And so this facility that we're talking about has several little apartments, so we could have 2 or 3 families at a time and still keeping within the 8. But that would be a big blessing because if a family travels and they're paying for therapy, paying for hotel accommodation on top of that is a lot. And we allow families to stay for $25 a night in our current— now at Kent Cottage, but we'd love to just make that a little more accessible for more people.

And how do you find your patients? Is it through social media or through references from doctors? Both.

I think that social media has definitely helped parents with different, you know, conditions connect with each other. And so word of mouth has been a blessing for people. Doctors from Primary Children's, Shriners, local pediatricians have sent people to us after they've seen their other patients have success.

Okay, any questions from the council? Yes, Terry.

So, so, Mayor, I was privileged to be in the Planning Commission meeting when, when you came and presented, and a lot of the patients— not a lot, some of the patients came. I lost it emotionally, and so did Ryan, and I think so did Jason. It was just— it just tore at your heart as parents came in and said how my son couldn't learn to walk, and then with the help of your group, they were— they walked in. Some of the other children learned to read. And so the service you're providing is just amazing. I mean, you already heard me earlier tonight talk about my concern about children. God bless you for taking care of our children.

Thank you so much.

Any other comments?

Yeah, this is Debbie. I want you to know that I personally know Tracy, and through the women in business groups that I've been part of, have helped them fundraise. I think it was a balance beam or some sort of gymnastics equipment. They are the finest people and do a great job. And so whatever we can do to assist them and change this, I'm 100% behind it.

Thank you.

Thank you, Tracy. Good to see you.

Hi.

I've been involved with Now I Can for many, many years. Used to be the CEO of a company that contributed heavily to that. I've participated in their 5K runs. I've toured their facility on a number of occasions. I've driven by this facility, and I— and frankly, we had lost touch. And then 6 months ago, you tracked me down while I was on vacation with Blaine and, and started planning your idea of what you were going to do. And whether we went through the finances Mayor, that you touched on lightly of how can you do this, can, can this happen. But this facility has been empty for many years now. And I do think it provides a valuable service, and, and I echo Tracy's likelihood that very few of these are built within residential areas that would demand a lifetime treatment. But you're right, to Councilman Peterson's comment. These children are all of our children, and we're grateful that you offer this great service, and I'll be supportive of this idea.

Thank you so much. That means so much. We do have some of our families here, and I—

Yes, we'll open it up to public hearing in just a minute. Okay, any other comments from the council?

Jeff?

I just want to— I just want to echo what has been said. The company that I work for that Tom referred to— still, I work at Clear.

Oh, great.

And, um, was not familiar with your company, uh, before that. And we have pieces of artwork throughout our office, uh, pictures of children that have been blessed from this treatment. And it's really heartwarming and touching to know that someone is wanting to do this in our community.

So thank you.

Thank you. Thank you and Clear for all your support.

Any other comments from the council? All right, well, this— we do have a public hearing. We'll go ahead and open it up for anyone who would like to make a public comment. Please give us your name when you come forward to the podium and hold your comments to 3 minutes. And we'll now open it up to the public.

Hi, my name is Katie Palfreyman and this is Zach.

And he's—

he wants— do you want to say hello?

We practiced on the way here.

How are you, Zach?

Anyway, at 6 months old, he was diagnosed as having some severe delays because of low tone, which is kind of a general catch-all. And he had severe cognitive delays, so moderate physical and severe cognitive.

And for 6 months, We worked with intermittent physical therapy, you know, as much as we could a couple months. I mean, a couple times a month, and we just weren't making progress. And someone that we were working with from the School of the Blind, of all places, it's like, have you heard of Now I Can?

I go, no.

And they're like, it's in Provo.

And I was like, that close too? And we were able to take him and they were the easiest people to work with. They did all the calls to our insurance. And he was able to go. And I kid you not, on the first day he came home, he could sit, and he couldn't sit on his own. The 4 hours intensive therapy, I was a little worried about. But I was also like, hey, go, you know, I was like, I could use a break.

Anyway.

He loved it.

He saw it as a playdate.

And they have been in touch with us ever since. And we are so grateful. He did 2 rounds. And at the end of his first round, this is a kid that couldn't sit when he went, he came home walking. In fact, he loved walking so much that over the Christmas holidays, like 2 weeks after he finished the program, we thought he had broken one of his legs. But no, he was just tired and worn out.

So yeah, we had it like just walking too much. So anyway, we were, we're so grateful for them.

And they've changed—

they've changed his life because after we got him walking and moving, we could work with his speech and other things. So it's, it's just been—

it's a great, great, great foundation and a great place, and they'd be a wonderful addition to Orem. Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else wishing to make a comment?

My name is Kristen Palmer, and this is Ava. And we live here in Orem. And when Ava was 3 weeks old, her pediatric orthopedist up at Primary Children's told us she would never walk and don't bother doing anything or trying. You know, it's a discouraging thing to hear as a new parent. And we did weekly therapy. We did community services. Kids on the Move came to our home. every week and then every other week. We made small progress but not much, things like sitting up and things like that. And it was actually the therapist from Kids on the Move who said, have you ever heard of this? And I thought, you're her therapist, you're telling us to go to another therapy, this seems strange. But we checked it out and Ava has gone 3 times now to Now I Can, 3 different sessions, and she can walk. She first walked with a walker Now she can walk without a walker, and that's life-changing. And it's hard work, but man, they make it fun. In between, they recommend spacing out so you can see better progress. And in between, she says, when can I just go back to Now I Can? We've done school therapy and things in between, but she begs to go back to Now I Can to work for 4 hours a day for 3 weeks straight. They make it fun, but The progress is unbelievable. It's life-changing for these kids. It's life-changing for us as parents, and we are just so grateful. When I walked into here today and saw the therapists that have worked with Ava, I just couldn't help but hold back— like, I couldn't hold back the tears because they've changed our lives and we owe them everything. And this is just so exciting to see them have the potential to grow and have this new building and facility. So we hope that that can happen.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Rebecca Swindle. I am a board member on Now I Can, but I come to offer you some different perspectives, 4 of them particularly, one being a board member. The second is I'm a real estate agent. I am not representing them, so there's not financial gain. for me on this. The third one is my extended family member has cerebral palsy. And the fourth one is I grew up a resident the street over from this property, played on this land chasing peacocks before this was built on. So my comments today come from kind of a full-rounded perspective. As a real estate agent, this land has— or this This property has been a little bit of a trial. It proposes a problem for people wanting to purchase a residential living next to a commercial property, and as a commercial property, it presents a problem as being in a residential neighborhood because location, location, location doesn't fit for something of this sort. So this property, or this entity, fits this property very uniquely. I have walked this neighborhood because I've known these people that I've grown up around, and I've talked to them about having this organization move in here. And I've come at it from the angle of not trying to tell them that they should accept it, but telling them what's— what possibly could be coming and answering questions. And as I've listened to these people that have lived in this neighborhood watch something go in that shouldn't have gone in to begin with, in many perspectives, my father's included, And then see it go vacant. They have had deep concerns as to what was going to happen with this building, and then also the type of group that would be coming in. As they've learned about the fact that it would benefit the children particularly, it's been overwhelmingly supportive, and the neighbors have come out. They came to my mother's house, some of them did, and we had a neighborhood community where people asked questions and came out to give their support.

Thank you.

support.

So, as a family member having cerebral palsy, my sister-in-law, 30 years ago, my mother-in-law tried to take her to Poland to get this exact same therapy that they are now offering. And they could not financially afford to do that, to go and stay there for 3 weeks every time of year. And so, to have that in the community is going to be a great resource. And just want to say, as a board member, I feel like here I can just give you more of a character reference that this has been something that's come to us not trying to come for a profit financially, but they are doing something that is first from love of parent, and then second has spread to a community of people. And I feel like it's highly beneficial that way. So thank you.

Thank you.

Mr. Mayor and City Council members, thank you for your service and the time that you've put forth on this agenda item thus far. My name is Wren Whiteman.

Normally you see me when I'm opposing something in our neighborhood.

I am here to share my complete opposite feelings. I am very positive on this foundation coming into that building. In 2014, that building was built. As Rebecca mentioned, we weren't too happy about it, but it is what it is, and it's been vacant for the last, I think, 3 to 4 years, and we couldn't be more thrilled as a neighborhood—

and I do speak for the Cherry Hill neighborhood—

that Tracy and the Now I Can Foundation is looking to move in. It's a huge win for Orem. to have a foundation this unique, and I can't think of a better tenant. Somebody who has gone and knocked all the doors, made sure that all the neighbors are all right with this, incredibly polite, and just a wonderful person.

And we are, like I said, from the Cherry Hill neighborhood perspective, 100% behind this, and we support it.

Thank you.

Thank you. Any other comments? Jason, while they're coming up, can you give me the address again?

So it's 1940 South and 1950 South on 375 East.

Okay, thank you. Yes.

Hello, my name is Tiffany Arranias. And I used to be a resident of Orem when we had our Evan. This is Evan. This is my son Evan, my second son. When we had Evan, we were living in the Cherry Hill neighborhood. So we had him back in 2010, and he was born early, super early, and he has a mild cerebral palsy, but not quite so mild that it didn't affect him a lot. And when he was little, we didn't know how it would go. So we lived in our house that's just kind of in the Cherry Hill neighborhood for a couple of years, and when he was 3, our Kids on the Move therapist that was coming to see us— he just informed me he remembers this— I said, oh, you remember that? When she came to visit, she said, have you heard about this place. It's here, right here. It's really close to you. And so, um, being in a really tough place with not knowing what was going to happen and what he was going to be able to do, and he was learning to crawl and did— couldn't do that and definitely couldn't walk, um, she referred us to this place. So we've been around, uh, Tracy and all the Now I Can people for like 9 years now, um, and they are just amazing people. And the kind of work that they do at this facility It would just blow your mind if you saw, because Evan learned to walk, he's learned to run, he's been working on his fine motor skills because it affects both, both just his arm and his leg on the one side of his body. And so he has, he has made so many leaps and bounds because of this organization. And I remember feeling really trepidatious about taking him somewhere for therapy.

It worried me.

And when I went here, they were— everything was just amazing. It was clean. They were so nice. It was a very intimate setting. It wasn't like people everywhere and cars everywhere, and it wasn't busy. It was just what I needed as a parent at the time and feeling really like I didn't know where to turn or who we could get help from.

And so this organization has blessed our lives and the lives of countless others.

And it would be just a fantastic blessing and a credit to Orem to have it in your city. And it is just an amazing organization, and I just can't speak highly enough of everything that they have done for us as a family. And like I said, countless others. And to be able to have— we have been blessed to be right here, right? We did move a couple of minutes south, to a town that won't be named. But after our, our other meeting that we came to, I spoke with my husband, who is born and raised here in Orem. He was a Bruin. He said— he notified me that we're moving back, um, as soon as possible. So that was news to me. So, so we will be moving back to Orem. But either way, I hope it stays here close to them, and I hope they— I, I just pray that, that this will work out for them because it has been so amazing. And we continue to take Evan. And we just love them. And we just know that they are the best people and they will do the most fantastic work. Do you have anything to say? No, he says no. He reminded me back then that he said, when he says, I remember when I was like 5 and I said, Now I Can is better than Disneyland. And I said, oh, you said that? So he thinks it's pretty great. I think so. Thank you so much.

Okay, thank you.

Sorry to hit you again.

Colby—

Tell me your name again.

John Livingston.

Okay.

Colby Christensen.

Colby is the daughter of Tracy and Joel.

Really, she's why Now I Can even exists.

She has just returned from the Texas Dallas East mission.

She served for 18 months, and you'd hardly know that she had any issues at all as a result of what they did with her, both in Poland and then bringing it back home. Anything you'd add there, Colby?

No, I'm just going to say I've been significantly blessed by the, by the therapy and the resources that have been given at Now I Can. And as I'm sure you can see, many children have been blessed as well. And I know that it would be great to addition to Orem and that many people would continue to be blessed by this. So thank you for your consideration.

Thank you. Appreciate it. Anyone else wish to speak? All right. This is a public hearing and seeing no one else is coming forward, we'll close the public comment portion of the public hearing and bring it back to the council. Any comments from the council? Yes, Councilor McDonald.

Unless one of my council members are Ebenezer Scrooge, I can't imagine this being other than a 7-0 vote. Thank you for your presentation.

Tom, I said, I said that in the Planning Commission meeting. I said I cannot believe one person on the City Council will vote against this.

Councilmember Spencer.

So Tracy, appreciate you coming and sending the email with all the information. I think that was excellent. You know, Wrenn Whiteman, um, you know, uh, sent me an email quite a while ago, said, hey, you need to support this. And in Orem, we did the Altogether Playground, and that touched my heart. That was amazing. And I think this is just right up there as an Altogether Playground, so I definitely support it 100%.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Okay. Any other comments? All right, I would take a motion if someone would like to make one.

I'll make that motion, Mayor.

Okay.

I make the motion that we amend Appendix A of the Orem City Code by enacting Standard Land Use Code 6264, Small Pediatric Neurophysical Therapy, and making such use permitted in the R-7-5 zone and enacting Section 22 6-9L, Small Pediatric Neuron Physical Therapy, to establish requirements for a shall pediatric—

small, I should have been—

says shall, it should be small.

Okay.

For a small pediatrics neuron physical therapy facilities in the R-75 zone.

Is there a second?

Second.

Okay, Debbie, we'll start with you first.

Aye.

Hey, Jeff.

Aye.

And I just want to say thank you to Colby, Ava, Evan, and our other little friends that were here this evening as well.

Thank you.

Aye.

Terry?

Aye. Heavens, yes.

Aye.

Brent?

Aye.

Okay, the ordinance passes, and we'll go ahead and move on to 9.3.

Thank you.

This is also a public hearing on an ordinance amending portions of Section 22-11-56, PD-43 Auburn Meadows, 2000 South Geneva Road, pertaining to the approved uses in the PD-43 zone for Area B. Also amending Appendix LL, the Orem City Code, with updated concept plans and elevations pertaining to Area B. And Jason Bench is our presenter.

Thank you, Mayor, members of the council. Can you see my presentation?

No.

Wait, it's coming. Okay, now it's on.

Okay, so this is the location of Auburn Meadows. This is the PD zone that was developed at the time, the property or the whole southwest area, the portions that were annexed. At the time, this was the impetus of that proposal. They're under construction on the majority of their project. What they're proposing is to amend Area B, which is the corner of 2000 South and Geneva Road. If you can see, I'll go to the next.

This is across the street of the proposed gas station.

Yes, correct. So as you can see in the purple and the red and the brown, those are the residential areas.

The property—

this area here is currently on the plan in the ordinance is allowed for some commercial uses, could be C-2, it could be adult senior living facility as well. And then these are some additional townhomes that were approved originally. What the applicant is proposing is to take These townhomes and move a few of them over in this location, 12 of those. There's 19 total, proposing to move 12 over here, and then he'll eliminate the 7 there and then eliminate the option for 40, up to 40 adult apartments that they were proposing to build in order to expand this portion of the commercial area. And what he's proposing to do You see the area that is expanded, proposing to expand the commercial area so that it can do one of two options. This option shows a smaller grocery store at this location. It does show some convenient retail along the Geneva Road corridor. Then this is a fast food type facility they're proposing. As part of this option, they will propose to To put a number of parking stalls that would be utilized for the actual condo project to the west. As you realize, if you've been out there, there is a parking issue, which we deal with many parking issues in the city. It's not just this particular project, so there are issues that we're dealing with. This is a complicated issue. The owner is working with the HOA to help us try to solve that issue to get parking off of Geneva Road. There is legal parking on Geneva Road, but we're trying to get them to park interior. What, what's happening, and it's not unique to this project, it's unique citywide, countywide, statewide, is we have a housing issue. And what the people are doing, and I think what's happening here is some are subletting to additional people that are bringing their cars, which are causing obviously some big issues. So we're aware of that issue. This particular project will be parked according to the C-2 standard, which is 4 stalls per 1,000, so that this proposal, what he's doing, will not cause additions to the parking. What it will do is add some additional options for the tenants there as they're working to get their project into compliance with the maximum they can rent per unit. The other option is Concept B, which allows for a larger grocery store, 30,000 roughly square feet, so like a Walmart. A neighborhood Walmart type of facility or larger Trader Joe's type of thing. That's the size of building they're proposing there on Option A or B. They're not sure of the tenant they can get at this point. It may be a smaller grocery store, maybe a larger one. They want to have the flexibility to do either one of those options, keeping the flexibility for that fast food on the corner. What will happen is the access will be at this location on 2000 South. You may be aware that UDOT is working on installing a signal at 2000 South, so the majority of this access will come off here. This one, I believe, will be closed. Access to the apartments will be closed. And on this option as well, the parking will be installed and will be utilized for the apartment side, not the commercial side. All parking on this side will be accessed within the development on this Area B. These are the elevations that they're proposing, and this will be part of Appendix LL, so that when they do come in, these are the elevations that we'll expect when they come in for a site plan. This one, I think, is up in Holiday, the Harmon. So it's kind of a prototype of what they're expecting the development to look like. You can see the fast food and then the retail, if they choose to do the retail along Geneva Road, will look like that. So these will be part of the ordinance. A couple of amendments, none that would basically necessitate the ability to develop, but they are taking out the ability to do a senior independent living facility and be restricted to only the C-2 uses, which was permitted. They're now just eliminating that as an option for the senior living, outlining that the C-2, as you can see here, is currently existing and that will stay as a use. Basically stating that if conditional uses are not listed, they're not permitted in this zone. Taking out the setback of 10 feet, the way that the ordinance is written right now, this parking would not be permitted because it requires a 10-foot setback between Area A and Area B. They're proposing to take that out. Staff supports that because we do— are able at this point then to get the parking that would help facilitate the project to the west. And then the water department— there is a fence requirement that they're proposing between the 2 facilities. There will be a gate so that pedestrians can access the facility, but they are proposing that if a fence is put over some water lines that run up that street, they at least have a sleeve so that it's not sitting on top of a water line. This, of course, is the property used now as staging for the project, but this is the area that they will do it. This is 2000 South Geneva Road. Planning Commission did make a recommendation that the council approve this and be glad to address any questions.

So, Jason, who is the applicant?

So Jeff Mansell is— I believe he's here.

And is Jeff here?

Okay. All right.

Um, any questions by the council?

Does Jason— does he have a commitment on that grocery store?

As far as I know, he's working on several leads. There are a couple different chains that are looking at going there. He didn't— doesn't have, I think, anything specifically in writing, but there are some smaller grocery stores that are very interested.

Mayor, this is Debbie.

Yes, Debbie, go ahead.

I live in this area, and I can honestly tell you we definitely need more grocery stores. All we have is Walmart, and that's not that convenient. So I know that there's already traffic on Geneva, but I think it's not gonna be any worse than it already is because we're already having to try to travel up to Walmart. So I think this would be welcome. The neighborhood would Definitely support it. So I think it's a great idea.

Spencer.

Yes, Jason, I've got a— so the original project, what was the parking at?

2.5 per unit.

And yeah, because it's bad, really bad.

It's definitely bad. And I think their issue is that they're either subleasing or renting to more.

Because even when you pull in on Geneva, you're gonna get killed. I mean, it's terrible.

Absolutely.

Can you go back to the picture of the A, or the first design? So, so where does that exit? Where do the— all that parking, where would that exit?

So the main exit would be here to the light. I don't know if you can see my— let me turn on the pointer again. Sorry. Would be out the south, and then this would be access to the light. There would be most likely right in, right out. That looks like they're showing But eventually, I would imagine, with the light, they may put some medians and other things to restrict that.

And then with, with this concept plan, do they have to do a traffic study?

Yes, and they are working with UDOT and Provo City because 2000 South is actually a Provo City street. And so they are working together to do that.

And then I've also had calls from, from citizens that The gentleman spoke earlier about the notice in the mail came late. So if that happened, I mean, can we pause this and have another neighborhood meeting?

So they had a neighborhood meeting. That was simply the notice for the Planning Commission. So, and on that same notice was tonight's meeting as well. So they were notified of both meetings. For whatever reason, there was a snafu with the mailing service that we use, and it was delayed a couple of days. And so that's the reason for that. It happens on occasion, unfortunately.

Okay, because I mean, I would like to hear from the citizens maybe and see what they want to do. See if—

has there been a neighborhood meeting on this?

There was.

Okay.

All right.

Any other comments from the council? Okay, well, this is a public hearing, so we'll now open it up for anyone wishing to make public comment. Please give us your name, hold your comments to 3 minutes. And the time is now open.

Hi, I'm Sandy Morgan and I own 2000 North and they're going to push me out.

I own the horse barn.

What, what do you mean you own 2000 North?

That's my lane that goes into the horse barn. Okay, so it has not been purchased, but they told me that they would make sure it was purchased.

So, um, and who's telling you that?

Well, it sounds like Mr. Mansell is telling me that. We told— we met with Provo City and said we were not interested in selling at this time. Okay, so I'm looking at that and I'm pretty sure that they're going to push me out. So we have a large horse industry, we have, um, many world champions, um, we've already been pushed out once in American Fork, and we came here thinking that we would be here forever. But if they put a grocery store in there, how are we going to survive? The parking is unbelievable, and there's going to be a temple that goes in a half of a mile away. Geneva Road is a 2-lane road.

When do you put in—

Geneva Road is being widened to 5 lanes.

When?

Um, it's over the next 3 years. They're doing an environmental study The next 12 months, right? And then their construction is the next 24 months. And the money has already been allotted by the state legislature, and it's already been approved by UDOT. And you can go to UDOT and see the plans, but it's already been approved and funded.

So what about the temple going in? Temple's—

temple's building, right?

Built—

temple's building right now, so they won't match up. Yeah, they won't match up perfectly. The temple will be done by the end of next year. The road will be done 2 years after that, but there'll be a new stoplight and a new 5-lane road.

Yep. There was one of you council members that came down and looked at the traffic when it was— I'm not sure which one. I met one of you at the end of the lane. It is not safe. Geneva Road right now is not safe. So you're proposing to put more—

it will be Different. So just realize it's already in the works of being improved.

But you're going to approve something that's not— you're not going to put in the 5 lanes prior to you approving this?

No, it will be done afterwards, but it's moving ahead right now.

And have you seen the parking down there? Have you seen how dangerous it is?

Yes, I drove by it many times.

To get out on Geneva Road is crazy right now. Crazy. It's not safe. So it would be great if you could get in the 5 lanes or whatever before you approved this more parking.

And we worked as fast as we could, but you have to get the money taken from the legislature approved, which takes about a year, and then you have to do an environmental impact study, which takes a year, and then it's going to be 2 years to, to purchase any property and to redo the entire road.

But no way to put a hold on this project until that infrastructure is in?

It depends on what the, the owner qualifies for and, and what he's allowed to do.

So, Mayor, I've got a question for Sandy. So can— oh, I guess Jason, can you go back and show that road, the 2000 South Road?

Yeah, I was just trying to get to show her property.

So you own the road?

I, I sold to Provo City in 2019 for a traffic light to be put. So the very front, like 100 feet of that, that goes down to my 2 acres, is owned by Provo City. And the reason we did that is because that traffic light is sorely needed. The traffic is unbelievable to leave. My driveway is not safe. We turn on the turn signal to turn into our driveway, and they pass us on the right side when we have a right turn. turn signal on with horse trailers. It's daily. The traffic is unbelievable on that street. So all I'm saying is, can't we do something to slow it down until you get the infrastructure in? Thank you.

Thanks, Cindy. So Jason, what was the original plan? You said it was senior living, 40 units or something?

And I don't have my— Sam's messed me up.

Sam messed you up?

Hold on, let me pull it up.

I guess to clarify a few things too, this is a concept plan. Jeff won't be able to build that and actually abandon that southerly access point until 2000 is built. And obviously, as you just heard from— I forgot, is it Mrs. Morgan? I mean, she's not willing to sell. So until she sells and 2000 goes in, we can't really close off that access. Now, Jeff, he has proposed— he's got 2 layouts here, Concept A and Concept B. Concept B is the 3,500 square foot or 35,000 square foot grocery store. It's the bigger store. That can't happen. I'm already getting— sorry, I can't talk. But that can't happen until 2000 South is actually built. So he could build half of of the first one there at 17,000, but 2,000 south would just go to that access point, which I'm under the impression that that's property that's already built and it wouldn't go further into your land, is the way I— They've told me a lot of times. Right, but I mean, as far as, as far as what's been communicated to me by Shane Winters, who is at Provo City, They won't go into her property until she's a willing seller. And as far as I know, that first access point is part of the property that has already been purchased for the signal.

So that can go in. So just 2,000 south or north can go in up to that access point, right?

But Jeff would only be allowed to build what's there in green, only on this one concept. If he goes to the next property—

where's her property?

Can you use that little Pointer, and it's going to be there. Yeah, right in that area right there is her property.

Okay, because I think when, when I met with the, the citizens down there, they also had complaints about the facility that not being finished with amenities and everything else. So hopefully he'll get his amenities done prior to start keep building out, because that was a concern with the citizens.

So he should have the pool house done because I know he submitted to have that bond released.

Yeah, he's, he's got several amenities in now and he's been working on those last several months. I don't know when you met with citizens, but they're in the primaries.

I don't know.

They've lost track of time building them, you know, last several months. So he is in the process of finishing that and the last phases are, you know, beginning to start construction. So at that point, well, we have a bond obviously to make sure that he finishes those things that he's proposed.

And then do we know how many Sorry, ma'am. Do we know how— have— know how many people attended the neighborhood meeting?

I think there were 5 is what Jeff Mansell was telling me, or told me.

Okay, thank you.

All right, go ahead, ma'am.

My name is Paula Rowe. I welcome this opportunity to speak to the City Council. I live in that area and We're talking about future changes and so forth, and, and they take time, I know, but there are things that need to be done now. As has already been mentioned, it is a disaster waiting to happen to pull onto that busy highway of Geneva Road. All the parking on both sides of the road make it impossible to see if it's safe to pull onto that highway, and it is an extremely busy highway, and you have to pull out to see beyond the cars, and that certainly isn't safe. I don't want to hit motorcyclists, or I don't want a motorcyclist to hit me. Heavy trucks, I mean, this has already been recognized.

You have heavy traffic On that area of Geneva Road. They go fast. You don't have any lights, you don't have any curb and gutter, you don't have any sidewalk. It's a country lane that's acting like a major arterial highway.

Well, it is no longer a country lane, but I—

we sorely need something done so that the cars that are parking along Geneva Road are no longer there. They need to require more or or make available more spaces for residents as well as visitors who are parking in the Fields development? Thanks.

And Jason, you're working on— or the city, who's working on getting the cars parked?

About 6 weeks ago, we did send a notice to all property owners outside. I've got several calls from out-of-town owners, right, wanting to know what the occupancy load is. I think what's happening is it's a family or 3 singles. I'm thinking what's happening is they're running to 4 or 5, and they're all bringing cars, and that's causing obviously some issues. So we're working on it, right? We've asked— we've called Jeff Mansell and said, hey, you got to work with your HOA. They've posted on—

So is that red line the curb, or is there a curb?

So UDOT did about 6 months ago come in and basically have no parking on the west side. Sam Kelly went back and asked them to at least You know, from the inner— the access points out, like this location.

But they're still parking all along.

So there's a certain section that can be parked. Geneva Road in this area is a state highway, and you can park on the side of the road. So that— but their issue that we're trying to get is to get them back into occupancy so the cars will actually fit on the property. But there is the ability on the west side to park legally on Geneva Road.

And it's a lot more convenient to park there than it is to park inside, and so people park out there.

Didn't we red— have we red curbed anything?

So there is some signage next to the intersections that prohibit—

Yeah, I know pulling out on the going left, that's dangerous because these cars are parked and you can't see anything also. So I think we need to red curb that up to a certain point.

The planned signal.

They did at one time change the parking so that it was easier to get on and off. Well, then they changed the parking back so that they protected their own access, but they didn't— they allowed them to park, like, say, all the way to Mylan, but they protected their own leaving their section. So they changed the signage a couple of times.

Yes, we have changed it twice. We initially went out in red curb. Well, being a UDOT facility, they signed the whole west side saying no parking. The HOA, some citizens that actually lived there said, is there any way that we could have some parking as long as we're outside of those clear vision triangles? We evaluated that with the 45-mile-an-hour speed, and we have allowed sections of it. And some of you have seen that, that you can actually park between those access points.

It's not permitted, right?

It is permitted, it's allowed, or do you have to have a permit?

No, I'm not talking about a permit like UVU parking.

No, it's not about permitting.

If you live in there and you can have so many cars and that's it. I'd never be able to live there because I have too many cars.

But so, yeah, so yeah, 2.5 per unit.

And I guess also to clarify too, there is a signal that's going to be built at this intersection next spring. We do already have plans. It's gone through PS&E with UDOT. It'll be advertised here probably within the month or 2, with likely being built next spring.

And hopefully—

You're talking 2000 South and Geneva Road?

Yes, it's been in process.

Emailed about, right?

Yes. Yeah, so it will happen. There's also the, the opposite side of the road. They're starting to demo those homes, so we'll be coordinating that construction with that gas station that's supposed to be going there with this signal. So we will have a signal there at this intersection. Provo is actively buying property and they are chomping at the bit to build half of Lakeview Parkway all the way up to 2000.

And they're ready to go.

Yes.

Sir, I'm sorry, but go ahead.

My name is Byron Taylor. Just to clarify one thing, it's not an issue. I do, I do not live in there. I live across the street from the fields. There is no parking in there. They are forced out onto the highway. If you drive in there and try and park, you can see that's the problem. This morning I got up and walked out my front door. I took a morning stroll along Geneva Road. I counted 51 cars parked along Geneva Road. This does not count the cars that were squeezed into the yards of vacant homes there. The plan that Mr. Mansell has presented allows for 18 additional parking spaces, so you can see the math does not work there, does not add up at all. He told me that they have some plan, this authoritative top-down process of forcing people to comply and reducing occupancy in this manner. Forgive me if I have no faith in that that method of forcing less density. Those of us who have lived down there, and anybody I think that's been around development, knows that when you have a development of this type, even if it starts out as owner-occupied, it never stays that way. We've seen that on the north end, and now we're seeing it already in the Fields. It's not owner-occupied, it's an investment property. They get as many people in there as they can. They all have cars. This is a disaster that should have been foreseeable. And now to try to resolve that problem by 18 additional places, at the same time enhancing Mr. Mansell's development portfolio, it doesn't add up to me. I've called your attention to number 19 on this code of ordinances. RV storage, open storage of recreational vehicles, RVs, utility trailers, boats, and similar items shall be prohibited in the P-45 Zone.

Oh, wonderful.

We know where they're going to go, don't we?

They're going to go out on Geneva Road. There's already long-term storage there. People can get a trailer, put their junk in it, park it on the road.

They can live anywhere.

They could be out of state, and they don't have to pay for storage because they can dump it in Lakeview on Geneva Road. I watched with great interest the candidates' interviews recently. Because I have determined— found out that it does matter who sits here. I heard a common theme: let's preserve the neighborhoods of Orem. However, it appears to me that nobody cares about the Lakeview neighborhood. From what I've seen so far through decisions and what has happened, our neighborhood is being destroyed. So who is looking out for the Lakeview neighborhood? Please reject this plan from Mr. Mansell. Ask him to go back and do the math. So that we have parking lot inside that development, and we're not shoving it out on Geneva Road.

Thank you.

Thank you. Any other comments from anyone else?

So I was already up here once with my daughter. I was at the planning meeting or the zoning meeting last month or whatever, and I was surprised I— we got ready to go after speaking for Now I Can and heard about this. And I'm actually living in the very first home north of this development. Um, and so you can imagine I was surprised when I hear that there's a meeting going on and I didn't know anything about it. Now, in all fairness, I don't own that home. I am living in it for 2 years while the people who do own it are on a mission. But it's kind of our responsibility to pass information like this on to them because they are very involved in things like this. They've lived there for generations. Um, their family has. And so I was surprised when they said there was a neighborhood meeting and, you know, we spoke with all of the neighbors and I'm like, how is that possible? Because I live in the house, get the mail there every day, I would have gotten it. And they informed me that I'm just outside the 500-foot limit of where they have to notify. There's literally not a single house between this development and me, but I don't meet the qualifications for the 500 feet. That seems problematic. Seems like, yes, maybe in a normal neighborhood where there's houses stacked together, you can get a good substantial amount of neighbors to come in and give their input about this. But it seems like they were able to skirt around that by only having 3 homes.

I think— Jason, I thought we were going out 1,000 feet.

They told me— Manziel and I think this gentleman both told me that I was outside the 500 feet.

So 1,000 feet is when you have multifamily housing.

Okay, so I just, just, you know, you brought up, was there a neighborhood meeting? How many people were there? It's my recollection when I saw up on the screen, because I recognized 2 of the 3 names, there were 3 people. 2 was a husband and wife, and then one other person I didn't recognize the name. That doesn't seem like a fair representation of a neighborhood when you only have to notify that few people. So to say, well, they had a neighborhood meeting and it was fine, that, that doesn't seem totally accurate.

I believe that's the legal requirement. So if you're right on the edge one way or another, we follow the legal requirements.

Okay, well, I don't know if— is that a state requirement, a city requirement? Where does that come from?

Both.

Okay, it just— it's surprising to me that the people who actually are affected—

anyway, if I may, Council, I think the state requirement is 250 feet, so I think the city is actually Doing 100% more.

I mean, I, you know, I know this is different, but we live— we own a condo right near the temple, right, you know, in the development right there, and they extended way out. I'm sure as a courtesy to the neighborhood, but many more people were notified than just that. And obviously, if that's a requirement, that's what it is. But, but I just— to speak to, was there a neighborhood meeting? That's relative when there's only 2 to 3 homes in that 500. So So I just wanted to address that.

Okay, thank you. Anyone else care to make a comment?

My name is Dennis Harrison. I live in the 55 and older section of this development. By the way, I received this on the 2nd and would have been happy to come to the Planning Commission meeting had I known about it on time. In reviewing the proposed development concept plans on the city site, I have reason for encouragement and also reason for significant concern. And I'm going to shorten my comments a lot from what I had planned, but 19 parking stalls is the tip of the iceberg of what is absolutely necessary in, in that area. And it blows my mind—

pardon me—

that we are jamming more traffic into an already over— overly used area. And I understand that we're going to have 5 lanes at some point in time. Have no clue how we're going to get around until that happens, or during the production process of it. But I'm just really, really concerned. And I personally, I think that property ought to be sold to Now I Can. We have personal experience with those people. with our grandson, and, uh, that would be a wonderful use for that purpose. But please take this under very serious consideration before you dump a gas station, a grocery store, more residential buildings right on top of what's already there. Um, I would, I would think that if, if indeed we have to have a grocery store there, let it not be the, the smaller one for the convenience of the developer. Let it be one that at least would be useful for us. My last comments are, the parking on Geneva Road will kill someone someday. And I hope that that is not my wife, my grandson, or anyone else. Please don't bury us, either literally or figuratively. Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to make a comment?

Elaine Schofield.

I can address the parking issues again like everyone else. I send people down there to visit so we can get to know our neighbors, and they end up getting towed and have a $300 tow bill because there's no parking. The women that I talked to down in the 55+ community They have rented out the parking spaces around the whole general community area, so there's only 3 spaces to park for just normal people. So the people can't even get in to use the facilities that are there. And I, when I look at the plans on the road and how they want to block it off, it's going to make some of these other roads major thoroughfares within the development, and I think they need to look at that.

That.

And generally, there are many, many unhappy people there about Jeff Mansell and what he has done.

So I think you need to take a look at how he functions and how he manages his property.

Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to come forward? All right, we'll close the public comment portion of our public hearing and bring it back to the council. Any comments from the council? Councilmember Summer.

Yeah, I just want to say that that area is, is a mess with parking. My wife and I went down there to look at the 55 and older community when I turned 55, and it— we couldn't find a parking place to look at it. We end up out on the Geneva Road.

and walking into it.

And, you know, it was okay when we finally got in there. But then when we were walking out, one guy, a senior, he says, are you looking to buy down here? And I said, well, we're looking. And he said, don't. He says, it's, it's a mess. And I just, I agree, we need a grocery store down there or a market, But every time I ride down there, it is just congestion. And I know we're putting in a 5-lane road, but Mary, you know as well as I do that can be yanked by people above us quickly.

The money's already—

well, there, it'll go through. You know it can be yanked.

It'll go through.

Well, I believe it will, but it's not in now.

You've got University Parkway to the north, Lakeview Parkway to the south. This is on UDOT's plans, and with the temple and the legislature already putting the money in, it's going through.

Okay.

Anyway, I— and now I was told when I was down there that Jeff Mansell's not the total owner of this now, or he's selling part of it out.

Is that true? I'm not sure how he's done that, but they have sold units to contractors that then sell the units as condos. But he's still part of the HOA down there.

Of the HOA, but ownership, is he?

He doesn't own all the units. No, they've been sold. So he's part of the owner overall homeowners association. Yes.

Okay, thank you. I just think the traffic's a mess down there. I don't think I can support it.

Okay.

Jamie had a comment. You want to say something?

Mayor, just a point of clarification for Jason and Sam. So the request that is in front of you today relates to a rezone request, correct?

It's concept plan.

Or—

okay, so it's a concept area.

Initially, the concept included additional residential units.

Yes.

So we're not necessarily— it's not necessarily a we have this or we have nothing. It is we have this or we have something else that is potentially, potentially less, potentially the same, or potentially more impactful from a traffic perspective, from a density perspective, than what is there today, or than what is— than what is currently being proposed.

Right, they would have the potential of building their 19 units and the additional 40 active adult units that would be on the corner. I mean, that is a potential.

So, so really the conversation is not greenfield versus a supermarket, it's a supermarket versus potentially another 59 units.

And the difference between this expansion of commercial is that they will meet the 4 per 1,000, which is a typical commercial which we see anywhere on State Street, or wherever. So they will address the parking for the grocery store area. We're still working, obviously, on the parking. parking that we have in the other area. And it's not unique. This is not the only area in the city we're working at. It's a dynamic issue that we're dealing with, you know, countywide. So I mean, this is not something that we're, you know, turning a blind eye to. It is something we have to resolve, and it's going to take some time to do that. That's not affecting this particular one. Now, access, the light, that is an issue. But this actually would be parked to what the standard is at 4 per 1,000. So it's actually a benefit, I think, for this project actually develop to the right parking standard, and we work on the other standard of getting those to the occupancy that they should be and not overoccupied, which is contributing to the parking issue.

Councilmember Spencer.

So my feeling is, I think we need to pause and step back and maybe continue this and maybe have another neighborhood meeting, and let's send out To 750 feet or whatever.

We could do more than that.

Let's see, let's see, let's get the neighbors and let's see exactly what— so they're on the same page as Mansell and we're on the same page, we understand exactly what they're proposing. And so we can get their input because I, I mean, we're— this is the same thing we're going over on the State Street master plan. It's the same thing. It's like, let's stop and let's look at it. And I propose we just continue it and then send out another mailer.

What we do is have Jeff Mansell hold another meeting is what we'd require.

Now that'd be great. And I think we can continue it. No harm, no foul. Let's move forward and let's, let's have the citizens be able to talk and speak to us and we'll be there.

So.

Any other comments from the council? Go ahead, Terry.

I agree with what Dave's saying. I would like to hear from those people who live there. In the ideal world, what would happen there and what should happen there? You live there, you know. I think the parking's a mess. I mean, we're trying to figure that out with the moratorium on State Street on fixing parking issues with high-density apartments and all the things that come from that. So we feel your pain. We're trying to figure this out, but I'd like to hear— going— I also support a pause and then going forward. suggestions, you know, what, what would be best for the neighborhood. As you mentioned, what is anyone looking at for our neighborhood? So let you know, I'd like— I think that'd be great.

Any other comments from the council? So I'm not comfortable with all the parking issues that are going on down there. I'm pretty familiar with it. I'm not comfortable with moving ahead with this until we get some of this solved. and figured out. So I'm, I'm either in the motion of rejecting it. If we were to continue it, I don't know that 2 weeks is enough time to figure out what's happening with parking.

I would suggest we just do a date uncertain, and we'll just bring it back when we're ready to bring it back. Within 2 or 3 months, probably, or 2 months or whatever.

So, Mayor, if you continue it, what do you want from the continuation?

Well, what I want to see is I want to see the parking issues Resolved and figured out.

We can't go by a 5-lane road in 5 years.

I mean, I—

No, no, but I'm just— forget about the 5-lane road, that's going to happen. What I'm talking about is the parking on the road that exists right now. We've got way too much parking on there that's causing a problem. I would like to get in there and say and take a look. Does Mansell have the required parking in the project that he's got there? to meet what his— what the people are, because it sounds like they don't. And it sounds like they don't for the 55+ have the parking that's there. And before we grant more additional parking, I'd like to find out what's going on and get that resolved.

So, so, Mayor, if I can address that, they do have the requirement— required parking based on the ordinance. What's happening is people are bringing more cars. and they're overoccupying the units. That's the issue.

So then that needs to be enforced that they don't do that.

Exactly. And that's what we're trying to accomplish.

And so, but they—

who's going to enforce it?

Well, the city, the HOA, and others are trying.

The city—

well, well, if it's an overoccupied thing, that can be a city issue. We're trying to get the HOA to solve it themselves, and that's taking obviously some time. If we can find out which units are overoccupied the city themselves can go in and issue a citation or take them to court to get them back into compliance. But we're not going to go door to door and try to find that out. It's basically a complaint issue, complaint basis. We're hoping the HOA can solve the issue because he's aware of— there's some units that are overoccupied. So we're trying to get them to come into compliance.

The bottom line, however we do it, there's no parking inside the unit.

Well, there's, there's 2.5 per unit. What's happening is they're having more cars than—

And I just want to restate that we have an approved concept. I understand if, if this option does not move forward, Mr. Mansell could pull his building permits tomorrow and build an additional 59 units. So I just want— when we talk about fixing the problem, we're talking about addressing a parking issue And we are actively trying to do that. But there is nothing that limits or prohibits Mr. Mansell from building those 59 units tomorrow with 2.5 stalls per unit.

So he builds that tomorrow with 2.5, and then we put another 50 cars out on Geneva Road, and we've gotten nowhere.

And we're not, we're not putting the 50 cars out in Geneva Road. Geneva Road. The expectation is that Mr. Mansell— we have given him a minimum parking requirement. If he chooses to modify his concept plan to, to include additional parking to accommodate this issue, and we would encourage him to do that, like we are encouraging him as part of, for example, this latest proposal to add additional parking. But there's not a requirement that he does it.

So if he puts in a grocery store and supposedly only 18 parking spots for it—

No, no, no, no, no. 18 are for the residential portion, independent of the commercial. This—

How much has he got?

4 per 1,000 is the commercial requirement.

Yeah, 4 per 1,000. So it's like Smith's. That's the same requirement. So whatever size they have, they're going to have 4 4 per 1,000. 18 is ridiculous. Nobody's going to know, you know, build a whole 18 or 30,000 square foot building with 18 stalls. 18 stalls are this for the residential itself. All these parking stalls— and I don't think you can see my pointer— all these parking stalls here are part of the requirement for the commercial only, not for the residential. So there's— I don't know how many there are— 80 parking stalls. That's the requirement, 4 per 1,000 for the C-2 zone. These 18 stalls are independent and separate and are provided for the residential portion to help solve the issue. It's nothing— that's not even the same thing for the commercial.

Okay. What?

Mayor, could I add to Jason?

I just wanted to bring something to your attention.

I did go out and drive this project this morning, and I did confirm 44 cars parked on Geneva Road. So, so Mr. Taylor is correct. I also was driving up 4 South, and I encourage each of you to drive through the New Rollins Meadows single-family home subdivision. I happen to be—

I'm sorry, 4 South and what?

4 South and about— it's between 900 West and 1,000 West. It's on the south side of 4 South. And as I went up the road, I was looking down single-family streets, and I was completely caught off guard by the amount of cars parked where these brand new homes are. There were at least 20 homes parked or 20 cars parked along brand new single-family homes. I then looped up to the east and into a cul-de-sac where I thought we had an illegal building permit. It looked like an illegal addition. Happy to report they do have a permit. But I went around to the cul-de-sac and there was one home, and I have, I have a photo and I have a video if you'd like to see it. There's one home in that cul-de-sac that had 8 cars parked in their driveway and was spilling out into the cul-de-sac. So Jason's right, we have a problem in not just our city but the county. Because we have a housing crisis, people are overoccupying homes with family members, children, grandchildren, and cars. And it's a citywide issue. And I think it's starting to spill over into the single-family homes. And I think it's going to continue to be a bigger problem.

So just so you're aware of that, it's—

I'm seeing it in other areas as well.

So, so how does that affect then the 55-year-olds?

Most of them are UVU students in that Yeah, and they may be—

that may—

I don't know if someone's bought a single-family home that's brand new and they're renting it out.

And how does that affect the 55-year-old section, Brent, that you said there wasn't any parking and they told you not to live there, that you couldn't find a place to park?

But I mean, there's a—

yeah.

I don't want to stop.

No, I'm going to talk to you.

So, so I've got a question for Dennis. You live back in the back area there at the 55 and older, and when I was down there, there wasn't an issue of parking back where you live. It's out where the, the multifamily, right?

Yeah, we are— our population density, of course, is dramatically less than than the condominium section. And yeah, we, we don't— there actually will be a few parking stalls built as the, the houses will be completed down there.

Across the backyard, and that's their complaint in there.

Yeah, that's not right.

We—

there is There's very minimal parking on the street in, in our area. Most people park in their garages or in, on the, in their driveways. By the way, I must say, the people down there are wonderful. We would love to have you.

But he has a horse. Just want you to know he's got a horse.

Well, I'm not sure about your horse. We had some horse troughs In the field behind us for a period of time, but they went away.

So, so the question is for Ryan and, and Jason. So if we continue this, and Jamie, you know, I was thinking we could do it till December 14th and give some time so Mansell could have a nice neighborhood meeting, we could have a barbecue or something. So would that be feasible? you think, or is that too long?

That's fine with me.

Okay, Mayor. I'd like to make a motion that the City Council, we continue this ordinance.

Mr. Spencer, did you say December 17th?

14th.

December 14th.

That's our next city council.

Generally, public hearings aren't continued for more than 45 days. I assume that's—

Was that generally, or can we do that?

Well, you can continue it to that date, but the most prudent thing would be to re-notice it and re-hold public hearing at that point.

Would November 9th fall within the spirit of 45 days? The first, the first council meeting in November?

No, we're meeting at that time.

14 days after. No, I think you're right. I think you're right, Tom.

There's only one meeting in November, right? One in December.

Well, the November 2nd is the election, so it's 14 days.

So it actually says 16th of November.

I'm sorry.

So we could re-notice it. We could have a public hearing. I mean, that's, I guess, not the issue. So November 16th, if you want another neighborhood meeting, you'd want to hear from the public.

So we could do it November 16th, right? You're just going to canvass.

I mean, it is, it is outside the 45-day window, but it is, it's close.

It's close.

Yeah, it's closer.

Okay, so I want to make— I want to continue to November 16th at 6 PM here in the council chambers, and we'll make sure that we have a neighborhood meeting and all will be able to attend.

So just to clarify, we do not have to do another notice, or should we notice the neighbors again?

Jason, what was the question?

So it's within the 45 days, we don't need another notice. This is their notice, or do we—

Yeah, continuing in the open public hearing would allow us to not have to re-notice.

But if neighborhood meeting, they could let the neighbor know.

I mean, can we request that the man still does the neighborhood meeting and goes out 1,000 feet?

We could do that.

So we could include everybody?

We'll actually look at the map and—

Okay, maybe make sure nobody's left out and even cherry-pick some. Sandy Morgan there.

Yeah, we'll get her address and send it.

We will. Typically we do. I'm surprised you didn't get notice, but typically—

Footage does matter.

We'll make sure that people are noticed.

Thank you.

All right, is there a second?

I just want to say one thing there. I'm disappointed Jeff isn't here, Mansell. And I can't make him come, but I'd recommend that you encourage him.

So I did talk to him yesterday and he was planning on coming. So I don't know if there's some issue that came up that he's not here. I don't know. He was—

we would like to have him here next time.

And I think he would have been.

I don't—

there must be something going on because he was planning on Based on our conversation.

So Jason, can I ask a question? How long would it take for Mr. Mansell to notice up and hold a new neighborhood meeting?

It's at least a 10-day notice.

10-day notice. So we could continue it to a date certain in October. That would be sufficient time for the neighborhood meeting. I just don't know why we are pushing it out further and further. We have an applicant who wants Some resolution.

One reason I would like to see is, is the parking issue. Is what's happening inside there? Why is everybody out on Geneva Road? I understand we have this problem all over the city in every neighborhood, whether it's high density or low density, but it's extreme right there, and I'd like to know why those people can't be parking inside the complex. So I'd like to find that out. So I'd like— if, if we were to do it in October, I want to have an— hold on just a second— I want to have enough time to actually investigate that problem. Because to me, that's the larger issue, is why are we— why do we have such a big problem? And are we just going to exacerbate it? I mean, you know, so, you know, I don't know how much time it would take to, to investigate this and look at it.

To be quite honest, I'm not sure if October or November November, but we'll do our best to get some answers.

So, yeah, I mean, would, would it be better to stick it in, stick with it in November 16th?

If it's, if it's doable for the legal—

Heather, you okay with November 16th?

So, you know, Steve was just whispering in my ear, you could set it for October, and if you're not ready to go, you should just continue to—

again, we could do October 26th as the last city council, and we can continue it if we're not ready. And then you could push it into December and go another 45 days.

So I like the mayor's—

that there's just—

it's more than just a meeting with the citizens. The mayor's saying we, we as a city need to do some study about the parking.

What's happening there?

Yeah, so it's more than just having a meeting. I think I agree with them.

I think—

I don't think it's going to be done in October if we're asking the city to do a study and to look at, are there parking spots stalls available inside the complex that they're not using. I mean, all that I think needs to be researched before I'm comfortable meeting again and not knowing those answers. So I agree with the mayor and what Dave's saying. I think, why rush it? Let's do it in November.

But I mean, if we do it the 26th, we can always continue it to 45 days after that. We can kick— we can do 45-45.

Well, I guess if we had it ready in October, but I mean, yeah, we can do it, but we got to get some answers.

Yeah, I'd like the answers before we meet again.

I mean, the question is what— so the council, what, what date do you want to do?

October 26th.

So just to October 26th and continue it? Okay, then I changed it to October 26th, 6 PM, council chambers. And then Mansell will notice Thousand Feet or whatever and you'll get with them.

Yes.

And is, is there a second?

Second.

Okay. All right, let's go ahead and vote on the continuation then. Debbie, we'll go to you first.

Aye.

Jeff?

Aye.

Hi.

Aye.

Hi.

Brent?

I'm against this whole project, but, uh, talk about it later.

Aye. Okay, so the continuation passes. We'll now go to a resolution 9.4 designating a portion of 150 North between 668 West and 800 West as both Paradise Parkside Lane and 150 North, and Jason is the presenter.

So the way the night's going, this might be very complicated, I don't know. But before you tonight is simply an address change from Parkside Elementary School, formerly known as Suncrest. They want to take this— if you can see, I turn on my pointer— they want to take this short cul-de-sac, which is 150 North street that fronts in front of the new school— existing school, new name— Parkside Elementary. They want to change it to Parkside Lane. It will keep the 150 North address as well, so anybody that actually fronts on that street residentially will still have the same address. It just simply will change the name of the street to Parkside Lane.

And a little background on that: Alpine School District is going to demolish Geneva Elementary just to the north. of Sunset, which is now Parkside, and then combine the 2 schools. They're combined now into this building, and then later they're going to build a brand new building.

So, so the principal, John, I don't know if he's here tonight, but he was aware. Yeah.

Hey, Jim.

So, um, Since you're the applicant, why don't you come forward, John? This is not a public hearing, but you're the applicant, so let's hear what you have to say.

Thank you.

Appreciate the opportunity. With the consolidation of Geneva and Suncrest, we've, we've worked very hard the last few months to rebrand the whole school, make sure everyone knows that we are now Parkside, even though we are in the old Suncrest building.

Parkside Street has the additional name as Stallion Way because Suncrest used to be Stallions.

Now that we've changed our mascot, we're requesting that it be Parkside Lane to reflect.

What is your mascot now?

We are the Parkside Panthers, is what we are.

And what is your name, sir?

John Shelton.

Should we make it the Shelton, you know? John, we know each other from a long time.

That, that was our second option, but we'll go with Parkside.

Let's move it to first.

You know, I go with what the community wants.

So.

All right, any questions from the council? Okay, I would accept a motion if someone would like to make it.

Mayor, I'd like to move that we design a portion of 150 North between 668 West— or did you change that number? 668 West and 800 West as both Parkside Lane and 150 North.

Debbie, we'll go with you first.

I'll get a second. Second.

Debbie, we'll go with you.

Aye.

Okay, Jeff.

Aye.

Tom.

Aye.

After all that, you don't want to— you're not going to vote? All right, the resolution passes. Thank you. Jamie, do you have any items?

Okay.

So I would like to move that we adjourn to a closed meeting in room 107. First, I would stay with 107. Why? Jamie?

That's—

yes, I'm sorry, we would need to Okay, so I move that the City Council adjourn to a closed meeting for strategic session in the City Council room across the hall to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation pursuant to Utah Code Section 52-4-205. Is there a second?

Second.

Second.

Okay, um, Debbie, we'll ask you for your vote.

Aye.

Okay.

Aye.

Aye. Aye.

Aye.