City Council · 2022-11-09

PowerPoint's the one. Okay, perfect. Sweet. The keyboard got a little sticky, so just spacebar it.

Okay.

All right, we got almost everyone here.

I'd like to welcome you to the 4 o'clock work session, and our first presentation, Ryan, we'll take from here. Thank you, Mayor. Mayor and Council, this is Eric Rasband with UDOT. He's here with his team tonight that's been working on the environmental study for So I'll turn it over to Eric, and they're going to give you a brief update on where they're at progress-wise and kind of what the next steps are. So, Eric.

Uh, Mayor, Council, thank you. Um, I always— when I walk into Orem's offices, it's like coming home. This is where I started my career, so I really appreciate the opportunity to come back. Um, I just want to introduce the rest of my team. I've got Jeff Dupay, Tiffany Carlson, Ryan Pitts, and Diego Carroll. We tried to anticipate questions that might come up so that we can phone a friend if necessary as we move through this. So, as you all know— there we go. The city conducted a planning study in 2018, looking at widening 1600 North, and then in 2019, That the jurisdiction of the corridor was transferred to UDOT, and along with some funding from the legislature. And so with that, where our process requires us to go through a formal environmental document, the funding that we're receiving is state funds. And so we initiated a state environmental study that looked at the impacts to residences and resources along the environment as well, and businesses as well.

Okay.

So, um, so we've gone through and we've looked at a bunch of alternatives, and we just want to go through, uh, the preferred alternative. It's very similar to the concept that was developed with the planning study. And, uh, so just— we're going to start on the west side. If you think about 1600 North today, from 1200 West to State Street, it's a 3-lane, and on both sides of it, it's 5 lanes. And so it's— There's kind of an hour an hourglass that exists today. So here on the northwest, or northeast corner, this is the resident in a residence in Linden. That property is looking like it's a full acquisition as we move forward. There's a large power pole, we're going to protect that power pole in place in the Pork Chop Island.

Right there.

This is the—

yep.

Yep.

Everything kind of shifts to the north in this area and aligns with the lanes west of the 1200 West intersection. It avoids some gas tanks at the gas station and some issues there, as well as minimize— minimizes the impacts of those townhomes through that area. And then as we get further, the alignment starts to shift to the south. You'll see some yellow lines. Those are potential noise walls, and when the project moves into design, There will be a balloting process that will evaluate those noise walls. And there's a lot of criteria, and I brought an expert if there's questions that we need to answer about noise walls. But ultimately, it's, it's not a guarantee that noise walls are going to come in. That will be something that happens at a future date. But it meets the criteria for balloting. So, and then continuing through the center part, Uh, most of the residents on the south side of the road. Orem City, through the MAG Corridor Preservation Fund, has purchased 8 of those homes and is maintaining them in different configurations today.

Actually, some of them we've actually demoed.

Yeah, I've noticed that.

3 of them we've taken down.

They're gone?

Yes.

Yep.

And what's the criteria for when you demo one or not?

Repairs get too high and rentals too low.

Yeah, if there's not a return on So here at the Bonneville Park, there's some impacts, there's some underground stormwater that we'll have to work with as we transition into design and mitigate some of those issues through the park.

Sorry, let's go backspace.

How's your sidewalk lining up on that?

Um, so what we're going to do is on the north side, the sidewalk generally remains in a similar alignment of what it is. Then on the south side, you see this very light gray line, that's an active transportation path.

So it's a wider corridor for bicyclists and scooters and pedestrians to use as well.

And then we anticipate that the city will repurpose those properties for like a linear park, and some of it will be used for potential stormwater detention as we move forward.

Similar to what we've done when we built out 8th and North, especially for example on the north side, there's kind of large parkway spaces.

That was the result of the widening project acquiring full parcels directly. So the sidewalk shifts as we widen to the south.

The sidewalk shifts to the south.

It moves with it that way.

Okay, like that one little quick one?

Yeah, right in through here.

As, as a parent of Maser high schoolers, can you explain how— because that's always been a pinch point— how that will be?

Yeah, let's go back.

Right in this area?

Yeah.

So there will be some acquisition, a partial strip-take through this area, and then, um, accesses into the school will remain similar to how they are.

And of course they've cut new access onto the street to the east of that area. These are the red box?

It's this one right up here.

Okay.

Oh no, back a little bit. Yep, it's also—

that's the house.

Thank you.

You bet.

That's a house that's going away?

Yes, it's right on the corner.

Do we own it yet?

Not yet.

By we, I meant you guys.

No, no, we have—

UDOT has not acquired any properties at this point in time.

So have you run some, like, what's the word, like samples on how the cars will get through that? The reason I say that, sometimes the cars are like backed up a block or 2, especially—

You're going to see an improved shoulder. From what it is today on the road itself.

So does that mean wide enough for a car?

Yes.

Do you think that's going to fix the problem? Fix?

It'll help mitigate it.

I don't know. I'm just saying, 2.5 miles at a time to fix this.

Yeah, but he said they could exit down and go back.

Yeah, Maser has done a lot for internal circulation.

Well, my kids graduated with them.

They have a connector out to 4th West now.

Yeah, okay.

Be aware of north of the track.

Yes.

Can I add to that?

There's a whole other phase that's going to come after this, that's where this will be designed.

And we, we did hear that in scoping, and we have heard that there are concerns there with, you know, access and getting in and out of there.

There will be an opportunity during the final design phase probably to take a closer look at this and see if there needs to be any additions or changes from what we're showing today.

This is a pretty high-level design.

Yep.

So I just unlocked like 4 years of experience.

Yeah, all pleasant, it sounds like.

It was.

It's like sat there and not moving for 10 minutes.

I mean, the other benefit too is at construction there will be 2 lanes in each direction too, so some of what you might have experienced historically will be mitigated by the additional lane.

So in the environmental process, we try to Clear the worst-case scenario, the biggest, because that will give the most flexibility to the designers within reason, right? Keeping it within an envelope that's within reason.

Thank you for being sensitive.

As we get closer to State Street, the, the road shifts back up to the north. There, there's a fiber optic vault that's right in this area that is fairly cost prohibitive to move. And so we're trying to figure out a way to protect that in place. And then we anticipate to extend the raised median through here to address some of the access and safety conflicts, the right-angle collisions that I think we're experiencing in that area, and then align with the lanes on the east side of State Street.

Yep. SWIG, how are you handling the SWIG exit?

SWIG is right here.

Right there.

Right there, right?

First media, SWIG.

First media, SWIG.

So they'll have access Into this as well as this, you know, right in, right out.

And then this one will have left in and then right out.

My Pizza Ray and Riga Cafe on the corner is also electrically utilized to get people out.

That little—

yeah, right there. So what do you mean? You're saying, oh well, now it's right only, but—

We're going to maintain it as a right in, right out.

Is there a shoulder to the deceleration lane?

There will be a bike lane.

Okay.

And then the greens are potential partial or, you know, so we haven't— that'll be some of those issues.

Your world ends right there at State, doesn't it?

It pretty much does.

And we own east of there.

Yeah. So our goal has been always to align with what happens on the east side of the road, right? Of State Street itself.

But we don't have that. large of a project even contemplated, right?

Nor do we, nor do we have the traffic pattern that suggests, you know, a need to expand. And we understand, obviously, at 4th West there, that continues to be a watch intersection.

Yes.

As far as it has been, it has been something we have improved in the past and potentially need to improve upon.

Okay.

So, um, the next one is, uh, just going through the schedule. So we started the, the document last, uh, last year. Um, we're getting ready to meet with the impacted property owners. We've, we've set up some— we've started setting up one-on-one meetings with each impacted property owner so that we can try and address their concerns on a case-by-case scenario. Um, and then we hope to have, uh, the public hearing and the, the document published in early December. Um, and then, um, depending on the amount of public comments that we receive, we anticipate getting a Record of Decision in late January, early February, unless we get significant comments that need to be addressed as we move forward, which might drive that schedule a little longer.

Yes.

So can I start and make you go back? Yeah, I remember the name of the business there on right by the freeway. that had trouble getting out of there.

Security metrics.

Security metrics.

Yeah.

Are we— is this going to help them?

What it'll do is it will create more gaps rather than a— right now everything's a single lane of traffic going through there, and so it's pretty much solid traffic. When we get the 2 lanes, you're going to start to see opportunities. The signals will help break up traffic a little more, which will provide more opportunity for them to get in and out. Okay, um, so that, that's our, um, schedule. And then if there's any questions or comments, um, we're here to answer if they have anything else.

Yes. So, Eric, if I may, and obviously this is a conversation that we've had with you and I've shared with the council, money was appropriated from the state legislature to move this effort forward. But right now, given current, uh, Construction, the current construction climate right now, the amount needed is probably about $15 million more.

Okay.

Our current number, um, we're currently underfunded between $25 and $30 million.

Wow.

So, um, with that as kind of the framework, that's why I approached you, uh, several weeks ago about essentially preparing a letter to confirm your continued support of Roadway project, and we are going to retain the services of somebody who's helped us in the past to make sure that our message is heard up at the legislature relative to this road and the need for the road. I hadn't heard the increased number, but that's obviously— I think as a council, I just want to, on behalf of the city, reiterate the city's support and Commitment to doing what we can to make this happen because this road carries, as you know, 25,000+ trips a day.

And, uh, it's a—

it's not a need in the future, but I need today for expansion.

So, you know, real estate is one of those things that's hit us hard the last several years. Um, if you look probably back even as short of time is 5 years, and real estate prices have almost doubled in that short timeline. Construction costs, we're seeing— it's, it's not uncommon for us to see this percentage of increase on pretty much every project that we have in our program. It's, it's impacting our ability to deliver projects. Uh, there was a table presented to the Transportation Commission a couple of months ago that currently identifies that As the current funding exists and cash flow exists, our construction likely is not going to happen until year 2030.

Yeah, and that's just—

yeah, and that's just because that's, uh, how our cash flow is currently laid out.

And it's, and it's not, it's not just this project. I mean, we're, we're expecting— we're experiencing this, um, across the state. You know, this is, this is where Because of the— and it's not just inflation, um, per se, by properties like Eric mentioned. You've got the construction costs, we've got— we've actually run into material shortages and supply issues.

So it's a combination of several things culminating in these cost increases happening not at a 3% level, but upwards of double digits.

Now, over a short compressed amount of time.

We're hearing it from all of our local government partners. They're experiencing similar issues with their programs as well. It's, it's such a weird position we're in right now with the economy doing what it's doing.

Yeah, so Eric, just with maybe just a question procedurally, understanding that this is the path that we are potentially heading, the preferred alternative, once that EA or that decision of environmental assessment is made Can we as a local continue to purchase properties along the corridor using, for example, MagCor preservation dollars without—

Yeah, we're, we're, we are, um, currently working with our leadership because we put a red box on somebody's property and that inhibits their ability to do things. Um, and so We're looking at— we've had conditions like this on other projects, and we look at hardships. So people who have medical conditions or job changes, they have to relocate. There's, there's a committee that is established to evaluate hardship requests, and we would, we would send any of those requests through that committee. If they approve that, then we're working to identify a funding mechanism to pay for those properties. Our current estimate on right-of-way for the project is about $26.5 million. So we can't— we really can't afford to, to go purchase every property. We have to kind of restrict to those, those individuals that have hardships until the project becomes fully funded.

But I guess my question is, since we already have $40 million set aside for this project, why can't we use those proceeds to purchase those properties from a willing seller to a willing purchaser, namely UDOT or the City of Boulder?

The cash flow has pushed that available money out to 2030.

So what you're saying is you've reallocated the $40 million that was dedicated to this project to some other project, which is kind of concerning.

It's unfortunate. So if a home went up for sale, do we not have the wherewithal to buy it?

Um, not currently.

So the corridor preservation funds that we've utilized, that fund has been drained from what I understand.

We don't have any.

Yeah, once we— we can't do anything until we get a record of decision. Once we get a record of decision, we anticipate that we will try to work with those property owners on a case-by-case basis.

Yeah, there's— there's—

and like Eric mentioned, we're trying to work through some of, some of those concerns that you just expressed, Jamie, on, you know, what's—

what we can Okay, any other thoughts or questions?

Okay, we appreciate the opportunity to come visit with you.

Thank you. Thank you. Next, we'll have the person give us about parking comments on Canyon Park.

Yeah, I mean, I'm concerned that they've just reallocated this money.

Probably one of the next steps I'll take is have a visit with several of the legislators that were involved in appropriating that amount.

Say, well, this went into walls. So this wasn't just a—

We were just—

It was money that was identified for a UDOT project. It was specifically identified for $1,600 million.

And so I'm questioning whether or not they can necessarily just take that money if it was specifically appropriated for that purpose and put it to another project. And that's the question I guess I need to answer and find out from And frankly, that's one of the reasons I think it's to our benefit to hire somebody to help bird dog this thing, because if we don't, then unfortunately I think some of this, this effort will take place. So I'm kind of frustrated.

I hadn't heard that piece.

I'd heard obviously as a result of the cost of the project they weren't going to move forward with it, but I Didn't know that they had essentially emptied out the account.

Yeah, it seems you should be able to negotiate. Is there any willing seller? Is it the homes in preparation for—

Well, that's what we've been doing, Ryan, in cooperation with the Mag Corridor Preservation Fund outside of UDOT, is working with them. And then when the project was— when the project starts, those dollars will actually be put back into the corridor preservation fund. So it's kind of a revolving fund, but like Ryan— to Ryan's point, it sounds like because of the high cost of real estate, that fund has run dry.

Yeah, I think we exhausted it in purchasing as many properties as we could under that until we ran out of money to buy more.

What we did is we exhausted our allocation of that. We had $3 million is what we agreed to bank with.

with that agreement. So we exhausted all of that account.

That—

those corridor preservation dollars are actually at the county, but other communities like Provo have actually dipped into that. So there isn't— there isn't any more money available for us to even try and ask for.

So, of course.

So we obviously— that's something we need to follow up with because some of this is new to at least to me.

All right.

Mayor, Council, Jamie, I appreciate the time. Um, we received a petition to, um, end a parking permit area. So Campus Drive is located, um, just east of Orem High School. Um, the permit area is from 3 PM to 9 PM. It was started in 2020— I'm sorry, 2002. And the main reason why it was going was people were parking on the street from, you know, the time periods, and they were using the football field, the soccer fields for personal use, blocking driveways. So back in that time, the— they petitioned for a parking district, they received it. And now the residents have signed a petition, sent it to us, and requested that it be removed. We've gone out and looked at it. And it's just like they said, that you've got chain link fences, there's no access, school access. You've got the driver's ed education and The baseball field there now on that south or southeast corner, and so all access is restricted from those school grounds with, you know, when Orem High basically redeveloped and put their new football field in and whatnot. So, yeah, I mean, we're— How many safety features do we have? So, we had 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, That's 9. I think there was a total of 15, and there's about 25 residents on Campus Drive. So we had more, more than about 60% of the residents. A couple they couldn't get a hold of. Um, and so, yeah, so we went out there. I mean, went out there. I mean, it's basically as they stated, there's really no need for the parking permit area that we see as, as the police department. Um, this, you know, searching our, uh, records, this is a, uh, a parking district by itself, just this street, so it wouldn't affect all the, uh, Orem High parking that's, uh, south of the school that's restricted during school hours.

This is its own specific, uh, parking district.

Lieutenant, there's no way for people to park there and get into the school now?

They would have to walk all the way around down to 200 South, I believe that is. Yeah, correct. I mean, there used to be a fence or a thoroughfare there, correct? Correct. And they're— they've got it locked off. There is a gate that can be accessed, but it's locked during school hours.

That's a big difference between now and 20 years ago.

Yeah.

And this parking district is only from 3 PM to 9 PM. So it really only was after school that people were using it for Social activities or recreation.

Unless they come in through the high school.

Correct. Yeah. Um, so yeah, I mean, that pretty short and sweet today. I mean, basically, um, you know, we conducted the traffic study. Uh, myself, Chief Adams, we agree, uh, agree with the petition to remove the parking district. Um, our request is to, you know, approve a resolution to dissolve that neighborhood parking district upon their request. Any questions?

Will this happen in the next council meeting, or—

Yeah, I mean, I can get with legal and we could put something together. You know, the residents were wanting it sooner than later, but, you know, we want to give an opportunity for people that may potentially be opposed to it that they could speak in the next council session. But In talking with the neighbors when I canvassed the area, they're wanting it gone.

Did most people sign the petition?

Yeah, so we had— there's about 25 residents on Campus Drive, and we have 15 of the 25. Um, and so when I went out and canvassed the area, I talked to several people on the street, and they, they don't like it. Um, they want it removed because it, it made sense to them prior to construction, but when the school changed up their dynamics, it just doesn't make sense for them neighborhood anymore.

So we kind of agree with and go from there.

So any concerns if we move forward with this? Yeah, it's pretty, pretty short and sweet today. So we'll all work with legal, we'll get a resolution prepared for either next council session or the one after depending on the schedule and go from there. So thank you for your time.

Thank you. Next, we've got a transportation master plan.

Are you doing the—

Kelly's going to present.

Is that the PowerPoint?

Pull up the PowerPoint.

Okay.

Steven's getting that set up.

This is John Dorney. He's with Horrocks Engineers, and he'll be helping me present, uh, our transportation master plan update. Um, what I have here for you guys is a draft hard copy.

Since it's 177 pages, it might have a kilometer.

Thank you.

Um, but this is just as we get this up and going. John has— and Horrocks have updated our current transportation master plan, which was, uh, built in 2015, and we're just going to go over some of the basics now. You guys will have a chance to take this, review it, make comments before we actually bring it back for approval.

Sorry, just a little slow.

And while they're, while they're going through this, or while we're doing this, we have 2 members of the Transportation Advisory Commission here with us, Kathleen Kramer and Laura Lekker, who serve very faithfully and have been here with us today.

Just want to identify what Sam said. This is an update from the 2015 master plan, and so it wasn't a complete redo. We did some things, we started over, and we'll talk about— we did gather existing data again. Um, we looked at kind of the counts from 2015 and realized that they were outdated, so we did provide existing, uh, new data.

Thank you.

And gathered counts. We'll show you that map. Part of the things we updated is in this list: the base counts. We updated the roadway level of service, which is the reason for establishing what roads need to be changed. We updated the road cross sections.

That's the planter strip, the trees, kind of the profile view that you can see.

We did address the State Street Master Plan. We originally had the districts put in with the higher densities, and then we took them out. So those do not have the State Street Plan in there now. And then we updated the 2015 from 2040 to 2050, and we incorporated the new 2050 MAG Transportation Plan elements and established capital improvement plan. So these are the main items that we updated from the 2015 Can I ask, are trails and bikes included in this, or just—

is this just particular parks?

They're included, but it's based on what plan you have currently adopted. I think you did a large master plan about the 2015 for the bike ped, and that graphic is in there, but that hasn't been changed because it's another whole master plan process. But we do have a picture of that.

Are there any changes made to this, um, the guidelines?

No, they're in here, but they haven't been modified much. We did maintain, um— am I pressing the wrong button now?

I think yes.

Um, Orem has their own trip generation, uh, different from the rest of the nation. So is Provo, probably because of students. And so we did maintain that It's a higher level of trips per house, and that is shown up in the master plan for the transportation study, the traffic impacts study guidelines.

Is that standard like mechanical? Is it person counting cars?

So there's a national standard that they get studies from the whole United States, and they come up with this book about every 10 years, they update it. Provo did an extensive study 20 years ago, and they counted 30 subdivisions, and they determined that, that the traffic per house in the valley was so much higher than the rest of the country that I think Ora might have used that data to increase their base count per home. And so it was done typically manually, where they sit out and sit out in the subdivision, they put tubes down, they put cameras Back then, 20 years ago, they probably didn't have cameras. But if we were to do it today, we would put cameras out and then manually count cars going in and out of an isolated apartment or subdivision. So, um, there's a high-level version of a master plan, and that's what WFRC and MAG does. They look at Payson to Ogden, and we'll talk about the process in a second here. They look at roadway. Level intersect— level of service. The high-level model doesn't really look at intersections, they ignore them. So we really look at roadway segments. And what we did is we did not do a microsimulation in this detailed version. That's where you get into specific projects like the environmental that you just heard from Eric Rasband. They'll get into detailed on a project level of what turn pocket they need, what lane they need. And similar to this process, I know there's a lot of data there, but basically we take that Pace into Ogden travel demand model on the far left and we put in customization for Orem. We change the population, we add employment, we look at your zoning, we look at land use, we look at existing traffic, we look at the number of lanes, and we come up with a traffic demand model. And then we put that back into the model and we customize it for Orem because it's just too broad. And we, we have these traffic analysis zones that we make smaller, kind of like pixels on a TV. If you have big pixels, it's blurry. The MAG model and the WFRC model have bigger pixels, bigger TAZs for Orem. We go in and carve them out smaller to get better data. And then we go through recommendations, we provide that. To the staff. The staff talks to OTEC. They discuss it with administrators. We also consult the general plan. We want to make sure that the master plan doesn't contradict the general plan because then you get developers picking which plan they follow and, and you know, you're stuck. So we make sure that we follow that. We did have public input on the 2015 version, an official one. Due to this being an update, we didn't do a full—

Public input.

Open house, but as part of this public comment period through Planning Commission, through City Council, the public will be notified to come in and comment about it. So that will be a joint public involvement period and Planning Commission. And then there's adoption. So we're kind of in this review adoption process right now. Again, these are the traffic counts that we did. We added our counts. You guys do extensively a lot of counts with Taylor and your public works group. We have dots here, and you can see there's different color codes. We got some from ADT, we got some from you, we got some from us, and we got an idea of what's the traffic past 2015. Once we look at the traffic and the number of lanes, we can classify your roadways. We can say, is this a collector? Is this a 3-lane arterial? Is this a 5-lane arterial? And that determines kind of your access and your flow. This mobility chart, you know, is the more driveways you have and the more ability you have to access the road, the less cars you can move. That's why freeways don't have accesses, because they can throw cars through there. So there's a conflict between high mobility and good access. You can't have both all the time. So there's this, this hierarchy based on the different type of roads. We looked at the existing road network. This is pretty much your signals. You can see the classes there. Maybe you can't see them. The urban collectors, minor arterials, principal signals, roundabouts. There's a hawk signal, a couple of them. This is in your report that you have. And once we get the travel demand model data and we customize it, we rerun the model, we look at it. we come up with the good, the bad, the ugly. What is ORM willing to accept? And this is just a graphic of what's acceptable, what's not. It's arbitrary. Sometimes C might be acceptable, sometimes E is acceptable, depending where you're at. But this is kind of a level of service grade that the industry gives to these roads. And this is how they do it. If you have a 3-lane collector, they're saying 13,400 cars is okay, but once you get close to 14,000, you're going to start seeing problems. And so when we show you these improvements, we look at the model, we look at your individual road links, and we compare it to this table, which is a MAG WFRC table that says if you put 20,000 cars a day on this road, you know there's a problem. Once you get around, you know, 13,000 or 14,000, you got to make a decision. Are we really estimating it correctly? Do we need to do something? And this is where the widenings and the roadways and what UDOT's doing on 1600, when they project 30,000, 40,000 cars a day in the future, what decisions do we make? And this is where we advise the city what's going to happen in the future. We take our best guesstimate. We look at level of service. You see the green and the red and the orange. Red's bad. Yellow is getting close to being bad, but it's still acceptable. And green is good. And again, you've got signals and you've got segments. These are the TZs, a little bit more detail in the model. These are the things that were broken up individually and looked at in more detail. And this is again the process. We take the existing model. We calibrate it with our counts. We look at what the capacities are of your roads now. We take the future data, so we take the population for 2050, we take your land use data from 2050, we take your redevelopment plan for 2050, we look at your general plan, we work with your staff to change the input in the TAZs like we did in the existing, and then we run the model again and we get this future volume capacity. And that's the answer that kind of we're presenting today. And that you can review. In 2030, we call this a no-build level of service, meaning if we didn't do anything and we just let traffic go and we didn't build any more roads or widen any more roads, this is what is estimated the road would look like, the road network would look like. We've got red is bad again, yellow's acceptable but close, green is good. Um, and this is from all the input and all the output and all the work And this is where we come up with projects, and we spend a lot of time with, with Sam and a lot of your other staff saying, this is what we're looking at. Is that a good idea or a bad idea? Or that's a crazy idea, that's not going to fly. So he goes back and talks to your staff and say, what kind of appetite do we have for this project? Um, and we did that again for 2050. Um, it gets a little bit worse if I flick back between these slides, I think.

Uh, That's Center Street.

No, 800 North.

That was going to be my question. Your last slide, if you go back, you got the 2030 model. So you're saying we're already built, already red?

Well, this is 2030. If I go back to existing, that's 2030 during the PMP too.

Yeah.

Oh, okay.

Whoops. The 8 east of the PMP, not the beginning.

Yeah.

And Um, so this is 8th East right here. Yeah, so this is from Center to 8th South, and then you go into 2050, then it creeps up past Center Street up to 4th North, and then all of a sudden you're looking at Orange.

But I want to see, can you—

do you have a model of, um, 8th East hitting on 8th North? For now, correct? So the existing conditions?

Yeah.

Is it back further?

Let me see. Well, it's no build, right? There we go.

Yeah, there's existing.

And this is, you know, I guess, I mean, What you see at the PM peak at an intersection is different than what the ADT says. So there's the microanalysis that I talked about where you'll see a spot problem at an intersection, but the road segment's fine. And so, um, the, the master plan typically doesn't look really hardcore at the operational from a— it's just the cost. I mean, we could do every intersection in the city, but it would cost so much money to do an operational that level. Again, tailored does a really good job of having a synchro model for your whole city. But together we try to figure out the dynamics between intersection improvements and road link improvements, because road improvements usually mean widening, and that means—

Secrets.

And public involvement nightmare. And I was around when Costco was built in college and remember the spray paint on the garage door. Building is not always the first thing. Adding lanes is not always the first thing, but, but the intersections are different because that's what the drivers experience. So we try our best.

Just a question on that. So the tie-in to University Parkway at the mouth of the canyon, that's not—

yeah, right there.

So this is, so this is a 4-lane section of road and this is 6 lanes.

Oh yeah, right. There's often a big backup right there. Yeah. Is that— you guys work together? How do you tie that in? How do you— yeah, we just have a development that's going to put some stress on that area that we're looking at tonight.

So do you meet weekly or monthly with UDOT?

Monthly.

Monthly. So this is a meeting that they have all the time, and we identified this section as needing, uh, 6 lanes. Right now it's 4 lanes.

And so this section of 8th North is all 6 lanes except for right here.

And there is that southbound or westbound coming out of Heber. There used to be a right turn free, free right.

Yeah.

And they changed it. And so between your staff and UDOT, they work through those issues and you can't ignore it. It's there every night. And then if there's an event or a ski, after ski, it's always there.

So.

So if you're meeting monthly, what's the answer to that?

Because there's future development, like Renee says.

Talking about that already.

You know, we meet, we meet monthly with, with UDOT, and we identify issues that are kind of lying in wait. Unfortunately, the funding for a lot of these programs are things that are into the future. These are, you know, we, for example, we're having conversations right now about some of these issues. The first one is 1600 North. You can see right up there, and we thought we had funding for that. We're gonna, we're gonna keep working on funding for that. At the intersection of Center Street and I-15 there at 1200 West, we have an identified problem there, especially during AM peak where we have people who are wanting to get, for example, to the university. They're heading northbound, but they're bypassing University Parkway and they're going to Center Street and looping around because University Parkway is so congested. And so we're having conversations about University Parkway and what can we do to ease access onto the campus from I-15 to the campus. Similar to, for example, if you've been up to Sandy and you see that fly-under that they've done at 106th. South into the Southtown Mall. All of these are conversations that we're having with them on a monthly basis, but in order for us to essentially effectively affect outcomes in the future, these are things that we need to program in cooperation with MAG. They need to jump into regional transportation plans, and ultimately, because some of these facilities are state highways They need to find their way into a state transportation plan, and then they are graded and essentially scored based on other— all the other needs in the state. And sometimes we fare better than others. In the case of 1600 North, when the scoring took place a number of years ago, we didn't fare as well as some other projects. And so we decided that we would retain the help of somebody who could go up to the Capitol with us and lobby for that money, and we ultimately got that money. So it's a very, um, I guess, push-and-pull process, and we're always striving for solutions. But many, if not a good majority, of the problems that you see here, these are not Orono problems. These are regional transportation problems that are a result of Obviously Orem traffic, but people moving through Orem to get places as well. So we have to involve MANG, we have to involve UDOT.

Mm-hmm.

But at the same time, given the limited means that they have to build projects, we have to get in line and wait for money to arrive, or we have to aggressively go after it. And our strategy in recent times has been to aggressively go after it.

So my question on 8th North, what's the discussion about that? What are they—

It's not a— right now it's not a high priority for UDOT.

So they're probably— meaning there won't be any changes there until it's a priority?

They're probably— you know, there are improvements that they can make. For example, we've talked about right-in, right-out access. I mean, we're having this conversation tonight about a particular development, there are some things that we can do in the short term to improve that situation, that level of service, you know, but there's no conversation right now about a 2050 solution. We're just trying to manage and hopefully get to 2030.

But that wouldn't be a we, that would be them.

Well, it's a— it's their responsibility as the owner of the facility But we work with them to do what we can to improve, um, to improve the network in general. And sometimes if we improve the network in general, then that does impact outcomes along, for example, state facilities.

And ranking also has to do with safety. And at least on this side, there's not as much crashes or accidents. There might be some near misses at 1550, but coming out of the canyon, it's all right-hand turns. And so I don't know what the rankings are, but they try to make it safe first and worry about congestion second. So you'll see different reasons of why they're putting money in certain places. Some of it's political, like you said, you got money for 1600 by hiring somebody. There's getting attention right there. I was surprised it wasn't 6 lanes at least.

But there's also a bridge structure there too.

Yeah, and the alignment of the bridge points, points a certain way. And there's a, there's a vertical and horizontal curve there. So to redo that area would be $200 million to do it all right. So I think if it's not an imminent problem from a safety standpoint, then they're like, okay, we can handle some backing up in the canyon for now. I, I don't know, maybe, maybe the city could work with adding back that right-hand turn. But there's a double left also. So there has to be room to have both. Yeah, um, and I think that's why they got rid of it.

John, if I could add, maybe Councilman Peterson's question specifically with the Palm Trees intersection, UDOT will work on that access permit with the developer. It's going to be— it's going to have to be a joint solution between the developer to put in some median improvements or whatnot to make that a safer intersection. So, so questions From the developer, I was told that UDOT wants to participate in the cost. Does UDOT do that? Do they say it's a UDOT road but we want you to pay part of it? Yeah, a really good example is down on Geneva Road and 12 North right now. A traffic signal is going to be installed at that intersection. The majority of that cost is being paid by that development of those large flex warehouse buildings that are either under construction or have been completed.

Correct sound, they're paying for those improvements due to their impact to the Yeah, so, so UDOT provided— yeah, yeah, because UDOT provided all the hardware for that signal, but then the developer is actually paying to have it designed and then installed. So they do partner to build that.

Do those conversations include the gas station and Mama Juice?

We have not yet.

Right, right now there was a— I think some of you may have seen that, that older traffic study that was performed in 2015 for that area, and there were 3 concepts in there, and all 3 of them essentially had a median going in there in different ways to restrict the right-in and right-out at 1550 on the south side for this development tonight. UDOT has hired them, Avenue, to go ahead and give us a construction estimate so then we can look at— they have a number, we can look, move forward to design it, get an agreement, and, and do some things like that. So They understand that now it needs to happen with this development coming in, that we need to put in some sort of a safety improvement.

So would we pay for that?

Would the developer?

I think initially it was thought that we would go in thirds— UDOT, the city, and, and, and, and the developer— which, that's a whole other discussion here, what we'll have in a few minutes leading up to the developer agreement for tonight. But if we can finish this, that we might as well just Yeah, yeah. I mean, the developer has— is not necessarily willing at this— well, is not willing at this phase of this project to participate.

Yeah, I think part of the problem is just the unknown, because I don't think there's a specific design approved yet. The cost is not known, and so I think they were reluctant to commit to anything with those factors not being known.

Yeah, they wanted to have a value there, not just necessarily give you a simple—

Were they looking to commit to a not-exceed amount? No, we proposed that.

So we approve the development and they— how does that work?

Well, I think the way it would work is when they come in for a site plan, they'll have to do traffic impact study, Traffic study will identify needed improvements to that intersection, and then our ordinance allows us to require them to make those improvements as part of the approval process. For the approval of the site plan?

Site plan, yeah.

Right now we're contemplating approving the overall plan zoning, but not the site plan.

Right.

Thank you for that.

And we were trying to have them make that Commitment by way of development.

Yeah. And they're not willing to do that.

Right. So does it— because once they have the zone in, then it's just approved. How much, um, does the— say, does the Pomachus and the gas station have once that zone's changed? And are they out of the picture then? Do they have influence in that?

Well, Sam can speak to that better than I can, but I think that UDOT, in designing whatever improvements they'll take into account the needs and the impact on those other businesses.

Yeah, it'll be— it'll go into a public process, and you'll have Mama Chu's, Will's Pit Stop, as well as Central Utah will all be partners at that table because they have to have access to Olmsted Power Plant and the park. There's a park there for that trailhead, a parking lot for the trailhead. So yeah, once— this is just the zoning. We tried to have some, some, some commitment with the developer agreement.

They didn't want to.

So but to everyone's point, yes, when it comes through for site plan approval, they'll have a TIS, we'll have the improvements. It's not as if you're going to approve it, kind of don't have to do anything.

They'll still be there.

So there will be protections there for these businesses?

Yes.

And part—

they'll be involved.

I think part of the reason why there's participation through 3 parties is because it's an, it's an existing issue, right? It's, it's not something that just the developer's creating. It's, it's the dynamics and the geometrics of that intersection. So the reason why you get 3 parties looking at it is because they know it's, it's there now as a problem, and they're adding more to it. So it's a joint effort to try to make it right.

So does your traffic study ever consider business impact? So, oh, this one, the environmental process, I'm not sure what to call it, but I guess I'm Okay, everybody comes together and decides the development's going in, we're going to fix it this way, and the businesses end up going out of business because there was no impact statement.

There won't be an environmental there, I believe, on— well, on the local level for the traffic. I'll be in the next meeting too, so I'm kind of holding back.

John, if they were to— if they were to make a decision to improve, let's say, from, from Palisade to the mouth of the canyon and expand the road from 4 to 6 lanes, it's a state facility, they would have to go through an environmental process.

Yeah, yeah, they would. To do that, they would have to go to fix this red line we're showing. Yeah, they would have to do the exact same process that they're doing up here. Um, talk to everybody, talk to the city, go through the environmental, then, you know, everything. the developer actually was willing to give away 50 feet of property to accommodate a future widening. And I don't speak for them, but I don't— you know, that's something that can be negotiated. But we originally said, let's accommodate the widening in the future and give away 50 feet. And where that stands, I don't know.

But I just think it would be a tragedy if, you know, we approve this and the businesses, because of changes to the road, 5 years down, 10 years, 7 years, they go out of business because of the change in traffic.

It goes back to that mobility and access picture I put up. That's a high mobility, high 2 major roads, and then the wannabe access. And they just, they come to a point where they can't both be in the same space. So what do we want to do? We even analyzed a full signal— a full signalized intersection with a raised intersection with underpasses, you know, it's $50 million or something. And so what— who can take that on? It had to be a state cooperation. So there might be something later, but the amount of effort it would take to fix the horizontal and vertical curves, and as you come down the hill, and then the angle of the bridges actually point you north so that they, they create a curve, and these— those should be straightened out. So it's a, it's a bigger fix. I think we looked at a signal, but it was so much effort, UDOT's like, don't even think about it. So we went back to a right and right out. Um, so they did pursue that, looked at it, backed off, offered, offered land, which they still may.

That whole northern half near that intersection isn't even up for any approval right now.

So that, that's another—

They'll drive through that.

They'll drive through it, but, but land directly next to it is still open for approvals here.

So what point did they rebuild that bridge? At what age? It was built like '85.

They do an inspection.

Yeah, 50 to 100— 50 to 70 years. We're looking at the bridge south of that, and it was built— one half was built in the '40s, one was built in the '80s, and the '80s one is amazingly in good shape. Like, there's no rebar and rust. So it kind of depends on the wear and the stresses over it. So the bridge inspections And UDOT will have inspected those every couple years, and so they're available.

And that's not on the timelines version?

I'd have to look at it and find out.

So one of the, one of the illustrations that was in our packet showed—

so going east on 8th North where you turn into those businesses, Mama Chu's and the gas station, it showed a left turn going into that development. And a right turn going into the development across the street.

And then coming out of that development, a right turn, so you could get in and out.

You could get to Monashews from the east.

And then coming out of there, there was a right—

I mean, there were 2 different ones.

There was a right turn and a left turn in different applications.

So I like that because that way you can get there from All different directions, uh, not impeding their business and their successes. And still, it looked like a good answer to all of the problems. But that was—

I think that's what Sam alluded to. There was like 3 different options, and you can mix and match if you want. If you can allow lefts in and it's not going to hurt anything, they just have to wait for the people, then that's— it's a left-out. It's the uphill leftouts. It's, it's leftouts that are scary. And I think one lady in the last meeting— I don't know, is this meeting or at Plano City— said, if there's not a median there, I'm just going to turn right and do a U-turn anyways. I do it all the time, you know. So there's a reason why they have to put in a hard median, because people will do that at risk. And so it's not just a little pork chop, it's like a whole system. And the negotiating between Mammochoos and Chevron and Central Utah, whether it's a left in or out, that'll all be negotiated. We just identified it, that, that definitely is an issue we recognize coming out of Heber. The problem is, when we ran the 2050 model, University was fine. It's the Heber Valley is like insane, like 30,000 cars a day coming out of that, which is a State Street type volume. Um, And so someone has to pay attention to that, and MAG is responsible for running their model up in that area. But we're seeing a ton of traffic coming out of that valley. There's a lot of rights getting to the freeway, getting out. So, um, a lot of information here. This is in your packets, but it basically identifies every project. for the 2050 condition. And we have little tags we went through with, with Sam, multiple iterations. We call out where the RTP has a project for a certain phase, or the MAG does, and where we say— the classic example is 8th East. The MAG says 8th East isn't needed till Phase 3. We're saying it's needed in Phase 1, which is those 10-year blocks, 2030, 2040, 2050. And this is where you guys provide input and say I do or don't like that, or ask questions. This would be the page that you probably look at and read the projects and mark it up and say, why is this needed? Do we really want to do that? Do we really want to have seven seven lanes on Center Street? These are the things that we just identified that the model shows as needed, and then we give you an idea of what. MAG says is needed on the same block. And then it's, it's up to us to kind of decide.

Page number that correlates to—

well, that's right. Yeah, it's—

I think it's 39.

32 for 2030 CIP projects. 39? Nope, I think it's 37.

37?

Yeah, page 37 is the 2050.

But you did bring up a point on your figure. 15 is interesting. We don't have a picture of it, but it tells you how much pass-through traffic is happening in Orem. So how many people don't start in Orem and go somewhere, and how many people don't come into town and stop, it's straight pass-through. And the 2015 council members wanted to ask and find out how many— how much people are we paying for for to use our roads that go to, you know, Provo, basically. And that, that Figure 15 is an interesting one, and that changes, you know, every so many years. But, um, this is the figure that we won't go through all these, but this is one that basically calls out the improvements. And this is where you'd probably spend a lot of your time and, and, and look at and say, why is this needed? What are we doing here? Um, talk more about it. Um, And if you have questions now, I can answer them, but I know we're up on your next meeting. Terry asked earlier, look, is this our problem or their problem?

And on 8th North specifically, but a lot of these are shared problems. Uh, UDOT roads are 8th North, part of 16th North, right? Uh, 13 South, or whatever the diad at University is.

Center—

is that Center Arts?

No, Center Arts.

So that's the major Geneva Road.

Freeway.

Okay, but the major to the freeway, 8 North, 12 South, or University Parkway, and most of 16, at least heading west, we share responsibility anyway. They're not our roads, but Center is ours all the way, correct? And that's where we'll charge a pass-through tax as people are going through the tunnel.

But that's, but that's legislatively part of the conversation we're trying to have with UDOT and the state legislature. We have local facilities serving regional purposes, right? You know, we have Center Street, it connects, it cross-sections 5, uh, 5 or 4 federal or 4 state highways, yet it's a local road.

State Street, Geneva, I-15, and University Parkway.

Yeah, excuse me. And, and so it's not— but it's not a state facility. And so we approach UDOT and we say, we need your help.

with this.

And they say, it's a local road, we don't invest in local roads. But there's a state highway in Benjamin that literally carries 1,000 trips a day, maybe even 100 trips a day.

Dozens of thousands.

And that's a state highway. And we're saying, wait a second, time out. You're maintaining state highways that carry 1/100th of the load That we're carrying in Orem. It doesn't seem practical. So part of the conversation we're trying to have statewide with UDOT is let's recalibrate this and let's have a conversation as to what should be a state highway and what should be a local road. And if we have roads in Benjamin that are state highways, well, maybe we need to have a conversation about saying, no, locals, you maintain that road, and UDOT, let's use your money to invest in roads where We have 25,000 to 40,000.

Why don't we offer to pay for that road in Benjamin?

Yeah, I mean, we went through an overlay on, uh, Center Street how many years ago, Sam? 4 or 5? It was $1 million from 1200 West to State Street, and that was all Orem money. But if you look at the research John has done about 35, 40% of that carry load on Center Street is not Orem. It's people going through Orem to get to Provo.

Can I ask how you determine that?

Like, is it by license plate?

So it's, it's an estimate because we— that kind of technology is super hard right now, is the license plate reading, because you'd have to set them up in every single place. They also try Bluetooth. The problem is you'll have like a 4 people in a car, and they'll read all those cell phones and your car Bluetooth and count that as 4 cars. And so that technology is— you can do it on a smaller scale. We've done it before. Um, we have the readers, but it's hard on a large scale.

So what's your best guess?

No, so what they do is they run the travel demand model, which takes people across the whole valley and say they, they match jobs with population, with, with institutions— UVU, BYU, hospitals. It's the same travel demand model that gives us the, the level of service and the road widths and their volumes. And they draw a line around Orem and basically say anything passing through this line and not stopping or not originating is a pass-through car.

I mean, you just have to go out right now at the corner of State Street and Center Street and look at all the traffic that's heading westbound. Like, I guarantee you that traffic is not coming off of 8th East or 4th East. It's coming from the river bottoms.

Yeah, yeah.

We're going to have the freeway.

And it's going to the freeway.

Yeah.

Yeah, um.

So where was that strip thing that you said?

The, uh, I think it's Figure 15.

Yeah, it was Figure 15.

Let's see. 11 by 17 graphics.

That's on page 28. So 35%, 30 to 35%, Center Street.

And if I may too, I think a community on the maturity continuum like we are as Orem, We have reached a point as a community where we can't necessarily build our way out of some of the transportation issues that we have. So we need to look— we can't just add more lane miles. So I mean, if we continue to face significant congestion along, for example, Center Street, we can look at expanding that roadway, probably go one lane each direction. But for example, State Street, Can we really effectively add one more lane each direction on State Street and not decimate the entire corridor?

Probably not.

I mean, 1600 North has 35 homes they're taking.

Um, that's big.

Like, you just can't— yeah, when you fill in, now you're, now you're building up. So, so is Provo. So those percentages, those percentages might stay the same, but the volumes keep going up. So you might be 12,000 cars a day now going into Provo, but it might be 18, and it just keeps growing.

So that's why we look at bicycles, pedestrian transit opportunities. We look at carpooling, we look at, uh, you know, lane tolling, so on and so on. Now, I'm not suggesting any of this, but those are some of the conversations that the state of Utah is having too, because along the I-15 corridor, they're running out of room.

to expand the roadway.

At a very local level, we're running into the same situation. With that said, and then I'll shut up, we're incredibly blessed to have the grid network that we have in Warren. So I don't want to say that we're in a terrible situation. If you look at many of our peers in this valley, they would give their left foot to have a grid network like we have. So I think we have very good bones.

It's just a matter of trying to find ways to improve those bones over time.

So a question about— because I, of course, I'm up on 1600 North. I know people out there have a concern of this expansion of this road. I think a better option— I don't know if this has been presented— because a lot of that is, um, 1600 North exit is you know, people go out to the east, of course. But, um, and then PG, East PG, um, puts a lot in that area over on the Fort West. Um, so, and I spoke with Eric about this a little bit, but in addition, I know you're going to improve that, they're going to improve that intersection or that interchange on I-15 with PG West.

Mm-hmm.

But so this expansion on 1600 to 18th is truly significant as far as removal of homes and impact to neighborhoods. So if there are concerns about that, how does that get addressed before decisions are made?

That would be through Sam meeting with—

I don't know if you meet with them monthly— is the people in this room.

So, but this doesn't— like, for example, the proposed collector distributor system.

Is any of that worked into our modeling?

So that was done after that whole collector distributor— the environmental process was done after we started all of this. And so they'll have that next interchange up. I don't know what they're calling that. It's 2000. The overpass will be a CD system. Um, but yeah, that How that affects this interchange and 1600 didn't.

So ideally, we go through this process every 5 years. It's been 7, but we had COVID. So, and, and so 5 years from now, we'll go through a similar process and we'll assess, okay, well, where are we today based on what is planned and what is currently available? So for example, in 5 years when we update this plan, it will be representative of the proposed improvements that are happening in Pleasant Grove. And maybe this changes a little and takes some of the stress off of North Orem based on these new roads that are programmed or already constructed.

I just don't feel that Orem should feel a responsibility to provide traffic at the expense of our neighborhoods. Um, of a lane, you know, because what are they doing? They're getting off at 1600 and going to the canyon because it's less than 8th North, you know, will be faster than going to 8th. Yet what's the cost for our city?

And that's the environmental process that they're going through right now.

Um, I almost feel like we need to address it now before they decide.

Well, looks like they're already buying homes and tearing them down. Well, that's the west side.

I'm actually— the east side.

Okay, because that I think you mentioned it. We weren't really— 1600 North really doesn't bleed into 4th West as much, right? I mean, they're not doing anything on that side. When you say it's purple—

Right here.

So this is the loop, right? The 1600 North where it turns into 80th, so it looks like you're going clear down to the mall, right?

Yeah, that's the Phase 3.

So right here.

And I guess to that, I want Yeah. Oh, so purple, you're taking all the homes.

That's not the case.

No.

So you're just going to take knowledge.

No.

So what, what this is identifying is there's a need, level of service. By the time we're at 2050, your level of service is going to be E or worse. You're going to have a lot of delay. So there needs to be— something needs to happen there. Now Also, to reiterate too, that the Transportation Advisory Commission has looked at this as well. And that's where philosophically we got to look at, do we want to build ourselves out of congestion? Do we want to destroy a neighborhood?

No.

Well, then to Jamie's point, we got to look at other modes. We got to be able to get people around because we're still going to have 100,000 to 120,000 people here. They're still going to want to get around. Do we look at other ways? Do we look at public transit? Do we look at active transportation? Do we identify other core corridors to move people around because people want to come here and they want to live here because we have a lot of amenities here that folks like. I don't know if we can ever stop that, but we have to figure out a way to get people to move around. And by using a car and building lanes, to your point, yeah, it's going to totally— it's going to create kind of a fence. You're going to have neighborhoods that don't cross. So if we want to maintain that, then we have to look at other ways to get folks to move around because we want to have people stay here. We don't want them to leave because they can't get around our city.

Sam, we also have the option of a no-build solution, right?

Right.

And what happens is congestion will drive people to find other means of transit, right? That we're liking.

Yeah.

So yeah, that's an option as well.

Or like today, we have a problem with a no-build scenario at Center Street between Geneva Road and I-15, right? Because given what we have with Union Pacific and a railroad crossing there, We haven't been able to improve that section, but Vineyard is growing like gangbusters, right? So when people get off the freeway now, they're not going to Center Street. What they're doing is they're saying, well, I'm going to go to 4th North, or I'm going to go to 4th South, or they're not even choosing to go into Orem from Vineyard along Center Street. They want to come up 4th South. So it creates more traffic demand on 4th South, and so you see more and more cars on 47. You know, they're gonna— cars are like water, they're gonna follow the path of least resistance. And they're going to start essentially adjusting so that they can get places. And we need to find ways to potentially discourage that if we want to preserve the neighborhoods that we have.

So that's why a 2000 South exit would be, you know, a prolo exit would be helpful for all those people driving Through Orange to get to Provo every day.

That 820 North.

It's not all just our burden.

Yeah, I know they finished that environmental and they're looking at an 820 North interchange through Provo. Um, the Purple Line, we're not saying you got to do it or you're going to be in trouble. We're stating that the model is showing if you keep building based on the current zoning, based on— well, I should say the zoning in the 2050 zoning, you'll likely need to improve that. RTP said— MAG said Phase 3, we're saying Phase 1. I asked— I think I told you, I asked MAG about it and they said— I said, why do we show it in Phase 1 and you show it in Phase 3? And they said, well, the previous Orem City Council members said there's no way we're going to go take homes, so kick it out further. So they've already done that.

Okay.

So that's just identifying what's out there, and we take the previous politics out and say, all right, another 5 years have passed, this is what the road network says is needed. You guys now can talk about it and decide as a city where you want to go with it.

Yep. Sam, correct me if I'm wrong, in our TAC meeting, but didn't you also talk about if that particular road needed to be widened, it didn't necessarily— it could be restriped, the lanes could be a little smaller. Like, there's a potential to add lanes without actually having to take up more land.

Right.

I mean, and those are all things that—

Throw options on the table.

If it does happen and we do want to move forward with that, those are options too. Like, you know, when, when we started the, the process with 16th North, that was one of the concepts that we brought to that neighborhood. It was just symmetrical widening, a few feet. People could keep, keep their homes. Um, if we could restripe it, that would be fine. But we brought that forward as a, as a plan, and then we let the neighborhood D side, and they're like, as much as it would be nice for me to have my home here and still be here, I can't get out at PM peak. I'd rather go ahead and you buy me out, and then we can go ahead and move, and then we widen this out. So, but those are fundamental things that I think you guys are willing to— I know that the Transportation Advisory Commission is looking to draft somewhat of a cover letter that kind of is going to explain maybe we need to look at different philosophies, and that would be something that's going to be presented to you guys as well. As we look forward to these, do we need to really embrace the fact that we can't keep building ourselves out of congestion, that we need to come with solutions that kind of maintain the integrity of our community?

Which is frustrating because it's not Orem growing, it's other places, and then they're using our roads.

Some percent of it is.

But we want them to come here and shop, right?

So it's kind of a—

Buy their cars here.

It's definitely a slippery slope.

We're getting close to council meeting, right?

Yeah.

So, uh, future roadway network. This just puts all the signals and intersections all in one graphic that says this is potentially where they will be or could be. There's another graphic in your book that has another subset of this, of what's future, what's existing. These aren't set. These are just— you will likely need to do something at these signals and intersections comply with level of service D or E. This is the last slide, I think. In addition to everything else in these documents we mentioned a little bit before, there's access management standards, meaning how far away can intersections be from each other. There's traffic calming guidelines, there's a traffic calming toolbox, traffic impact study guidelines, the Southwest Street Network Area Plan, the Geneva Temple area, that's in there. cost estimates for the projects and also a capital improvement program. So all of those are appendices. If you're interested, that's also in the document. I think that's it.

Again, this is not in stone. This is a draft, merely a plan for the future, can be amended at your discretion going forward.

If I could add, Jamie, as I said, TAC has signed off on this, from what I understand.

2 members are here, is that correct?

And our next steps would be to present this to the Planning Commission in a work session and then move forward with adopting it formally through the Planning Commission and City Council process.

So tonight is the introduction, and then we move forward with that.

In the meantime, any concerns or questions as you review it, please get those back to Sam, and he'll work with addressing those concerns. Thank you.

Yeah, thank you.

You want to get your food?

I can talk while you eat, or shall we just quickly—

um, yeah, why don't we do that?

Okay, okay, I can talk while you eat. Okay, let's go ahead and do that.

We'll, uh, so we'll grab our food. We have a volunteer say a prayer.

Thank you very much. Dear kind and wise Father in Heaven, we're grateful for this opportunity to have to meet together tonight to discuss the needs of the citizens of our great city. We thank you for their commitments and the work that's been done on these projects that have been presented to us. We ask you, Father, for a blessing upon the food that we're about to eat, that it may give us nourishment and strength. Yeah, yeah, you remember practicing?

Yes, there you go.

Chicken, grilled chicken, and the pork salad. Like something like that.

Yeah.

What are you gonna do now?

Just dousing it?

If you find it, Bryce, if you find it not as spicy, they must have done something different to mine.

I'll just judge you.

Yeah, no, they did something.

I'm listening.

I'm so glad you're listening, and I didn't even look at you. Didn't even give you the look, did I?

All right, let's carry on.

Are you good?

Uh, we have 2 council members that's not with us.

Do you want to wait, or are we good to go?

Thank you.

We can watch it, read about it in the papers. Okay, as soon as they come by.

Okay.

Unless it's one of them.

Uh, nope. The bunnies or the, um, which part of the paper?

And once we approve the calendar, you'll give us a reminder on whose turn it is to get—

Yes.

That kind of stuff. Okay.

If you guys haven't signed up for the Thanksgiving meal, do the seniors. Gina was asking me about it.

The 18th?

When is that?

Friday the 18th, I think.

No one signed up to something.

I signed up.

Okay, but she didn't know.

Everybody, um, I'm assuming Chrissy sent you some sort of, um, invite.

They need, they need to count.

Was that for veterans this Friday?

Veterans is actually tomorrow.

No, no, veterans at senior centers tomorrow.

Tomorrow.

But the veterans program is Friday.

When's our lunch?

Well, there's—

this is the Thanksgiving lunch.

We don't have a veterans lunch.

It's tomorrow if you want to come.

I thought it was Friday because it's 12:00.

She was just asking me.

I'm like, well, I'm sure they want to come.

Are you ready? Are you good?

You're on.

Okay, mine will be really quick and simple. Obviously these are just housekeeping things. First is the mayor pro tempore that the mayor has, um, recommended for January through July— through June to July, 1st of July. Um, he has recommended, um, Council Member Lamson, so that will be on the consent calendar next month for approval. Um, the next one is your proposed council meeting calendar for 2023. This is required by the state that we do a proposed council schedule for the year, and we have to publish this. Obviously, we can add and subtract to this, but the state requires us to do this. We do try and stick to the 2nd and 4th Tuesday for city council meetings. Um, I think we got lucky this year. I don't think we had to change any of them. So, uh, we do have July, November, and December where we only have one meeting per month. And that's still in there. So this just gives you an idea of those dates that we're proposing, some of the other activities that are going on that may have conflicted, but it didn't, um, except for poor finance conferences always get in the way. So please look over that. If I don't hear anything back from you, we will go ahead and proceed.

Valentine's Day?

That's just to let you know, that's—

yeah, we have that day Scheduled for the city council meeting.

You're more than welcome to. We're more than welcome to look at moving it. We can look at the calendar when we get close and say, you know, there's only two items we can postpone them.

We can cancel it.

Laces. Yeah, that's a question.

That's my first time I ever got in trouble. Valentine's Day with my wife.

You just learn.

And we can't— again, we can do like we did tonight. We can move it to Wednesday. So would you prefer moving that to Wednesday that week, to the 15th? We can do that right now.

I think that makes sense.

The 15th.

Okay.

Yeah, we're seeing if we just skip it.

Okay, we'll put it down for the 15th, and then when we get close, we'll— we can play with it then. So I'll change that to the 15th, and then we'll put that up obviously again on the consent calendar for December so we can get that published before the first of the year and stay with state code.

So for the very first time you've given us a month and a half to think about it.

Yeah.

Well, yeah, takes a little time.

Takes a little time. Uh, the last item I have is the canvas with the election last night. Um, due to the fact that Orem City did have a proposition on the ballot, we are required to certify the canvas for that ballot proposition. The county will give us the final numbers on the 22nd, I'm hoping by 2:00, 3:00 in the afternoon. Um, and then we will— we talked about it before individually in staff that since that is the week of Thanksgiving, that we could do that by an electronic meeting. Um, the regulations for an electronic meeting does require one member of the council to be at the anchor location, which is here at the city council room. So we will need one of you to be here. We will do it via Zoom. That's all that's going to be on the agenda is we will open it up, we will go through the Canvas and through the information that— the final information the county has provided for us, and we will adjourn.

Okay.

So it'd be a really quick one because we weren't sure who was going to be in town, who was going to be traveling. So we thought we could do it via Zoom. How long?

How long?

It depends on how much you want to talk about the Canvas numbers. You can look at it, you can make your motion, and we're done.

And I think historically has like 10 minutes.

Yeah, it doesn't take very long.

Um, I, I'm in town and I have been the anchor person before, so I'm happy to do that.

You are? Okay, Debbie.

I'm out of the country and will unlikely be able to join.

Okay, and then time Um, I think we did the last one like at 4 o'clock in the afternoon. Anybody oppose 4 o'clock? I should have the numbers by the county where it's just the proposition, not a full-fledged election. It's a Tuesday. I mean, November 22nd. I'm sorry. Yes, will we have a quorum? Everybody be available to at least Zoom in with Debbie here at the anchor location? Okay, so, and we're okay with 4 o'clock? Okay, so I will schedule that and get a calendar agenda out for November 22nd at 4 o'clock for an electronic meeting with Debbie here at the anchor location for that campus.

Okay, that's all I have. Done. Thank you. Thank you.

Let's continue through and just go ahead and go through the rest of the agenda.

Mayor, really quick, I, I forgot to mention I did contact the county today.

They will be releasing another set of numbers tomorrow because they are closed on Friday due to the holiday. And then they will release numbers on Tuesday and Thursday, uh, by 3 o'clock for any other new numbers that come in. So just so you guys know, that's when they plan on releasing them, is Tuesdays and Fridays.

Normally Fridays.

Normally Fridays by 3 o'clock.

So the bulk of the numbers are in already?

Pardon me?

We have the bulk of the numbers already?

I think so, yeah.

All right.

You keep giving me the dirty eye. We don't have any city council members that are reporting tonight, right? It's not on the agenda. Okay, let's just run through the agenda. So we've got number 3, call to order, number 4, invocation, and we've got—

That's my dad and my husband. Be nice.

We got our report recognition.

Here we have Chris Shields. She is here from St.

Thomas Hospital to recognize the Rosewater Fire Department. Okay, so if you can turn the time over to Chief Sanderson and Chris.

For that presentation. Is that okay, Mark? In the meeting?

Yes.

So do you just want to turn the time— can we turn the time over to you to introduce Chris?

Yeah, actually, Chief Myers is going to do that.

Oh, okay.

So Chief Myers will take that along with Chris Chills, or—

correct. All right, so we'll have that recognition and we'll have 6.2, annual report, uh, from the Metropolitan Water District. And Reed Price will go through that.

Yes, and Steve Brown unfortunately will not be here tonight.

That's right.

So it'll just be Reed and Chris.

Okay, then we'll have our personal appearances. We don't have any consent items, right?

Right.

We got just 2 scheduled items. We got a public hearing ordinance. We're in the River District we've been talking about, and we've got a— and so Jason, is he going to present us where we're at with all that? I'm sitting behind you, so— okay, yeah, we'll be able to present the outputs.

We'll be here as well.

Okay, and is most of that things we're already— yeah, same project we talked about. And then, uh, the next item— well, actually, as far as the River District, do we have any significant concerns by anyone that we need to talk about before we get in there? Are we—

I, I have just—

well, it's just what Jamie brought up, but that's just trying to make clarification about that 8th North. And it sounds like we have had lots of meetings with UDOT and The developer, and my understanding is the developer is not willing to participate in any explosion today anymore.

Well, I don't think they're right now. We were trying to commit them to that participation by way of development agreement, and they have been unwilling to do that. But I believe as part of the site plan approval process in the future, we can require certain improvements as contingent on approval of it. Yeah, depending on what the traffic study says. Yeah, if it says these improvements are needed, then you could require those.

Remember, there's 2 phases.

The first phase is the 25 units we're talking about tonight, and the 9 acres, which is the budding engagement, is a different phase that will come back as well, which will be a site plan approval, which will have the same type of traffic study, same requirement potentially. Do we need to approve the second phase? No, no, we're not approving the second phase. We're only doing a small, a small competitive Just 25 units.

Changing the ordinance for the second phase.

Well, part of it is for the fast food.

Right.

That's it. So council could decide not to do that, but that would affect phase 2, not phase 1.

Wait to change the ordinance after you see what the plan is.

That's also good.

Yeah, just continue to sign off.

Yeah.

So that doesn't—

So approve 9.1, but continue 9.2.

Yeah.

Oh man, it's not that—

Do you mind?

Okay.

Okay, so these are all issues we could probably—

This is just the amendment, the language amendment to allow fast food restaurants and drive-throughs.

Part of that, if I can explain, part of it is to allow them to do their development with a different type of— different phase. Instead of having it look like the office building, you can have the architectural standards like phase. So part of that may not be approved tonight. Yeah, maybe they continue or have to take another But if the council is willing, I would have at least considered their— okay, so we'll, so we'll listen to that point too, depending on how that conversation—

maybe might be part of it.

Sounds good.

Then last we got the first 2 items and we're all adjourned. So Any questions? One quick thing just for tonight.

Um, when we do these meetings, there's—

we use Zoom, we have some questions, and then there's this Zoom Room. Zoom Rooms did a big update over the weekend. Our AV people hadn't done the update, that's on their end. So we're just doing it through some cameras tonight like we used to do it.

So it's being streamed, it's on YouTube, it's just not being done through the system like we typically do it because the Zoom Room update wasn't completed.

Okay.

No, I think that's some— that's not ours.

Pete is going to be there with ours.

I think there's one of the new chairs.

Okay, let me, let me just turn the rest of the time over to Jamie.

I just have—

I have 5 items I want to review with you tonight. The first one is just a reminder about open enrollment. This is our city benefit open enrollment period.

It runs from the 1st of November to the 17th of November.

Amy Peterson, our benefits specialist, should have sent all of you a login by email.

Is that correct, Carrie?

Yes.

So you have an opportunity to go in and make adjustments to your benefits. We are going through what is called a passive open enrollment program, and Carrie, I'm going to allow you to kind of speak to what that is.

So it doesn't require a lot of work on your part, but it does require you to essentially re-up your benefits.

So you don't need to log in unless you, um, take our HSA or FSA. If you don't take either one of those and you just want to keep everything exactly the same, you don't need to do anything at all. If you are doing either of those 2 things, then you just need to log in. Your HSA and your FSA have to be elected every year. That's the only thing you have to do.

Okay, um, the next is we've been waiting based on supply chain issues for pieces of equipment. One of them is a new play structure for Sharon Elementary. That is one that we thought we would be receiving after the new year, but we just received word from the contractor that they are prepared between the 21st and the end of this month. Month to receive that equipment. And so we will actually go in and install that equipment immediately. Well, not ahead of schedule, but earlier than anticipated. So we are moving forward with that playground project. Recall too, there's a bathroom reconstruction on that park too. So I know that has been a park that has needed some TLC, and you may You may be hearing from residents about it. Please let them know that we're just—

we're—

the contract for construction of the bathrooms has been awarded and is in process, and the play structure is on its way. It will be completed by the end of the month. We're incrementally making improvements. And then we have—

Just one question. So yes, Alpine School should close here and it won't impact our park? No, it's our park.

Because our park has nothing to do with them closing the school?

It does not.

It's our park. The restrooms picket ball courts, the pavilions, and play structures and open space are city-owned property.

We have a similar project that we have restrooms underway at Geneva Park as well. You recall that we made significant improvements to Geneva Park over the last number of years, and the last piece of that is a restroom structure, and that is also underway. Another, just a shout out to Mayor Young, You recall we presented to you some proposed improvements at Lakeside Park for some artificial turf in the infields of our ball diamonds there at Lakeside Park. It's about $1.87 million worth of improvements. Along with that, we are looking to add lights on select multi-use fields at Lakeside and make several of those fields Synthetic turf. Thanks to the efforts of Mayor Young in cooperation with our county commission, we were in the process of drafting a contract for $1.87 million from—

Mayor Young, we're going to carry you in on our shoulders tonight.

And Mayor Young, I haven't talked to him about this, but he's— I'm hoping he's agreeing He's a magician.

I don't know.

Yeah, apparently you've never seen his curveballs. Uh, but that is, that is a really big win for us, and it's nice to not be ignored by that TRT/TRC process.

Was it a hard sell saying to them, because Grow gets so much of the money?

Or was it an equity issue, or how did you, how did you do this?

Uh, we don't want to go into detail here.

Okay, talk to you offline.

Back to the curveball.

It's got a bunch of tricks. Yeah, hard.

The, um, just another, another just by way of information, as we start to collect bids on Heritage Park and Heritage Tank, we talked about obviously the very, very competitive and good bids we received for the construction We have an irrigation line that needs to be associated with that project. The engineer's estimate put that, put that project at about $400,000. We just bid it and it came in at $296,000. So the trends are moving in a good direction.

I think that apartment's by my house and this is what's happening.

Potentially, yeah. You've got the Midas touch.

It's a good art.

Okay, so that, that's the good price news. The not so good price news relates to City Center. We've been working with Layton Construction and they have given us a preliminary estimate based on what we have for our new City Center project. And I will add kind of a caveat that the project has grown in scope Remember we talked about building a 60,000 square foot facility, but we added a 7,500 square foot basement to it, and we also have added about 4,000 feet of additional space to that facility. We had a price of approximately $24 point— So we estimated the 60,000 square foot space at $24.6 million, and Layton Construction is estimating the project now at $27.5 million.

$1.6 billion.

So we do have a delta that needs to bridge, about $2.5 million. We've had conversations about doing what we can to value engineer the project. We believe we can get about $500,000 to $750,000 in savings just by value engineering the project. At the same time, we believe some of our revenue numbers have come in stronger than we anticipated. So we, we still believe that there's a way to, to bridge that gap and to make everything pencil. But I wanted you to be aware that the price is obviously higher than expected, but it's within breathable— you know, we're in breathing room here. There is some flex, and we were worried obviously that the cost of it would come in north of $30 million. So to be at $27.5 million right now is actually pretty encouraging. And given where we are with the construction market, that potentially may get better. So this is, um, this is good news, bad news. Yeah, so, um, and that's all that I have.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you for that.

But that will—

during this meeting Yeah.

Okay, Pete, you—

okay, sorry, Tess.

You're good.

We need the, um, that the power cord too because it's got the Ethernet.

Oh, okay, okay.

Would you want to start carrying that in?

I'll grab that.

How's our main man?

How are you doing?

I'm good. Good.

The, uh, we're having some technical difficulties with our audiovisual system.

Oh really? So we have to do it like this.

We—

this is how we did it like back in the day. Yeah, the early days of streaming on YouTube.

So it's—

I'm sorry for your big night that we're in pure ghetto mode.

I think we got Fox here and they're gonna probably join you right now. right here on the wall.

Yeah.

And then where am I?

Oh, in your spot. Okay, at your battle station.

Is that what we call it now?

Yep, battle stations.

What's going on?

How are you, man?

How are you, buddy?

Good to see you.

Okay.

This is just the camera because we—

Yeah, this would be a cheaper setup for a new city center.

Just much cheaper.

I'll just hold it with my selfie stick and just kind of like shoot through. It's obviously set aside for AV, like a bunch. It's a lot of money.

Okay, should we start trying again?

Yes, pull in the camera.

Cam Link.

And start. Okay, that's good, that's good.

Oh, it's got a back—

it's got the backwards.

It's flipped.

Do you remember how to do that?

I think it's in Zoom.

I think I'm—

that sounds right.

Where are you gonna sit?

What's that?

Where are you gonna sit?

I'm gonna make sure it can focus in on you. Yeah, dude.

Let's see, we have it. We usually all do the AV, but Zoom did an update this weekend that our Uh, mirror my video?

We don't want mirror.

Oh cool, what's that?

We don't want mirror.

We don't—

we want opposite. Sorry, man, it's gonna be crowded over here.

I know, those are— yeah, uh, Bren's gonna sit over there. Who sits right here?

Jason?

It's gonna be tight.

You're all right.

No, I'm filming everything. This is how we're training.

Here, are we good?

She's—

yeah, she's gonna help Jeff, so she'll hand it to him.

Test, test.

You can wipe me.

Do you know who he is?

Oh yeah, do you got him?

Jason.

We'd like to welcome everyone to our city council meeting tonight.

And to start off, start off, oh, we're going to let Debbie introduce the people that she's got to do the invocation, also the pledge.

All right, I'd like to introduce my father, Blaine Black. He currently lives with us and he served in the Utah National Guard. I know this week is Veterans Week, so I just wanted to shout out to all the veterans and my father. He helped build the Park City main road. He helped work on the road that built Main Street in Park City. So lots of great work. And then my husband Jim is here to offer the pledge. So we'll start with my dad. Come on up to this podium desk.

25 or 30 years ago, I had the opportunity to work right here shortly after the—

excuse me—

shortly after the wall had come down. I was kind of worried because we had— I can't talk without that thing.

Where do you think I got it from?

You said the cell phone, the whole system was down a bit.

Yeah, the lights are on.

Speaking of that—

Anyway, I was kind of concerned because, you know, for a long time we've been— the Russians have been taught to hate us. And nothing could be further from the truth.

I found them as delightful people.

I didn't particularly like their leaders, and I don't either. But they're a blessed people. Dear God, accept of our gratitude and thanks for the blessings that we have enjoyed. We're grateful for the water that has fallen from the skies to replenish our water supply. We're grateful for the opportunity to provide Elections. We're grateful for the freedoms that we have. Truly, we are blessed, Father. Help us to reach out to those who may be less fortunate. Help them to feel and know that they are children of God. We pray for those who would be participating in this meeting. They may be guided in all that we do and say. And realize the great blessings which are ours. We ask this humbly in the name of Jesus Christ.

Amen.

Amen.

All rise, please, for the Pledge of Allegiance. 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. I'd like to have a recognition.

Steve Duff.

Mayor, Council, thank you.

It's not every day that we get to do what we're about to do here today, so this is, this is kind of special for, for all of us. I'd like to introduce Chris Shields to you. Chris Shields is our liaison nurse at Tumpanogos Hospital. And so she gets to actually follow through on many of the patients that we bring to them and kind of see it through to see how the whole process really works. And so without further ado, Chris.

Thank you, Lon.

Pretty impressive to have this many people here and especially To be able to hear what we're going to do right now. I'm really honored to be able to do this and grateful for the introduction.

Orem City Council and Mayor Dave Young, for the opportunity and for the privilege it is to be here this evening to recognize our partners in healthcare, Orem Fire Department, and the good work that they do and for the lives that they save. We have great respect for our EMS partners And when we work together as partners, we have better patient outcomes. So that is really, really important to Timpanogos Hospital. So I'll give you some really quick introductions. Obviously, we've got the crews, a lot of the crews that are here, and the chief and the BCs and the captains. We're going to talk about them a little bit. And we also have Jeffrey Hill, is our COO at Timpanogos Hospital.

Hi.

We have Joe for ETA. Joe is our emergency director at Timpanogos. Uh, we have Nate Black, he's our communication director, and then we have Maggie Scott and she is our chest pain coordinator. And then again, I'm Chris Shills, I'm the director of EMS relations for Interstate Healthcare.

I work here in Utah County and work a lot with Timpanogos.

So also we have a life saved, and if I can just have you just stand up? Jennifer Nielsen, Joshua Hansen, and we have one online that's watching, Jan Thurl.

She, um, is online or will be reviewing this recording of this, uh, this council.

So council members and Marion, our purpose here this evening is to recognize our own Fire, the great department that they are, but more specifically to recognize crew members from the department for their efforts in saving 3 lives. Now, you don't get to do this every day, but these 3 lives were saved in a matter of about 4 to 5 weeks. Actually, we had one, and then the day after we had another one. So when you get the chance of doing this, it's a great—

it's a great thing.

So, um, we are also here tonight to introduce Jen and Josh and Jan and their family members to their rescuers. We don't get to do that very often.

It's a really great opportunity.

With all 3 patients' consent, I'll start with a synopsis of each of their cardiac arrest events, their treatment, and their survival. So if I can get Josh to come up.

Hi.

And stand right here next to me. And his sister Julie. So on August 14th this year, about 2:25 PM, while visiting family here in Utah from Iowa, Joshua, 32 years old, started to have some chest pain and suddenly collapsed and was unconscious. CPR was immediately started by family and 911 was called. 4 fire crews showed up on scene and started to work. High-performance CPR was done. The Lucas device was placed for mechanical CPR, was placed on him. Defibrillator pads were attached and a shock delivered to Joshua's heart that was in a fatal arrhythmia. CPR was continued. A breathing tube was placed and secured. IVs were started. Cardiac drugs were given. And then preparation to transport was made. Eventually, Joshua's heart started beating again, and Forum Fire transferred Joshua to Timpanogos Hospital emergency department, where he was taken to the cath lab— immediately taken to the cath lab to open up the coronary artery that was blocked, causing the heart attack. While in the cath lab, and while the stent was being placed, Joshua went into cardiac arrest again, and there he was shocked again, and his heart started again. His heart was then— his heart was restarted and they continued to place the stent. He was admitted to ICU to Dr. Gales, a cardiologist, Dr. Rosenberg, an intensive care neurologist, and 2 intensive care ICU docs.

Joshua was discharged from Tiffin Ocas on the 17th after going into cardiac arrest on the 14th.

So Joshua and family, we at Tiffin Ocas Hospital are honored for the opportunity to celebrate your life.

Joshua.

And recognize those who were involved in saving your life. So Joshua and Julie, meet your rescuers. So Jeff Hill, our COO, he will be handing out some certificates that we've got. So if I could get Clayton Colhan to come up, Andrew Butler, Skyler Jones, Trevor McGinty, Greg Hicken, Captain Ben Williams, and Battalion Chief Steve Pearson to come up.

Andrew Butler.

Skyler.

And this is the first time they've seen each other since, so Because we had a really great surprise. They were going to watch it online, and then they actually flew to Utah last night to come to this to meet the rescuers. So that's an awesome thing. We're so glad that they came. Thank you guys so much.

This is also another amazing story. So she said, I'm gonna cry the whole time.

So on September 21st of this year, um, Jennifer Nielsen, 50 years old, was driving her car, um, really close to Station 1 here in Orem when her car rolled into the intersection, up onto a curb, and then stopped. First responder Deputy Chief Jason Earl from Orem Fire and his son were in their car.

They watched this happen.

And they went up to the car and they could see that Jen was unresponsive and not breathing. She was kind of like doing some seizure activity. The doors were locked in Jen's car and she was in a seat belt. She was unresponsive. Um, Deputy Chief Earle— and a lot of times, you guys, the—

if you're an EMS personnel, you have a lot of things in your car and you're ready for anything, right? Well, Chief Earle was ready for anything.

He grabbed his handy-dandy Slim Jim, and he was able to get the doors unlocked. And they checked Jan in the car and she didn't have a pulse and she wasn't breathing. So before this, 911 was called. Station 33, Ambulance 33 came to the rescue and they showed up on scene. And so she was quickly extricated from the car and into the ambulance for treatment. High-performance CPR was immediately started. The Lucas device was applied for mechanical CPR. IVs were obtained, a breathing tube was placed, defibrillator patches were applied. Jen was in a lethal rhythm, and paramedics defibrillated Jen twice to get her heart started again. While, while given cardiac drugs, they checked, checked the pulse again, and when that came around, they recognized that she was in an organized rhythm and she had a pulse. They had obtained ROSC. We call it ROSC. Return of spontaneous circulation. The crew called Tipinogos Hospital ED, neighbor reported the events, and transported Jen immediately to the ER. At Tipinogos, the hospital teams were awaiting Jen's arrival. Boston Cardiology was also there. Jen had several CT scans to rule out any injuries. She was admitted to ICU. Um, through the trauma surgeon, uh, also with ICU intensivists, an interventional cardiologist. The electrophysiologist also consulted with her and ICU hospitalists. Jen had some abnormal findings in her EKG, and so the EP cardiologist was consulted as well as interventional cardiologist. She was taken to cath lab to see if she had any blocked vessels in her heart, which she did not. But her EKG showed a long QT, you know, the long QT syndrome. And sometimes with that, people go into cardiac arrest and they die. And that's what happened in Jen's case. And so, uh, she had a dual ICD, which is an internal cardiac defibrillator pacer, placed in her chest.

Um, and that is to help prevent any other further cardiac arrest so that she didn't get into So she can be safe.

Um, she saw multiple specialty doctors. She was discharged on the 30th. So Jennifer, or Jenny, we are happy. We are happy that you are around for us. We're happy that you are here with your, your lovely family. And Jen, we want you to meet your rescuers. So if I could have, uh, Deputy Chief Earl, he is not able to be here tonight, but we're going to have— I think Juan is going to— Juan is going to come into his place. Casey Deadcalf, Seth Swanson— Swenson Bryant, um, how do you say that?

Sennor.

Sennor, and Tim Hope.

Awesome.

Thank you, guys.

Thank you so much. Jan Thurlow, she's a 57-year-old female. She is again online. Uh, Jan was unable to be here tonight, but she expressed— when I talked to her on the phone, she expressed her gratitude for her life and those that were involved in saving her life. She has a brand new grandchild that she said she was so happy to hear about because she would not be able to experience that.

So she was very, very humble, very grateful for those that helped save her.

Jan was about 3 weeks post-op from a surgery while when she was at home, she developed severe shortness of breath and passed out a few times. Her husband called 911. Orem Fire responded and came out to the house. When they arrived, Jan was awake and she was feeling a little bit better. Actually, even she said, I don't know if I really need to go to the hospital. But the crew did their assessment and talked Jan into going to the hospital based on their clinical assessment, which was a big deal because that really saved her life. While en route, and while— as they were arriving at Timpanogos Hospital, Jan went into cardiac arrest. The EMS crew went to work as well as the Timpanogos ED team. The teams were able to get Jan's heart beating again and immediately took her to the scan where they could see that Jan had massive bilateral pulmonary embolisms, or clots in her lungs. Jan wasn't doing well, so the decisions to make that had to be made to save her life had to be very quickly made.

She was given a thrombolytic, which is to dissolve the clots, the massive clots in her lung.

They took her to the cath lab and then the interventional suite at Tiffin Augustus where the interventional radiologist, Dr. Jacobs, Performed a thrombectomy on Jan to save her life.

And that—

a thrombectomy is when they go in and they actually suck the clot out, which was a lot of clots. Jan is here today because of the team efforts that were involved, but more— but Orem Fire played a very significant part in this miracle. They recognized the severity of Jan's condition from the very beginning, and they got her to the right place for other interventions to take place. Jan's rescuers are Andrew Butler, Skyler Jones, Braden Partridge, Clayton Cohan, Greg Hicken, Chad Brooks, and Captain Ben Williams.

If I could have them come up and accept their awards. I just want to say that one state was on the 13th of August and the other one was on the 14th of August. Does that ever happen in your career very often? Not very often. These guys are awesome.

These guys are awesome. So as they are passing those out, Seldom are our EMS partners and police officers recognized for the work that they do. We celebrate life because of their efforts in saving lives. We bring together all fire, EMS rescuers, and first responders to recognize them today for the dedicated service and fine work that they do and to thank them for being our partners in healthcare.

I'm going to pass around this plaque and I'm going to tell you about this You guys can take a look at that.

So this, this plaque is, uh, in the EMS room at Timpanogos Hospital, and I can tell you that PG and Ormond Fire are— especially PG is really trying to get more than Ormond Fire on that plaque. So that plaque represents all of the saves that crews have. So it says on the plaque, in recognition and dedication and service exemplified through the courageous act in the effort of saving a life. So, Orange City Council and Mayor Young, thank you, thank you, um, for letting us be here, and thank you for having such a great department. They are dedicated to what they do, and they are good at what they do. We are so very, very grateful for what they do. So thank you very much.

Bring the families.

And the families, please.

Josh and his sister, the families come also.

So if you guys want to just kind of stand.

You guys gotta get a little smaller so the mayor and council behind you.

You guys are like real big, tough firemen, but get small.

They don't make us the ass.

Sorry, I suck at this idea.

Did we get it?

One more.

Must be one more.

All right, everyone say cheese.

Cheese!

We want to thank you for that presentation. That was amazing. And it's, uh, we see a lot of presentations, but we don't see a lot for saving lives. And saving lives is the ultimate— that's the ultimate gift. So we appreciate you coming tonight and sharing that with us. We appreciate our firemen, and they know that we know that they Phenomenal work. Mayor, as you know, I happen to have the privilege of serving on the Board of Trustees at Tiffin County Hospital, and I know them to be a class act and grateful when they can marry with our firemen and other first responders and provide excellent results that save human lives.

Thank you for your efforts.

Now you've got a difficult situation here, Chris. I'd like you to come up and tell us about our Metropolitan Water District.

Lovely water.

Water brings life. And the rolls of paper.

How was my day?

All right, well, what a community we live in. This is a wonderful blessing to be here in Orem and in this area.

Um, My name is Chris Shirkey.

I'm representing the Metropolitan Water District of Warren tonight. Steve Brown is the chairman of the district, and he's asked that, that Rita and I make the presentation on the annual report for the year 2022. I'd like to introduce everyone that's involved with our board, and if there's anyone here tonight that might need your name, if you could stand, we'll remain standing until we're done. Steve Brown is our chairman. My name is Chris Shirkey, I'm the vice chairman. Rick Lewis, Lydell Gilman, Alex Locke, Tim Crandall, Carl Cook, and then Reed Price, who serves as our general manager, and Ricka Ivey, who serves as our secretary. So we appreciate their many years of service and dedication to the city. Um, just wanted to, by way of mention, in terms of our membership on the board, we've had 2 members, 2 new members become appointed on our board, Carl Cook and Tim Crandall. As many of you are aware and know, we've had 2 funerals in the last 2 years from members of our board who passed away, including Russ Brown and Jack Jones.

Jack Jones.

Jack Jones, sorry. Between the 2 of them, they represent nearly 100 years of institutional knowledge on the board. board and in the water system going back to the '60s. And so there are big shoes to fill, and nonetheless, there are members of our community who have water knowledge and who have stepped into this and been appointed by, by the mayor and city council. So we appreciate the support of the council. I'd like to give you a little bit of history regarding the Metropolitan Water District Board and the Metropolitan Water District Act that was created by the state Utah in 1935. The city was incorporated in 1919, as you know, as a rural and agricultural community, and the leaders knew that development of a robust water supply was necessary to make this community a viable place to live for future residents. In '35, this Water District Act was created, which allowed local districts to be formed for the purpose of shoring up water sources and water supplies for their growing, prospective growing, and developing communities. Municipal water district boundaries typically mimic the municipal boundary for which it was created, but if you can think back to 1919— excuse me, to 1935, our boundary of the City of Orem was much different than it is today. In fact, the Metropolitan Water District of Orem boundary, or service area, was assumed to be the eastern boundary of the City of Orem. And then all the way to the west to Utah Lake, from 2,000 north to 2,000 south. So that large swath. As you all know, the city of Vineyard has since incorporated, and much of that area that was independently serviced by the Metropolitan Water District of Orem is now in the separate service boundary. So a large portion of that boundary is known as Vineyard today, and studies have shown that Orem's water supply The water supply that we have has been developed over the many years since 1935, is sufficient for our needs today and at build-out well into the future. Right now we have a population of 100,000, and it is anticipated in our studies that we'll have a build-out population of 125,000, perhaps in about 2040 or 2050, depending on how things develop.

Thank you.

It's important to also note that Metropolitan Water Districts can buy and sell water rights, whereas a municipality can only buy or purchase water rights. It cannot divest itself from those water rights. The Metropolitan Water District has purchased water shares in a few different irrigation or canal companies. Those companies hold actual water rights and divide the company among its shareholders for use of that water. So the actual company, whether it's Provo Bench Canal or Provo Reservoir or North Union, they actually own rights. And the shareholders don't own the right, but they own a share in that company that holds the water rights in the state of Utah. That's an important distinction to understand. The Metropolitan Water District is a shareholder in many companies including Provo Bench Canal and Irrigation Company, North Union Canal Company, Provo Reservoir Water Users Company, Lake Bottom Irrigation Company, Vixen Irrigation Company, Tanner Irrigation Company, and Provo River Water Users Association, which is also affiliated with the Deer Creek Project or the Provo River Project. They also have a contract with, with Central Utah Water Conservancy District for 7,520 acre-feet of water that was developed under the Central Utah Project. The Central Utah Project was developed 30 years ago and had its 30-year anniversary last Friday. So the CUP is managed by the Central Utah Water Conservancy District. Through this contract, though this contract is held with Metro, the City of Orem has the obligation to pay, financial obligation to pay for this. Since FY16, Orem has budgeted about $1.2 million of for this water and will do so through the year 2047, at which time the contract that Orem Metro has with Central Utah Water will then be renegotiated. Orem generally paid for this water through water right impact fees. Those impact fees were developed in the late '90s, meaning that the ability to assess those was developed at that time, and has— and we've since been acquiring revenues from those fees since the late '90s. In years when these impact fees revenues are not enough, Orem will pay for this out of its general water fund budget. In other words, any available dollars that were generated through water fees for use of the water system, the culinary water system, then would augment that cost of that bill. It's important to also note that the Metropolitan Water District has made significant financial contributions contributions back to the City of Orem. I'd like to list a few of these for your, uh, clear information. Since 2008, well number 2, they donated $323,000 for that. Well number 4, which is over here on 1000 East and Center Street, they received— the city received $150,000 for that. And well number 9, in 2008, the city received $350,000. As well as another $350,000 contribution in 2012. In 2013 and '14, the Metropolitan Water District contributed $600,000 for the redevelopment of the Alta Springs Pipeline. We've taken you up to our Alta Springs and made you aware of the pipeline on that road that we were driving on. That used to be an old reinforced concrete pipe that was probably 40 years old. And leaking. That had to be replaced then for about a $2 million project by the City of Warren, but Metro contributed a significant portion of that, uh, dollars for that project. Um, they have also contributed $300,000 in 2016 for our Water Reeds project. It was mentioned earlier, uh, that Mayor Young helped acquire about $1.8 million recently for recreation. He also was at the forefront of acquiring $7 million Through his relations with Utah County and Commissioner Bill Lee. And so that $7 million that we've received will also go towards that project, which is turning in a lot higher in price than we had anticipated. Well, number 10, they made contributions in 2017 and '18 of $500,000 each, and then most recently for the 10 million gallon tank in 2022, another $500,000. So their contributions back to the city are not inconsequential, and they're not small. They're very significant to the tune of millions of dollars. So we do have this kind of symbiotic relationship where we generate revenues, we help pay for things that they subscribe for, but for the benefit of the citizens of Warren. And so we have a coordinated effort. Our own water staff works closely with Metro on a variety of issues, including Provo River watershed issues all the way up to Heber, where our watershed is up in the upper Uinta Mountains. We sit on council with them. We monitor the usage in our water supply. We monitor our water supply and usage of that supply through our various canal company associations. We also evaluate if we can rent water available on a given year for farm irrigators that are in the city limits and even others that are outside. There's available water which we charge that to them. We also team together on Utah legislative matters and water rights protection legislation. Recently we had an audit that was performed by Squire Company. So we are an independent district, a local district of the state of Utah. We are audited and held to those standards that are required under state law. And in the audit, it gave us a clean bill of health. This is available for anybody, it's a public record. Document for your— for you if you'd like to see that at a future time. We've had significant policy adoptions or modifications this year regarding purchasing, travel, conflict of interest, and also fraud reporting. And so every year the City of Warren is held to these same standards through the Auditor's Office as other municipalities, including Warren districts. And so we were held to those same rules and expectations. We do have a looming challenge that's before us, and that is the Deer Creek Intake Project. That's the most significant issue that we face currently. There is an intake project presentation that was given to you by the management of the Provo River Water Users Association. We have an interest in that association to the tune of about 6.5%. A project of this magnitude and nature is about $98 million as currently estimated. The Copper River Waters Association has a variety of resources available for loans and bonding and so forth. However, that cost will be a pass-through cost to all the shareholders in that private entity and association. Our obligation will be estimated to be just under $400,000 a year. For the next 20 years after this, after the project starts, which will be this coming year. Warren is now faced with— Warren Metro is now faced with determining how to pay for this, and there are 2 viable options that the board has recognized. One is that this will be an immediate pass-through cost to Warren citizens through a rate increase, and that could be a nominal rate increase. It'd be about a $1.50 a month increase. per household, or they have an option and they have the ability to increase the property tax. The current metro water tax rate, tax rate is at 0.00018. That generates about $4.78 of revenue for a home assessed at $483,000. So the local district, including metropolitan water districts, have taxing authority. And so anything that they do regarding how to pay for this will be coordinated through OREM staff and presented to you at a time in the near future as we receive more details and information. But we did want to make you aware of that, and that is coming in the near future. The project will start in the spring of 2023. So with that, we're happy to entertain any questions. or responding to comments you might have. Just one question. As far as the ownership of Metropolitan Water District, is that 100% Orem? It's a local water— it's a local district of the state of Utah that was created by the City of Orem in 1935. So it was created by Orem City, and the Orem City Council appoints the directors that manage All of the management duties and operations of that district. So it's not like a board or a commission that you have in the city. It's much different. It's more autonomous. So it's an independent entity that Orem owns shares of? Metro— that Orem Metro owners owns shares in companies, yes. But Orem owns that? Orem does not own that. Orem created that, but the Metro has those shares and owns those and has separate accounting and separate accounts and so forth for acquisition of water on behalf of the citizens of Warren.

Interesting.

Okay. Any other questions?

No?

Okay, well, thank you, Mayor and City Council. Okay, thank you, Chris. Okay, next we'll move on to the personal appearances section. Item number 7. I'll just read this. Time has been set aside for the public to express their ideas, concerns, and comments On items not scheduled for 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. Those wishing to speak should have signed in before the beginning of the meeting. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes or less. We just got 3 individuals who'd like to speak tonight. The first one is Liam Frye. Do you want to come up?

All right, thank you.

Hello, my name is Liam Fry. I'm 16 years old and I've lived in this city my whole life. And every day, almost every day, I ride the Murdock Trail to get to my taekwondo class. One day I noticed that the intersection was roped off and it was filled with ambulances. Coincidentally, a little boy who's the brother of someone I go to taekwondo with was hit, critically injured, and life-flighted from the intersection to Primary Children's to be rehabbed.

What?

Luckily, he survived, but this motivated me to do something. So I created a survey to collect public opinion about this intersection. I had 114 respondents of the survey. Only 7% said they feel safe crossing this intersection. Most of the respondents made the comment that something needed to change at this intersection, and I wholeheartedly agree with you.

As myself, I've almost been hit 20 times at that intersection.

84% of respondents said their first choice would be to add a tunnel to this intersection, but I realize that may not be possible, so we'll substitute a tunnel for a footbridge or something else. 61% of the respondents said that their second choice would be a scramble signal, which is where all cars stop and every pedestrian crosses at once.

Another option is to add more right turn arrows since only one of them Lights has them.

I've sent the full results of the survey to you guys in an email, which also includes the story of the boy's mother who was hit, her experience, as well as the experience of someone else in my ward who was also almost hit there and killed. I would like to see a change at this intersection, and I would like to hear what kind of results or what kind of change you can support the next city council meeting.

Thank you for listening.

Thank you. And Steve, you would follow up that? Thank you. Yes, Jamie.

Thank you for your comments. We, we do in fact agree with you, and we actually have a study underway with our regional transportation partner to study this very intersection, including some of the solutions that you are, uh, that you have brought forward by way of your survey. So in fact, it is something that is in process. We do sense, uh, there is a sense of urgency in doing something at that intersection.

I just didn't want you to walk out of the chamber tonight with the idea that this is not something the city's working on. In fact, the city is very aware of the situation, is trying to make some improvements so we can improve the safety at that intersection for you and your friends and the community at large.

Thank you.

Next we've got Lisa Kucherov.

Hi, I'm Lisa Kappel with, um, Bad Hand Writing. So, Mayor Young, city council members, city manager, you know more than I do, and maybe you can explain this to me. So I'll just let you know what I'm worried about, and I don't know if you can answer this now or answer this later, but thank you so much for your service. Um, you dedicate a lot of time, you volunteer Your efforts and your hours, and I just want to let you know how much I appreciate what you do.

So I'll start with that.

And I live right behind those water tanks.

So thank you for the water that you provide.

My concern is the development of 800 North and 1500 East, and I didn't know I wasn't supposed to sign up if you were already talking about it.

I really know I've never done this.

I want to work on those saving lives so that those firemen don't have to come. I live on 1100 East where some people's lives have been greatly impacted by accidents that they've been in because of lack of stoplights. I'm so worried about traffic increasing. I've talked to several of my neighbors about the apartments that are being approved or discussed tonight. And there are concerns about the air quality and lots of extra cars. But mostly it's the safety that we're worried about. I talked to others who said, hey, you go represent us. So I live between the Murdoch Canal Trail and the Provo River Parkway Trail. So what happens when I'm trying to turn is there's a pole and you can't see it. When I was even trying to come tonight, when I very first moved to the area, I almost hit so many bikers because I did not know That they just whip through. They aren't necessarily waiting for you. And if you are new to the area, it's really, really hard to make that turn. I don't have a light where I'm at. I can wait 2, 3 minutes. I have to wait for a different light to turn before I can make that turn. There's bikers, there's pedestrians, and people are cruising. They are not going 45 miles an hour. They're coming up and they're going 50, 55, 60 miles an hour by the time they get to where I'm at. So I am worried that when you put in those units, that it will increase the number of traffic, the number of cars. But I'm also worried that the people who are there, since it's apartments, are going to be new to the area. They're going to have friends visiting. That, you know, that Provo River Parkway Trail, it's going to be pedestrians that they're trying to turn. You know, you'll have people coming and they're trying to turn right there, but they've got pedestrians going by. And so I'm worried about accidents, more accidents happening. Um, I'm not sure what the traffic study is that you're having going on. I would love a traffic light, but I don't know what you can do. I've got 8 seconds. Um, I just, I'm worried about traffic density, dangerous desperate turns, and accidental turns.

So what have you got for me?

Thank you.

It is a, uh, it's a project we're actually talking about tonight, so.

Thank you.

Thank you. Uh, last we've got Scott Dunaway. Mayor Young and members of the City Council, thank you for your long hours and at times, uh, thankless service that you give to our city. At the risk of keeping a painful pot boiling, I'd like to share with you some of my concerns about the elements of the decision-making process that led to the creation of Prop 2. These are not just mine. I hear them from my neighbors and, and friends.

Thank you.

Nearly 73,000 voters overwhelmingly rejected the proposition. It failed to pass in any precinct in the city. The margin everywhere wasn't even close. Voters in Orem are thoughtful, educated, and as well-informed as any in this state. After all, they elected you.

It is not sufficient to say that these voters were duped, naive, or don't care about the issue.

Discussions I've had with neighbors leading up to the election indicated they were researching the issue and considered the arguments carefully on both sides of the proposition. Normal practices of good policymaking appear not to have been followed in considering the creation of the Orem School District and placing Prop 2 on the ballot. A very important and potentially costly decision that would have affected every— nearly every member of our community seems to have been hastily conceived, poorly studied, and involved discussions and decision-making that was far from transparent. This happened—

the whole process happened in a very short period of time for something that was so significant.

This raises for me 4, among others, 4 important questions that seem to be lingering. One that I haven't really heard discussed much, but how much time did the city's Director of Legislative Counsel, Jesse Riddle, spend on matters related to Prop 2? My understanding is that he was hired to help with litigation involving the moratorium of the State Street Master Plan, among others. However, it appears that he, he was involved in this process of creating an Orem School District from the very beginning of his tenure with the city? If that's correct, why didn't we know about that early on? Number 2, how many city funds were spent, including a proportion of Mr. Riddle's salary if he was involved, for matters relating to Prop 2? 3, why was a normal RFP process not followed in selecting Discovery Education? consultants to do the feasibility study. I know this has been talked about, but I've yet to hear an answer that's satisfactory.

I read the study.

I read all 288 pages. I read the study, but I was left with more questions than answers. During my career, I've read a number of feasibility studies.

I have to tell you that the one produced by this firm was very, very poor.

Finally, did all members of the City Council strictly follow the state's Open and Public Meetings Act in discussing and deciding all matters related to the creation of Prop 2? Thank you for your time.

I look forward to your answers.

Thank you.

Mr. Dunaway, if you look at tomorrow's or today's paper, there's an op-ed in there that I I wrote a few days ago, and I think it's being published tomorrow. That will answer some of your questions.

I will read it.

Thank you.

I wish those questions would have been brought forward earlier, so thank you.

Okay, and I, I think any of the city council members would be happy to meet with you individually and discuss your concerns. There are answers to all of the concerns that you brought up.

Thank you. Thank you.

Okay, next we'll move on to item number 9. We don't have any consent items tonight. We're going to have a public hearing on the ordinance. I'll just read it. To enact the section of 22-11-64 PB-51, the River District, at 724th and 1550 East Zone, at Annex YY of OMC Code, and amending Article 22-5-3A and the zoning map of the City of Warren by changing the zoning of 3.05 acres from the Business Park BP Zone to the PB-51 Zone at approximately 724th and 1550 East. We'll have Jason Bench discuss this with us. Thank you, Mayor, members of council. As, uh, you alluded to, the applicants— and they're here if they want to come forward and comment, so they can do that— but the applicants are requesting to create a planned development zone, a PD zone, in the ORM. Currently in the ORM, we have a sequential PD zone, so this one would be PD-51. So you can see on the map that there's a proposal We've got the applicants coming up here. If you want me to introduce ourselves, then I can proceed with this. Sure, that'd be great. Jason White with 50 East Capital Management.

My name is Jim Ivory. I'm with Fortress Rat Development.

And my name is Jamie Chapman.

I'm also the total project manager.

So tonight they're requesting 3.15 acres for the Disneyland and have the quarry redeveloped. So please don't mention the PB-51 zone. It is part of an overall project in Provo that I'll talk about briefly tonight as far as the units that have been approved in Provo about a month ago or so. This is 25 units in one that they want to do as part of this project, so it'll be interconnected. I'm going to show you as we move forward on that. The remaining property, which they also own, which is this that actually has direct access or frontage on the network, will be part of Phase 2, which will come at a later date. They want to keep that as a business park zone, so that is not proposed to be changed at this time.

It's going to remain.

business park and developed with their Phase 2. We did notice neighbors as part of our— the rezoning requirement, 1,000 feet is the minimum. We did go 1,500 just to make sure that we reached across State Farm and up onto the bench as well to make sure we notified at least those that we could, and hopefully they spread the word as far as they could be with different things. as far as what was proposed at that location. So the outline in red is the portion of the area showing the proposed property. Just to show you, this is the floodplain map for the Town of Schoenscraft. You can see the dark blue that runs down there, that is the Provo River, and that is in the floodplain, which makes sense. This map shows you that the property that they're proposing to develop is not within the floodplain, so there would not be any issues other than building their structures at least a foot above any potential flooding of that if the river was to come over the high bank. This is the proposed layout of the property in 25 units. They're proposing in the text 2.5 spaces per unit. 65 are required, they have 88 they're proposing. As you can see, You can see on this site the minimum— what they're proposing with the ADA is 3.52 units. What they're actually providing is 3.52 stalls per unit. This is a blow-up of that proposal. This is just another outline showing Phase 1, which they're proposing here in the dark blue. Phase 2, or multiple phases, would be the one that's not part of the ADA.

Yes.

The proposal tonight. She's showing access through this portion here, 198 units that was approved in Provo. There is a dedicated street. This is the Plum-Provo boundary at this location. This is a dedicated street in Orem. What they're proposing is a private street that runs down through their project in Provo and connects at this point into a public street in the Provo River Bottoms area. So as part of the development, which I'll I'll touch on that. They are proposing that Quorum, through their development agreement, have perpetual access and egress for these units here to access not only this street but also coming back down through their project in Provo. So they will have direct access down in Provo. Jason?

Yeah?

Sorry to interrupt, but do you have any idea from your studies which way the access will likely go and on what percentage? If you know, they have their transportation engineer here. I would probably defer to him.

Is it easier to look it up?

We can come back to that. That's just something we want to look at. I was like, he's looking that up, but he can point that out.

Thanks.

This is very small text. I can blow it up if you'd like, but basically the highlights is that the PD zone would allow up to 8 units per acre. This proposal that they're 25 units is 7.5. 3 units per acre. The overall height maximum is 40 feet. The structure they're proposing is 36'9. The materials they're proposing: brick, rock, stone, cement fiber, which is the HardieBoard, or stucco. Those are the higher-end type finishes, and that's what they're proposing on their product. These are not stacked units, they're townhouse units, so multiple stories, but each of the stories is part of the overall— And then again, the 2.5 is the minimum. And then they're basically the requirement in the PB zone that the development needs to substantially comply with Appendix YY, which we'll go over what that includes. And as part of the development, they will do a 1-lot or 2-lot subdivision. The area outlined in red is the proposed project. The remaining 9+ acres will be lot number 2, which will then have the Access on 8th North. So these are the proposed elevations. Again, they're townhouse styles, one unit, multiple units along there, each of them are a different unit. You see there, different elevations with a maximum height of 369 to the peak of this portion. The color boards that they're proposing, which outlines different materials that we have talked about. As part of the development rezone portion, they have a property development agreement. 2 things that are outlined in the development agreement. One is that they agree to the City of Orange access. In Provo, they did require that the access or trail system be part of their project next to and through the Provo River area. The Planning Commission, it was recommended they do the same, and they agreed to propose that trail be finished all the way up to 8th North. So this development agreement will outline those areas that we require of them when they come through for the actual project and site plan. The second one is that they agree that anything outlined in red that you see there will also be an access Easement. Easement, so ingress and egress for these units. So they will not be gated or, you know, not allowed to access down through here and then south into Provo to access that as well. So those 2 items are part of the development agreement that has been signed by the applicants. And that's, uh, we consider this tonight, that has been done. So the Planning Commission, it was, there was 5 members of the Planning Commission, there was a vote of 3 to 2 in favor. but because there wasn't a majority of at least 4 votes, it comes to you with no recommendation. Staff does recommend, based on the development agreement that you recommend approved, we recommend that you approve the PD-51. So we'd be glad to address any questions. I know the applicants have a presentation that they would like to make as well.

Jason, maybe you mentioned this, are these owner-occupied or Are all these rentals or Airbnb? Do we know what this product will—

These, my understanding, are rentals. So year-long leases, my understanding.

Even the ones in Provo also?

So yeah, because like this is the plan in Provo. As you can see, they're similar type style, but they are 198 units that are rentals. Okay, appreciate the City Council having us here tonight. I'd love to walk you through a little bit about how we got here and why we think this makes a lot of sense for Orem. And just brief background on 50 East Capital, founded in 2019.

It's a family office focused on real estate development investment, and folks are private development partner out of Washington, D.C. Initially, but now has bicoastal offices and manages a fairly large portfolio of federal properties across the country. Okay, so what you see here is the entirety of the ownership parcels that have been Compiled, uh, intermediate master plan between 50 East Capitol and Orchard Pratt. Um, the dark black line is the city line from Provo and Orem. What we've accomplished today is, as you guys have already mentioned, um, the purple area that you see was zoned for residential, and the yellow area in Provo was zoned for office business park. And so basically those zones were flipped. To move the residential, you know, more secluded against the river and put that office space up, you know, on University with great presence. What we're asking for today is to continue the residential zone into Orem to that small 3-acre parcel, and then the remainder will remain business park zone in Orem. And as you can see, there's— the concept is destination dining. Closure to 8 North and a kind of vacation rental hospitality use transitioning to the residential. Why we're here, we're— I know we're going to talk about the zoning text amendment next, but just briefly, amending the BP zone to allow for drive-through use for restaurants. The restaurant use is already a permitted use within the BP zone. Um, so just, it makes sense at the mouth of the canyon having the ability for some type of drive-through use. I think it's already been discussed about how restaurants today, you know, DoorDash, Uber Eats, Grubhub, etc., and, you know, as we had with COVID that restaurants want to have a, you know, quick way to get food to a caller. And so it's just a, you know, a way to do that within the EP zone. In addition to that, the There's a section of the code that requires architectural style that matches the entire BP zone, and so just amending that to allow different architectural styles for different projects. So we'll get to that later. And then obviously the rezone to a PD-51 for the tunnels. Quickly on next steps, this is not the end of the approval process for us. If we were to get approval for the PD-51 zone, We would then submit a site plan application, work with Jason and Sam, meet all the development standards in the city, work with, you know, traffic studies, etc., all the technical studies that we will need to move forward and get approval from Planning Commission on that site. And often then we would do the same thing for the destination dining and Airbnb use, for vacation rental use. I won't belabor this, uh, Jason's already gone through, you know, The zoning of what we're trying to achieve here. Sure.

So, you know, one thing that we want to make sure is clear is the P-51 flip here.

The reason why we're looking for that rezone is it's a space that we really can't do anything with, and it's really a continuation of the Provo project that's already approved and already going to be going. And so it just so happens that Orem owns a finger that stretches down the river adjacent to Provo and wedge between. So there was really no other use other than make it contiguous and consistent with what we're doing in Provo. So that's the primary purpose there. And I think that another big takeaway, and we ran this at Provo, is that there's a— There's any indigestion from development, it's usually that people would rather see it be dirt forever. And this is not going to be dirt forever. And so we already have The ability to build quite a bit here. We just don't think it's right for the space. We don't think it's right for Orem. So we spent a lot of time trying to figure out what we think is right, and that's how we developed this plan today. So, uh, while we could do something without needing any rezoning, we would rather do it right. And so that's really why we're here tonight. There's nothing— there's nothing new or more dense that we're creating here that doesn't already exist from an entitlement perspective.

Thank you.

Jason already talked about this as well, but, um, the BD-51 zone would be very restrictive to what— to the concept plan that we're getting approved with the zone change. And so we'd be held to the maximum density, maintenance break, or building height setbacks, private utilities, etc., architectural styling that's been included in the concept plan.

Is that the same density that we have in Provo? On the Provo land?

No, the Provo land we have, I believe, close to 14 units an acre.

And is it the same style?

Exactly the same style, yep.

But you just pushed them in?

It's just a larger parcel and, you know, it was easier to configure this because— so this, I did the measurements just because I wanted to figure it out. This property between the river and the Provo line ranges between 130 feet wide and 230 feet wide. So it's barely developable for anything except for what we're proposing here. So it really is being able to achieve something that wouldn't otherwise be achievable. This is the concept plan rendering showing how it lives as one community with Provo. These are rear-load townhomes, so they— you park in the garage in the rear of the unit, accessed by an alley. You enter into your unit from the first floor, which is typically a living room and kitchen, and then the bedrooms are upstairs. The front doors front onto open space on all these units, and the majority of them front on the river. The drive aisle is 26 feet wide. We have As you mentioned, 3.52 spaces per unit. I also put in here a count of the bedrooms, and so we're over 1 space per bedroom with this development. It's a mix of 2s, 3s, and 4-bedroom units, and our square footages range from 1,277 to 2,078. We've already discussed the Pro River Trail. I just wanted to point out that the reason why we kind of jogged it to the, to the other side of the development and didn't follow the river is these units, because again the sites are narrow, are more closer to the top of the bank of the river. And so you can imagine you'd have a 10-foot public access trail 10 feet outside your front door. We just didn't think that was a good idea for our community. Jim, do you want to discuss the— Yeah, as it's shown in the— and called out in the language of the proposed PD-51, we've tried very hard to articulate these units, to use high-quality building materials, and to give— even though it's a townhome— to give each townhome Kind of its own personality, so someone can point at this and say, oh, that's my unit, I'm the one in the middle, or I'm the one with the awning, etc. But our plan is to do something that's very complementary to Morrow. We know this is a great location, it's close to the river, and quite frankly, these, just given their proximity to the river and the location, will be our most premium units within the development. As we, as we get into it, we— there's been some questions. Okay, is it for rent? Is it for sale? Why would you do townhomes for rent? And, you know, we, as we looked in it and considered this product type, you know, number one, it's less dense, you know, coming in at, you know, at 8 units an acre. When you go with stacked flats, you can You can get much, much higher densities, but we did not feel that that was the right product for this location, and we wanted to do something lower, something flatter, and something far less dense and keep it more walkable. You know, we looked at the comparable properties as far as new developments where, you know, someone would, if they were moving here, if they're looking to rent a fairly new apartment or a new place to live, And, you know, looked at our nearest comps, which are called out kind of on this property, on this slide. And as you get into the single-family, we looked at an opportunity, or what kind of opportunity exists to rent a single-family home within this area. And we, you know, Roughly, we have a— we've shown a 2-mile radius. This came up Monday off of Redfin, and these are the available properties for rent within a 2-mile radius. The slide on the left shows all of the properties available, and the slide on the right shows all of the properties that are available that were built within the last 30 years. So there's There's very little by way of available housing for someone to rent in this area, you know, and if you want to get something that's slightly newer, then, you know, it looks like there's only one house. And, you know, do you want to talk to this, Jason?

Yeah.

It's near and dear to Jason's heart. So I'll tell you, you know, the experience that I had is we As I showed up here and started figuring out what this land should be, a lot of it comes from just my own personal experience in moving into Provo. And I was looking at Provo and Orem to figure out where we were going to live. And so we moved from New York, we're looking for a house to rent so we could figure out a place that we could kind of plant our feet for a couple years and figure out where we wanted to live. And after looking, there was one house for rent that was more than 3 bedrooms, or there's 3 bedrooms or more. And so there's basically zero stock unless you wanted to go north or you wanted to go, you know, save up south. And so as we started looking at this land, one of the things that came up was in Provo-Norrum, if you live in an apartment, Class A apartment, Class A minus apartment, and you decide, well, I gotta grow this, what are your opportunities? Well, right now your primary opportunities are to leave both. And so you either have to go to Vineyard or you have to go north to Highland. Again, Highland Alpine Plus grow there before you go south. And so there's not that ability for that, um, that resident that has a growing family but, you know, can't quite afford a house yet, can't quite afford a down payment yet, but needs some more elbow room. And it just doesn't exist. And so, um, we ran some math, uh, median home price just under $600,000. Right now the rate as of I believe yesterday was 7.26% on bankrate.com. Run the math on that with a $118,000 down payment, you're paying $3,500 a month today. And that's, that's fairly cost prohibitive right now. Now, that's rate-driven. Obviously, if we're signing, you know, 2% mortgages, makes life a little easier, but we're not there anymore. And so we can go to the next slide. I think the biggest thing that we saw was there's a massive gap in the market than most other markets. Doesn't exist. You can, you can rent all the way up the continuum. You can rent in single-family homes for as long as you'd like because that market exists. And here it really doesn't. I look every day for properties to rent just as a, as a market touch as we try to build these, and there's a massive gap in the market. So if you use the Platts at Riverwoods, which is a comp in Provo, again very similar to the properties around the small, um, you see what stock is available, and they actually only have one unit available right now. But if you get to the 3-bedroom and you need some more room, you have 2 or 3 kids, um, unless you can make that leap with a $120,000 down payment and a $3,500 monthly mortgage payment, then you really have a massive gap in the market where you're stuck renting an apartment for the foreseeable future. And so what we're trying to do here is really fill a gap in the market. Now, most of these townhomes are in Provo, Only 25 are norm, but nonetheless, I think the product needs to exist for both cities to be able to keep talent in some of these businesses that, as they have good jobs, they end up having to move. And once you plant your feet somewhere else and your kids get in school, you're not coming back. And so I think we're losing that ability to retain some of these young families. So that, that's really the biggest thing for me. The second biggest one was every apartment complex that we looked at is right on kind of main and main. So you're on a major intersection, you're in a major parking lot, Costco parking lot, mall parking lot. There's nothing kind of green where you can let your kids run out the front door and not worry they're going to get hit by a car or run through a parking lot. And so the whole premise of why we're looking at townhomes on the west side of the river is because you're off of University Avenue, you're, you're not anywhere near any main thoroughfares, and so it gives you a little more green space to have the ability to let your kids come out and run around and grow up. and be by the river and have more of a quiet existence than have the parking lot existence that a lot of apartments have really been directed towards. And here's a letter from the CEO of Nexeo, Dave Decker. You know, we've approached a lot of businesses. He's the most proximate forum business owner/CEO, and he said, you know, as we approached him, that this is what we're recruiting for them because they can not only, you know, off of self-employment, but there's, uh, very nice housing adjacent. So this would be great delivery efforts.

That's it.

Questions?

So you use the term, not with your homes, but destination dining.

Um, can you tell me what this looks like? Because usually fast food is not destination in I'm like, is this some sort of nicer restaurant, higher-end restaurant? Like, what does destination dining mean? Yeah, Taco Bell, it's a destination.

Um, so, so there's, there's 2 components to this. I think the first component is the first thing as you approach there and you look up and down 8th North, you think, well, man, there's a, there's a desert of food options. As you go up the canyon and working right there, you see, you know, boat after boat and skier after skier and people heading up the canyon with, with really nothing to grab kind of quickly as they're heading up to either Park City or Sundance or wherever. And so what screamed out to us was like, we need something here to just service this population that's going up the canyon frequently. So that was the first thought. And then the second thought was, well, we don't really want to live by a lot of that. And so what if we bifurcate this and we have a drive-through, or, you know, a double drive-through where there's maybe 2 attached to each other and there's a drive-through on each side? But what we really want to do is we want to do some nicer dining because we have a lot of people come in town for business trips to visit us in our office, and we try to find somewhere to go out to eat. And there's, there's just not a lot that's not really fast casual. And so the thought here is to have Really kind of 3 to 4 sit-down restaurants that are probably unlike anything that we have down here currently. We want to increase dwell time. We want people to feel like they want to go there as a— just the destination itself is the experience, not only the food. And so I would say it leans, you know, 85% destination dining, higher dwell times, really nice Easter lighting, outdoor seating. along the river, all that. That's, that's the primary goal here. The secondary was, well, we're trying to service a population that really has been underserved for years. And so that's really the tip of our cap, the drive-throughs. And we'd like to keep them separate so it feels like, you know, they are their own piece to some degree. But anyway, that, that was a good question. If I could comment just a little bit on that, that's We— although we haven't addressed the second item that's on the agenda tonight for us, but that, that's the reason why we're asking for a text amendment. You know, one, within Orem's code, fast food is synonymous with drive-through. And so we're trying to just establish the rules so that we know how to plan the destination dining and the restaurant village concept that we're after. And obviously the other thing, when, when this business park zone was created There was one owner, there's now 3 owners, and the idea was one big business park, so all the architecture was to match. And, you know, we like Nexeo, you know, we have a good relationship with our neighbor, but it's going to be tough if we have to match their architecture. So that's the 2 things we're asking for as far as the tax amendment goes. And Jason will explain that here in a little bit. We're looking for the rules of the game so that we can continue to plan. Hey, so I got a question on the, on the 25 units. Looks like some have some driveway parking and the others don't. So how many have a driveway and others just on the road? So the function of having a driveway or not having a driveway is just because of the odd shape of the property, and townhomes want to be A line and not, uh, they don't stagger greatly so that it doesn't fall in the road. So you're naturally counting parking as the driveway, you're parking 2 in the garage, I guess? Every unit has 2 in the garage. And then so that driveway that's counted is 2 more, so that's 4, is what you're counting? We're not actually counting those at all. And then just, what is the parking requirements in Provo? It's, it's the same 2.5. It is 2.5. So you have plenty of parking on that one schematic. It doesn't show much parking, but—

So there's 38. You can see it on the—

I'm in Provo.

Oh, sorry.

But yeah, I see that. Yeah, we're meeting that. We're at least meeting and exceeding the code in Provo. So it is identical to ours.

It doesn't have—

it actually Orem has more spaces per unit than we have in Provo. Right, my concern would be is if this maxes out, then they'll be flown over into Orem.

I think you're asking if Provo also required 2.5 per— did they?

They did.

So you questioned it?

Yes.

You're saying you would actually be at 3-point-something, right?

Yes, we're 3.52.

Is that locked in or is that changeable?

This is a concept plan that gets approved and rezoned during the site plan process. I mean, we have to substantially conform to this plan, but, you know, as the details— utility design, dumpster locations, you know, trail location— like, all these things are going to get detailed out. And so parking may change slightly, but not much. I mean, our goal would always be to have as much surface parking as possible.

And just so we're on the same page, you're required to have 2.5, but you would expect to have around— what was the number? 3.5 to 3.52. And that would be your expectation barring some really unusual situation? I know it would take a lot of unusual situations to change it from 3.5 down to 2.5, right? Right. As he stated, it has to be substantially compliant. If this is what the plan that you approve Again, when they go through for site plan, they may tweak, you know, the dumpster room, they may lose 1 or 2 stalls, but we'll expect it to look somewhere like that.

So it's going to be close to 3, 3.5 at least. Yeah, because we are quite sunshine with apartments that are condos that don't have an apartment, so they get burned quite a few times. So it's just a, it's a touchy subject.

Yeah, parking's a huge issue, but I— let me just say a few things. Um, one thing you guys should have made a bigger issue of is that you're local, and the money behind this is local, and the money behind this is close to the development. So you have a vested interest in having a real project that you stick with for long term. I mean, more often than not, we see a developer comes in Before that's finished being leased up, it's being sold to somebody else, and before that happens, the next guy's optimizing and selling to somebody else, and then nobody cares about parking or anything else at that point. But the fact that you're local, and I can see this— and you're obviously not going to commit to anything, but I can see this being, you know, a long-term hold. You've got more than just a casual interest in a random development, right?

Is that accurate? Yeah, that's fair. I mean, we We all, uh, at 50 East and the capital behind it, live within a mile of here. What we want there versus how we can maximize the returns, and there's a lot of things we could have done that make more money, but we have to look at this every day.

Yeah.

And we want this to be something that we can live with for decades, that we all enjoy. And so there's been hyperfocus on getting this right because this is our backyard, not somebody else's.

Right, right.

So it's a huge issue. I think that's a big issue for, you know, you as a developer on the positive side. Um, I think 8 units per acre, that's less than the proponent side. What were they about? You said they were like 14?

Like 13.6.

And so these would be the nicer units that would be on the north side. Um, one, one concern I do have, and this would be something you guys have to figure out, but it's also, um, it's just, you know, I know how you're more focused on destination driving, or dining, and making it nice and all that.

Sure.

But I think drive-through in that location I think of like In-N-Out, and then I think that because you're going to have a ton of traffic and you can handle a lot of cars, you know, that want to come out there, and then they're like, say they've got boats and they've got this, they've got that. It just seems like if you get serious demand and you've got drive-through, you could have a traffic mess in there. Have you got any thoughts on that?

Yeah, in the retail world we spend a ton of time on staffing. And so as you go into Provo, there's some really awful drive-throughs that you can't get around the parking lot because of that. So if we don't think we can handle the parking volume of a tenant, we would never sign that tenant up because it ruins the whole thing. And so again, it's the— to your point of being acutely aware of this being our backyard and not doing something that's going to spoil the whole development, or, you know, we don't, we don't mean to have any We just need it to be something that, you know, serves the goal of trying to get people, you know, some way to get food on the way up the canyon. Um, and so yeah, we're laser-focused on that because you can blow up your entire project with one bad director.

Right, right.

Thanks.

Any other questions?

So are you the property management company?

Do you hire that out?

How long do you typically hold your projects?

Do you hold your projects? Well, most of these projects are going to be long-term holds. This one uniquely will probably be a generational hold. And property management is a third party that we have to go through the interview process. Yeah, I don't think we want to be on tape telling anybody who they've been awarded the property they're not going to work very hard for us.

You don't need that in-house.

No, we don't need that in-house.

So, you know, I've sat in the Planning Commission meetings and met with you folks.

The 8th North issue is— we need to get comfortable with that. And tell us your involvement with UDOT, your commitment with UDOT, you know, what's going on with all that. Yeah, that's a— If there is one, or, you know, just give us a sense. I'll speak high level because I spent a year and a half trying to figure this out. Our original goal was to try and get a signal there. After a number of conversations with all the parties involved— Provo, Orem, UDOT, UDOT commissioners— it was a— we became aware that we don't, we don't have much sway in what happens on UDOT roads. Regarding the signal lights. We are the catalyst for traffic studies that allow UDOT to then go decide what needs to happen here. And a lot of that kind of harkens back to a 2015 letter between— or understanding memorandum between Orem and UDOT, where there was 3 proposed options here that involved some sort of medians. And I mean, those have probably evolved greatly since 2015. But at that point in time, the intersection wasn't F, and so, you know, it failed miserably. And so we are here now, 7+ years later, in the same spot. And so no matter how much agitating we had done, I think we end up being in the same boat as a lot of our neighbors and trying to figure out what, what becomes of this. And so while we tried to solve it ourselves, we don't have this way to solve it, but this will trigger a traffic study because of the zoning change. that will then allow you, or I guess forces UDOT to then run their study and see what is narrative here. And for all the technical aspects, I'll turn it over to Dr. Orninger or Walter Pratt. But, you know, we spent a ton of time trying to figure this out, and I think that unfortunately UDOT kind of runs its own ship. And so we'll have to be, you know, advocates and And, you know, participants with everybody, including municipalities, to try and figure out what to do there. But we don't have a ton of sway, so we're still kind of in limbo waiting to see what UDOT decides to do. Yeah, one of the things we learned through this process is that we as the developer cannot make a direct application to UDOT. We can, we can come in with a, with a traffic study, which is kind of the next step. Uh, we'll, we'll run the traffic study, it gets submitted to Orem. Uh, we will spend time with, uh, with your city engineer Sam Kelly and, you know, working through the various, uh, the various options. But ultimately, uh, Orem will be the applicant, Orem is the owner, UDOT is the authority having jurisdiction. So, you know, we're, we're kind of, uh, we're along for the ride. And we're, you know, and again, we're— I think that's one of the pluses of this project is there's, there's been a problem, it's been recognized, problem that's out there for a long time. Because we now have proposed some land use here, obviously there's going to be an increase in traffic. There's a new traffic study that gets generated, and that hopefully is the catalyst to get some modifications made to this intersection that can improve it.

Any other questions?

Okay.

Can I ask one question?

Sure.

So can you, based on that conversation, those conversations you've been having, um, I understand there's been some question or some requests for development agreement with you. Um, I have serious concerns about the 8th North area. Um, there have been a number of fatalities and very serious accidents. Um, I'd kind of like to know you're all in to fix that, and I feel like the development agreement is the best way to give us that peace of mind. We have the responsibility for the safety and welfare of our residents. Um, can you comment on that?

Um, Amy, can I pose a question in return? Um, when you say all in, what do you mean by all in? Because I think we have, we have demonstrated we spent tens of thousands of dollars on traffic studies thus far, and we've wrangled some meetings with 20+ people in multiple municipalities. And, uh, so we've been pushing hard to get something done here. So I think from that perspective, we've been as all in as we could be. But I just want to make sure I'm addressing your question correctly.

I guess I'm more specific towards the development agreement, um, and how to solve the questions that have come up that I've heard come up In relationship to solving that issue on 8th North?

Yeah, as we have gone back, the development agreement right now does not address 8th North. The reason being, this is, this is a zoning action that we're contemplating tonight. And, you know, if we're successful in zoning action, then we're going to move forward with civil engineering and with hydrology and with stormwater and with all of the other design and technical studies that get us to that point. We haven't produced the traffic study, which, you know, the traffic study will, you know, will have recommendations in it for mitigation. That's, that's kind of the next step. If you ask us tonight, you know, why aren't you including 8th North mitigations in the, in the development agreement? Because they haven't been designed yet and we don't know what they are. And so it's tough to agree to just something completely open-ended, you know, but to date, you know, I, I have checked the account. I know we're more than $50,000 into various traffic studies, zoning traffic studies, and just ideas that, that were completely scrapped, you know, when we, when we did bring them and present them to UDOT and they said no, it's never going to happen. So we've tried, and at this point We need to, we need to follow the process that's been prescribed because again, as a developer going directly to UDOT, after our efforts, you know, we're told it's got to be Forum that makes the application anyway.

And I guess I'd like to just kind of clarify off that too. I would just like to make sure that we have a good working relationship with our city attorney on creating those safeguards.

I can't speak for the City Attorney, but we've traded a lot of emails in the last week or two. I'd like to think we have a pretty good working relationship with, you know, with Steve Earle, with Ryan Clark, with Sam Kelly. We've been working with staff for a long time on this, and Jason's done a great job as well, just, you know, presenting the project and explaining things.

Do you want to speak to that, Tom?

Yeah, I'm not sure what your question was, but I think we have had a good working relationship.

I've been working primarily with their attorneys, and they've been very good to work with, and I think we've been able to work out different issues related to the development agreement.

Obviously, we don't have this aspect of it in it relating to 800 North, but with regard to the other aspects, yeah, we've had a very good relationship.

Yes, Jerry.

Mayor, thank you.

I think one of the things that These folks have done tonight is they've tried to outline a vision for the future as it relates to the entire property and the entire parcel. And I think in order to achieve that full vision, it's necessary for them to obviously move forward in pieces and in phases. And the success of that phased approach is going to be dependent on whether or not they can meet those, for example, transportation requirements in the future. So those transportation requirements can be reviewed, will be reviewed, and will need to be met prior to approval of a site plan moving forward with the project. So while there is not a financial commitment, for example, on the part of the developer to what the future holds at 800 North, The success of their ability to move forward relative to the future phases of this project will be contingent on, I'm anticipating, participation in improvements that will need to take place in and around this development so that we can ensure safety, we can ensure good access to the project and to obviously surrounding areas. So, you know, one of the conversations we did have And they did have relative to the development agreement is some sort of financial commitment to that future 800 North mitigation. But at the same time, I think we can garner the same kind of securities through the process that we have in place. If the transportation requirements or studies suggest a required improvement along 800 North, then those required improvements will be contingent. You know, the approval will be contingent on those required improvements. No improvements, no approval. So I think there is a good kind of check and balance in place. The ideal would be to have guarantees by way of a development agreement, but secondarily, I think we can achieve that same end with obviously that requirement that traffic studies be completed. And if they—

there are required improvements, Then their participation in those improvements will be a requirement of development.

Do we have any other questions or comments before we go to the public? Okay, we'd just like to open this to the public to make any comments, voice any questions, concerns. Hi, my name is Brian Byrd. I was invited to attend our neighborhood meeting for this project several months ago, and I also came to the Planning Commission meeting, so I'll try to not be too redundant. Tonight's been kind of interesting. We started off with the firemen and heard about the, you know, some of the Accidents that have occurred on 8th North. So first of all, I'm in favor of this project. Um, as I sit here listening to the city ask questions of the developer, what I would like to know, maybe how do you guys think about why doesn't the city just make application to get a light there? These guys haven't built yet and it's already unsafe from what you're already hearing. People have been injured. And if it is Warren City Council's duty to keep this area safe, why not use the city of Wye and pay whatever it takes? Because there are current citizens here that may be injured. I don't see how these folks should have to bear that burden. Now, certainly they can pay some of it, but they'll be doing that through tax dollars.

And other ways.

Also, um, in my business, we do a lot of work in Heber. So all the folks that we hire and employ are traveling on 8th North and going right up the canyon to Heber. And Heber is a growing area, so there's going to be more and more traffic whether these folks build or not. So anyway, just think about that.

I'm in favor of it.

I have 3 daughters that live in Vineyard, Orem, In Provo, they all rent. It is super hard to find rentals. So I'm in favor. I appreciate all the time you guys take, uh, for the benefit of us as Orem, uh, property owners. And I would just like to, you know, if it is true that they can't make the application, why not you guys, you know? And have the city move some funds to get that thing so we can save that money. That's all I have.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Hi, I'm Molly Faulkner. We own Will's Candy Shop across the street, and obviously we're just worried about— it is an unsafe intersection, we understand that. Um, and we just want it to, to be win-win for all of us.

We don't want them to shut us down and, you know, vice versa.

And a light would be great, and we'd love the city to support that.

Thank you.

We know that, you know, people are concerned about that corner, and we've invested our whole life into these convenience stores. We're family-owned, and, um, yeah, we work hard, so we don't want to be kicked out, some big project taking us out as well.

So just hope you'd be considerate of our property that we've invested in.

And we like the project, actually think it looks nice, but we just don't want them to shut us down. So that's beyond concern. So thank you.

Thank you.

I'm Bill Faulkner, um, Holly's husband, and I just wanted to add to the concern about shutting this down.

If it came down to anything going right Right. In and right out only, it would absolutely shut a convenience store down there. And I think I just would like to add to it of what we have put into this, and we purchased this 18 years ago on a risk, and we've worked it The first thing we did was work with Warren City, and we worked with the Warren City Narcotics Department. It was known as a big drug hub. None of the community was coming there. None of the neighbors were coming there. We got rid of all that. My wife and I were there every day from 5:30 in the morning till midnight for the first year or two. We're there every day for the past 18 years. And if anything limited to right in and right out, It would absolutely wipe us out. The majority of our business is coming down and up the canyon, so I hope when you go to try to figure 8th North out, you think of us, think of Mama Chu's. It won't survive with just the neighbors on the hill there.

It won't.

So thank you.

Thank you.

City Council, Mayor, my name is Braden Garner. I'm an Orem resident. I've lived in Orem for roughly 4 and a half years. I'm originally from American Fork. I won't talk about it, we're in Orem now. So, um, I actually went to Utah Valley University. My wife and my 9-month-old son And as they were talking about kind of the demographic that this housing or this project will address, my wife and I fall in that demographic. My wife was a teacher for 3 years before we had our son. She taught at Westmore Elementary, Title I school, and I currently work for an engineering company in American Fork. We're actually renting right now, and one of the problems that we face is our lease is actually going to be up in Roughly 2 years. And as these guys showed as well, there's no housing in Orem, and we're kind of being forced to move north or move south. And again, Orem's near and dear to my heart. Again, Will's Pit Stop— I mean, my wife and I walk down there, get drinks. We love going to Vivian Park. And I worked at Ivan's Ski Shop as well, right on 800 North. Right, so I'm pretty familiar with the area and I love it. But again, I think this is something that's going to target that demographic of myself with affordable housing, but then as well not forcing people out of, again, finding housing somewhere else. So again, I'm for it, and thank you for your time. Thank you.

Jim, can you address, as far as— I mean, right now we're just talking about the 25 units, right?

Yes.

And that flows in with the current traffic, and that's all dealt with. It potentially becomes a bigger issue on the next approval, right?

Yes.

So, and, and that next approval would potentially affect the traffic.

Yeah.

So, and really, Brian brought the best of the Procedurally, but right now we're talking about zoning ordinance and the creation of a zone to accommodate these units and appendices that specifically speak to exactly— not exactly, but in great detail—

what they will look like. Some parking requirements, setback requirements, and the like.

They will have to go through a process to receive site plan approval, and a lot of these transportation issues will be addressed based on a required transportation study that they will be required to submit. That transportation study will include a means to mitigate traffic concerns that are associated with the development. At the same time, 800 North is a state highway. So the gentleman, I, I hear you at the back of the room talking about cars coming and going from Orem to Heber, so on and so forth. There's a reason it's a state highway, because it serves a regional purpose. So we've got to look at it from the perspective of part of the responsibility rests with the developer who has property adjacent to the— Um, So the road in question, part of the responsibility rests with the community, Orem, and part—

obviously a big part of that responsibility rests with Utah and the state of Utah.

We're not talking about hundreds of thousands of dollars of improvements. We're talking about tens of millions of dollars of improvements potentially. The issue associated with a signal is something that we have exhaustively looked at. And it's not a city's unwillingness to do it, it's the geometry and the engineering of a signal at that location doesn't work. So that's, that's kind of the predicament that we're in, is we cannot accommodate a signal because it actually would make the— it would make that specific location more unsafe than it is currently today. So all of these things will be considered, and the property owner will be required to participate in whatever improvements are suggested. But it could be a short-term kind of solution that can take us for the next 5 to 10 to 15 years, but then at some point it may include an improvement that is well beyond what I'm talking about. But right now the issue at hand is a zoning discussion and not a site plan approval process.

So can I address that just briefly? So there's 2 phases.

One, the rezoning portion that we're talking about tonight is Phase 1.

With that site plan, there'll be a traffic study associated with that and any mitigation measures that are associated with that. Phase 2 will also be another site plan that would require an additional traffic study and potentially additional mitigation factors that come in when that comes in with additional restaurants, fast food, if the council decides to approve that. So there'll be multiple facets. And I think because we talked about in the meeting prior to this that they will need to involve the volunteers, they'll need to involve World's Best Taco, they need to involve everybody in the solution, uh, they can as well. So all of them have a win-win. Is it possible? Most likely, but it will work. People have to feel some pain?

Maybe.

I mean, it just depends on the solutions because it is a busy highway. It's going to be continued traffic, not just this project, the traffic from Midway and all those as well. So I mean, there's going to be multiple phases. This phase will require some solutions. Phase 2 will also require some additional solutions if the traffic study shows mitigation measures needed. So it's a multi-faceted approach.

Thank you for the clarification.

Thank you for the comment.

I'm Suzanne Rahn. I have the property directly east across the river from this development and to the south, so the former Community Press property and the property to the north, which is enormous. And I am completely in favor of this project. I think it's Long overdue. My own sister who grew up here with me, um, moved to Seattle over Pueblo Forum area because of lack of housing availability, which is really sad to me. I know for a fact because of my children and my friends and my family, this is—

they're spot on.

This hits a note that is so desperately needed. Um, I just want to say I really like these guys. I like working with them. We work together on this homelessness issue, these vagrants, the drug use. The faster that you can get this approved and developed, the better for everybody. Um, with regard to the other stuff, you know, when that cyclone approval stuff comes up, I'll attend that too because I'm in favor of all the small businesses succeeding. I'd like to see that. But these guys are great. They've done a wonderful job.

They've done their homework.

I think this would be a massive plus to the whole neighborhood, and then we could stop meeting on Saturdays and Sundays and chasing off drugs people and, um, people who decide to camp on properties. So please give them your support, as I do.

Thank you.

Thank you. May I ask you a question?

Excuse me.

May I ask you a question? Sure.

So your property's on the problem side, is that correct?

Uh, both.

The property directly east sits in Orem and the community press building sits in Provo.

So you've got your own property in both?

We have the same problem.

Yeah, okay, the more Provo problem.

And then there's the bridge.

Do you own the bridge?

We own it half and half.

That's between—

okay, so what, you go halfway across the river and then they have the other half?

Something like that, yeah.

Okay, and so the road going to the bridge, would that be your road?

It's both of ours.

Even on, even on the east side?

On the east side, I don't own the road. Uh, I may own to the middle of the road. I'd have to look at my plat.

You do.

You do own to the middle of the road.

Okay, now.

That's a CEP previous owner property.

I actually didn't care as a kid.

I had my blanket there and swam in the river, but it was just— I'm just trying to figure out who it was.

Okay, thank you. Thank you.

So I'm Josh Martin. I'm a Warren resident. I make a left-hand turn every day of my life between Mama Chu's and Will's Canyon Stop. It's not Will's Pit Stop. Towards Canyon stuff. So, and I would— I take my nieces and nephews to Pop-A-Dots. So anyhow, speaking specifically on the zone change, I'm 100% in support of this. I think this is a spot-on project. I think the architecture is amazing. The density is great. The parking's great. Everything about what I've seen tonight, I am absolutely in favor of. Thank you.

Thank you.

My name is Pat Gasly.

I've lived in Orem for 43 years of my 47 years. Um, went to Orem High School. Now I live up above the Orem Cemetery, and, you know, growing up You know, I'm— Orem's the greatest city on earth. I said I'd never leave. I've always wondered what would happen with this piece, and I think it's an amazing idea, and I'm in total favor of it. I think it would be a great asset to Orem, and obviously hope to see them get the approval for it.

Just want to let you know that.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Thank you.

My name is Kirk Beecher.

I actually don't live in Orem, but I am with Central Utah Water.

We owned this property before they did, and we sold it to them. We also own, um, our headquarters building is within the 1,000-foot radius of this property, and then we have the Olmsted Power Plant, which is right across the street next to Willows and that. Um, so we have a vested interest in this area, and we, we think that the, the project is a good project.

The zone change is, is the right thing to do.

Um, we do want to be at the table when you talk 8th North, though, because we have a lot of interest in how that works out. So thank you. Thank you.

All right, is there anyone else? Okay, well, we'll close the public comments portion of the meeting. Would someone like to make a motion?

I'd like to make a motion that the City Council, by ordinance enacting Section 22-11-64, PB 51, River District 728, You have a vote?

Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

The ordinance passes. So we'll move on. Next we've got items 9.2 on the public hearing slash ordinance, and that's amending a portion of Appendix A of the Orange City Code by amending the Standard Use SLU Code 5811 Fast Food and making such use permitted in the Business Park BP Zone, and amending Section 22-9-8 Miscellaneous Regulations for Manufacturing and Research and Development Zones to allow fast food restaurants with a drive-through, and make architectural standards consistent throughout the Westside Development Project area. In the business park TP zone located approximately in the north and numerous down there. Okay, sir. Thank you, Mayor. So as previously stated, uh, prior, what they want to do is strike out the amendment that does not allow drive-throughs, put it in a business park that does not allow that, that does not allow fast food. So in Ormond, as was mentioned, fast food and drive-throughs are synonymous, so The land use code labeled as fast food is what they're wanting to add as a permitted use. Strike out the B, and we see that it does not allow the ride-through. And then C, or what would become B, each phase would be consistent with itself. So if they have multiple phases, each phase would have to be architecturally consistent with one another. So they may have different architectural themes as they go from Phase 1 to Phase 2. And that's what's before you, uh, In this request, the Planning Commission did make a recommendation that the council adopt the changes as proposed. So I'd be glad to address any questions.

Do we have questions?

Terry?

So I really love the idea of the destination dining. I think that's fabulous. Um, the drive-through to me, like I said, feels a little Taco Bell-ish. Um, and I understand the need, people go up, but can I just please do this well? I mean, if you're gonna do a drive-through at a restaurant, I just don't want it looking like, um, how do I say it, other establishments that just— that, like I said, create— and I don't know, I mean, I'm having this problem because it really feels like there are 2 different things in a buddy. I can see that. And I guess it could be done well, but I just don't want it to look cheap.

Does that make sense?

Uh, yeah, I think when I'm thinking of a drive-through here, I think the destination dining is going to be done really well because the whole aesthetic is what is focused on the driver. Um, you know, food's important too, but you've got to make sure people want to be there. Um, and so I think there's that component, but I think if you think of like Lake Tahoe, Park City, When they have like a Starbucks or something like that. I mean, obviously we're not going to have a Starbucks in, but the point is, is that aesthetically they do it like almost like a mountain villa. They don't, they don't do it like a stucco strip center. And so all that's going to be thematically much more kind of mountain modern than it would be, you know, traditional strip center on Main Street.

I guess I'm saying please make this look really nice because this is a stretch for me. Make it look good, make it blend, have that feel, like the things you've just described.

Well, my business partner has to drive by it every day, so if I don't make it nice, then I have to hear about it.

That's fair.

And I agree, I think that that piece is a stretch for me. Uh, so I trust in you to do it better.

I'm— I concur with all of that. In fact, I came tonight thinking I'm not going to vote in favor of this. I'm concerned with the drive-through image. That's me, like Debbie. Um, I feel like you've got a great project here, and along with them, urge you to maintain that standard.

Okay, one question: does Cheesecake Factory have a drive-through? You can work out your own drive-through and we can build it.

Yeah, that would be it.

Just for the cheesecake price, that plug in there too.

I think you're gonna have plenty of traffic there, more than you— it's just such a convergence, so that's where the drive-through is tricky.

Thank you, Mayor. Um, so after COVID, the whole drive-through world kind of changed and restaurants changing their whole business model. We saw businesses that would— that were not— that didn't have drive-up capabilities that were all of a sudden offering not a drive-through window but a place that you can drive up, curbside pickup, and now that's become part of their business model, a lot of restaurants. So I'm just curious, the difference between I mean, I know what a drive-up window is, but— and I'm assuming that a destination restaurant would also be able to have customers that would drive up to a curbside pickup. So is there different language that needs to be put into that as well to cover both of those areas? And when you say drive-up or drive-through window, are you talking about what we're all envisioning?

Jason, maybe I can answer that. So Julie Smith, actually the applicant on this for these guys. Um, you guys are familiar with StratTank, correct?

Yes.

So there's one up in Lehigh, there's one in Springville. And exactly what you said, um, Councilman, that everybody had to adapt. And you would know that there are drive-ups at both of those. And just recently, um, the Lob Bros We just barely got approved and it's under construction. You know, we have lots of bushes and trees, and while you're inside dining, you won't even see the drive-up, the people coming through. So I think that's—

if you're trying to envision what that will look like, that's what our vision—

you know, it will be well screened, it won't be offensive. As for putting verbiage in there, I think the best thing we do is at time of site plan, you guys can request that. You know, say I'm not happy with this or that, but that will be a site plan issue.

And I, I don't have a— I mean, I don't have a really concern with that. I was just curious what that would look like. Well, I think there's something else to keep in mind that, um, I spent a decade in retail, and one of the, one of the most important things when COVID hit was you didn't— nothing was built for this. And so you're really scrambling to figure out, well, how do I even service this world because I have 4 spots in front of my, my restaurant and those are designed just for regular customers. They aren't designed for cars flying, you know, for 15 cars coming in and grabbing food. And so the luxury we have here is we have the ability to kind of overthink this and figure out how to make, you know, if it is destination dining and they're good, there's going to be pickup opportunities So we can do that in a way that's not detrimental to the aesthetic and the experience of everybody who's dining inside. And so we can architecture, you know, architect around that, right? And same thing with the traditional drive-through, right? Because I think these are 2 different things, right? The drive-through is unique. But I would think that's— I wouldn't pair that with fast food. I would just pair it with something that is quicker than ordering and waiting a half hour for your food before you pick it up and go to the campus. So it's kind of, you know, similar, similar transportation but kind of different concepts.

Let me just clarify that the site plan does not come to City Council. We'll go to Planning Commission on Wednesday.

Mr. Peterson. Sorry, Debbie just said so, you better do it right.

Right.

What I mean by that is, if it's only going to go to Planning and you won't see it, then, um, I want to solicit this place and come a lot. If you do it wrong, I'll be ticked every time I come. Just give me your email and we'll flow check this.

Sounds good.

Any other questions from Council? I will open this for the public comments. We'll call the public comment. Oh, here we have a public comment.

The other thing I'd like to point out, and one of the reasons why we reached out to Suzanne and asked her to be here tonight, uh, she, she owns land. There's 3, there's 3 landowners in this business park zone. One is the Nexio building, there's us, and then East of the river is Suzanne. So this action, to some extent, you know, affects her property as well. She lives in this business park zone and has this, and so we wanted to make sure that all of our neighbors knew what was going on and were in agreement with any land use actions that would be taken that could potentially affect them.

Thank you. Again, I support their zone change on this. The property that I'm developing in Provo, the Community Press, we don't really have the option for drive-through. And I think the face of drive-through has completely changed with regards to COVID. And I don't know if you have the experience of cooking dinner with your kids and all of a sudden the doorbell rings and they DoorDash something and you're cooking dinner. So everything has changed. But, um, I trust that what they're going to do is going to be really tasteful. I'm trying to do something very tasteful. Um, I know the demand from being a resident of Provo and owning this land, hauling boats up the canyon, running up there skiing. There's huge demand, and I think it's going to be a real asset to the community to have not only the residents but the retail, fast food, the destination dining, all of that. And in my book, you know, more the merrier. Bring them on and let's make this a great place to be because it's been extremely underdeveloped.

Thank you.

For forever, and it would be nice to have your support too. Thank you.

We should call it medium speed food.

There we go.

There we go.

Good food quick. Okay, we'll close the public comments. Somebody like to make a motion?

Terry?

I make a motion that we amend a portion of Appendix A of the Orange City Code by amending the standard Land Use SLU Code 5811, Fast Food, and making such use permitted in the business park BP zone and amend Section 22-9-8, number 1, Miscellaneous Regulations for Manufacturing and Research and Development Zones, to allow fast food restaurants with a drive-through and to make architectural standards consistent Throughout the Westside Development Project area of the Business Park BP Zone located at approximately 800 North and University Avenue.

I'll second that.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Okay, with that, we'll move to, um, we've got AC and drones.

That's all they have.

They don't have the—

yeah, okay.

I think we'll just give a plug for our Veterans Day program on Friday, Wren, at 11 AM at the North East. I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I appreciate it.

Where's yours?

That's all she wrote. Somehow we scrapped the other stuff.

This is the new standard.

I'm sorry for jumping in. I just—

the mayor asked that I come up.