March 4, 2014 City Council Meeting

Work Session

Discussed FY 2015 budget. Current economic forecast done by Department of Workforce Services for Utah County shows 3.9% unemployment, significantly below national level. Economy in Utah County is better than last year. For the city, sales tax and franchise fees revenues have continued to grow. Motor vehicle tax is decreasing. Distribution is based upon population of cities and as Cedar Hills population is flat while other cities are growing means we will get less of the distribution. Telecom fees are also going down as it based on voice usage and more people are using less voice and more data, so telecom taxes are lower. Considering creating a Class C Road fund where road funds would be held so as to better manage those funds. Expected increase of sales tax revenues is $50,000 or 4.55%. This is a conservative number as we received more in FY 2014 than expected.

Public Safety expenses are increasing $52,827. Fire going up 4.2% and police going up 3.5%. Park maintenance going up $22,300. This includes $4,800 requested from the Parks, Trails, Beautification and Recreation Committee for community projects, more Christmas lights at roundabout, and landscaping rock on Canyon Road. Street expenditures going up $10,000. Public Works increasing $29,917 to add an additional full-time person. Legal services are expected to go up $20,000 based on large GRAMA requests and appeal. This may go down but trying to be conservative. Community Services to increase $17,072 for building maintenance, advertising, new table linens, and community events. The increase in building maintenance and linens is due to higher usage of building with more events.

Anticipated subsidies:

·         Family Festival expected is $24,500 (though we generally get about $20,000 in donations)

·         YCC is $2,500

·         Library reimbursement is $10,200

·         Community events $3,000

·         Recreation programs $54,321.34

·         Events center will have a profit of $12,394.09

·         Parks is $157,700

·         Golf Operations is $114,716

·         Golf Debt is $358,670

Public Works need addition of one full-time employee as they have taken on many new projects over the past few years in order to save the city money from utilizing other companies. This includes things like street light maintenance, recreation center maintenance, additional storm water duties required by federal law, GIS data collection and management, and additional park areas.

Staff looking at a telehealth option for employees to supplement health insurance. It is $15 per month per person or $29 per month per family. It can be started and stopped at any time, not locked into a contract. Offers 24x7 telehealth coverage. Staff proposes to add to budget $15 per month per official and employee for this program.

The rest of the budget is discussed below during Council meeting.

Council Meeting

Public Comment

Nobody signed up.

Consent Agenda

The minutes from the February 4, 2014 and February 18, 2014 City Council meetings were approved. The appointments of Paul Blaine Clyde, Randy Gehring, and Jon Traveller to the Water Conservation Committee were also approved.

City Reports

CM Rees – Working on press release and issued a city statement in response to some incorrect information posted on a recent GRAMA request. Would like to move next Council meeting from March 18^th to the 25^th so that we do not have a conflict with the political caucus that night. YCC hosting a dodgeball tournament on March 15^th for those ages 12-18 at Velocity Sports in American Fork. Teams of 6 will cost $12. More publicity coming soon.

David Bunker – Jr Jazz wrapping up this weekend. In Motion golf classes had about 50 participants. Karate classes going well with great participation. Mix and Mingle event went well. Sammy’s has limited hours in winter but opening up as golf season begins. Five new poles have been added to golf range, just waiting for new netting to come in.

CM Zappala – LPPSD meeting and working on budget. Need to charge County for areas that LPPSD is covering. Discussing if they should become a taxing district instead of special service district. Had emergency preparedness townhall, which went well.

CM Geddes – Planning Commission met last week. Discussed Blu Line proposal of senior living center. Voted to approve preliminary plans and will now move on to Council.

Mayor Gygi – Water Conservation Committee meeting again soon. Efforts on Capitol Hill have been fruitful. GRAMA bill that was potentially bad for cities appears to be dead.

CM Augustus – Will discuss finance items and North Pointe items during those scheduled agenda times.

CM Crawley – Parks & Trails committee having beautification day soon to help a few families who are in need of financial help with yards. Need additional volunteers for this committee.

Review/Action on Adopting Impact Fee Plans

This has been discussed in depth in previous meetings so please see my blog posts from earlier meetings for more details. Information has been sent to the UVHBA with a positive response. City is getting UVHBA some final information on how the Public Safety fee is calculated for multi-family units, but they were fine with us moving forward. The Impact fees being updated are for the Public Safety, Culinary Water, Sanitary Sewer, Parks and Transportation systems. Once approved, new impact fee rates don’t go into effect for 90 days.

Review/Action on North Pointe Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement

This has also been discussed in depth in prior meetings so more detailed notes are available on my previous blog posts. We did receive bids from Waste Management for hauling rates if we do a direct haul. We now have rates from North Pointe, DCD, and IRL.

·         North Pointe tipping rates are $31.50/ton. They do anticipate rate increases. Contract is an initial term of six years with 12 two-year terms that automatically renew. 13 month notice to withdraw.

·         IRL is $15/ton. Waste Management would direct haul to IRL and would charge $2.98 per household per month to direct haul to IRL. This total cost would exceed what we pay to North Pointe now.

·         DCD is $28/ton. There is no additional charge for Waste Management to haul to DCD as the distance to DCD is the same as North Pointe. This rate would be locked in for five years.

·         When including anticipated recycling tipping fees, we would save approximately $6,000-$10,000/year to go with DCD. Staff still needs to confirm this recycling rate.

DCD facility on Geneva Road has been around for about five years. They are planning to expand this summer to be on similar scale of North Pointe.

The savings of switching aren’t as high as we had hoped. The benefit to being with North Pointe is we are a member, therefore we have a voice on the board and we have an established relationship with them. The agreement with North Pointe passed 4-1 with CM Crawley voting nay.

Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Presentation

See notes above from work session for beginning of discussion.

Proposed 4% salary increase for employees. Health insurance costs increasing 6%. Utah Retirement System increase projected at 1.14-1.18%.

My questions:

·         Line 10-33-450, what will the Emergency Management Grant be used for? This is a new grant that pays for our staff member of emergency preparedness.

·         Line 10-35-110, why are recreation program revenues going down $15,000? Moved to another line item. I would like to begin charging rent to Tree Fitness, as we do for other entities who utilize our recreation center.

·         Line 10-35-130, is park reservations a new line item? It shows $0 in prior years. This is an new line item to better track revenues that come in for park reservations.

·         Line 10-40-305, what is the expected increase in legal fees for? Did we go over this year? Increase is to cover GRAMA requests and appeal.

·         Line 10-41-110 and 10-41-211 (increases for Mayor and Council) - I would rather see those increases go back into our library reimbursement than a raise and increase in training expenses for Mayor and Council. We cut $4,000 out of library reimbursement and I’d like to see us add it back in this year.

·         Employee benefit line items – why is each going up so much? To cover increase in fees as well as telehealth program.

·         Line 10-69-913, how close are we to being accurate on the anticipated golf subsidy? We are close this year and anticipate the same next year.

Discussion on Golf Course Maintenance Shed

Staff has prepared preliminary cost estimates for the golf course maintenance shed. The analysis identifies costs associated with construction of a new facility vs. the retro-fit and reconstruction of the existing facility. Retro-fit and reconstruction will take much more time and have higher costs because of how it would need to be done for safety and compliance, and includes much more labor. If we build a new building the estimated cost is $288,000. To do a rebuild of the existing building is estimated at $387,500. Efficiency on new construction leads to savings. Labor costs of rebuild are a huge cost.

Discussion on Development of SC-1 Commercial Zone Senior Living Facility

On Thursday, February 27, 2014, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed

Senior Living facility located at 4600 W and Cedar Hills Drive (Smart property) to the City Council for preliminary approval. Doug (Blu Line) has met with the City regarding the City’s property along 4800 W. Doug has also met with other developers throughout Utah (i.e. The Boyer Group) regarding the development of the City’s property. Doug has requested to have a chance to update the City Council on the proposals for the commercial zone, as well as to give an update on the Smart property.

Traffic study was done by Hales Engineering. Based on similar facilities it was determined that 0.41 parking stalls per unit were needed, though this facility has over 1 stall per unit planned.

Met with Boyer Company and Mountain West, who either work with or represent retail companies and large restaurants, to get a better understanding of potential interest in our area. There are not any sit down restaurants or retailers who are interested in coming to Cedar Hills today. Quick serve restaurants are more actively looking for sites. These include things such as Café Rio, Rumbi’s, Dickey’s BBQ, etc. However, most of these are already located near Cedar Hills and didn’t indicate interest in looking at Cedar Hills. Feels right now there isn’t a lot of interest for commercial development for our area right now. After meeting with Boyer, Doug feels that building the senior living center will bring in interest to the area because of the increase in number of residents as well as walkability. Doug continues to feel confident he will have no problems filling this facility because of location to shopping, to a temple, and the quality of the neighborhood.

In order to make it economically viable they must have at least 275 units. They have widened the building to reduce it from five stories, but have needed to keep the number of units close to 300. Rent will range from $800-$1200 per unit. This will be similar to other units they own in other cities in Utah.

Like to establish relationships with local schools to provide charitable contributions for libraries and such, and also work with senior residents who are interested in volunteering at schools or mentoring students. Meeting with Alpine School District now.

Blu Line would keep ownership of the building and would engage in leases with those living in the facility. Nobody under the age of 19 would be allowed to live there at any time and it would always remain a 55+ facility based on development agreements entered into with the city.

Review/Action on Road Maintenance

Tabled until next meeting as it was added to the agenda on Monday.

Review/Action on Mesquite Park Restroom

Tabled until next meeting as it was added to the agenda on Monday.

February 27, 2014 Planning Commission Meeting

Updated overall site plan shows a park behind the homes on the southwest part of the plan, between the yards and the parking lot for the proposed movie theater. Also eliminated all exits onto 9900 North.

Current setback is 179.3 feet from residents on the south portion behind the senior living center. Some concerns were expressed about HOPA laws. To qualify for HOPA (Housing for Older Persons Act of 1995) the facility must be 80% occupied by residents 55+, owner must publish intent for this type of housing, and owner must verify ages of those who plan to lease units. 80% excludes unoccupied units, any units occupied by employees, and any units lived in by nursing staff. The developer can reserve units for those 55 and older. Nobody under age of 19 will be allowed to live in facility.

Chandler (Assistant City Manager) would like to see some lighting on the trail around the facility as it currently does not have any in the plans. This would help alleviate concerns with vandalism or crime. There will be several security cameras around the facility and also viewing the trail. They will be noticeable and signage will exist telling people security cameras are being used.

Landscaping includes many trees around the entire facility to beautify the property. Sewer line would need to connect to 4800 West, instead of the current drawing of 4600 West. Still need to submit a storm drain plan consistent with federal law. Culinary water main coming in off of Cedar Hills Drive. Also needs to submit noise study once size of the building has been finalized.

Met with Fire Chief to discuss safety. Will need 7 fire hydrants. Need to identify location of stairwells and elevators. Floor plans will be submitted to the fire marshal. Parking lot is larger than required for fire truck access.

Current plans are less than 300 units (didn’t present actual numbers). Height of facility is about 38 feet for ceiling of top floor, 58 feet to peak of roof, and 68 feet on the decorative columns. Design guidelines says living space should be below 50 feet and this would comply with that guideline. Units are about 800-1200 square feet.

Low monument signage for the building so as to keep residential feel. Retention ponds on east side with underground storage tank installed to collect storm drain runoff. This is consistent with all retention ponds in the city.

Culinary water system has capacity for all units with great pressure, as verified with Chief Freeman for fire department needs as well as residential needs. Landscaping will be irrigated. Power poles will be taken out and utilities will be installed underground so as to not interfere with landscaping. Blu Line is working with Utah Power on this now.

Experience of Blu Line is that the entire facility will fill in 8 months with 55+ individuals. They are also looking to build a similar facility in the Provo area. The reason why these facilities are successful in an area like Cedar Hills is because of the younger families nearby and many of these residents want to live near their children and grandchildren. In their Salt Lake facility there are only 6 out 160 units that have residents under 55 living in them.

Public Comment

George Munton – Have seen some units similar to this in other areas and have considered leasing something like this. Does not want anything in the city that will de-value the current properties. Thinks the size of the units are too small for an active adult.

Mrs. Munton – Would like to see ramps for those in wheelchairs. Feels the height is too high for our community.

Daniel Zappala – Has concerns. Design guidelines state this area should be used for commercial and that mixed use would only be on a second story of a facility. Second that the developer has not made a bid on the city owned 9 acres. Third, would like to see height of building go down to 3 stories. Fourth, that pedestrian access needs significant improvement from all corners. Would like to see easier access for those living in the facility to get to trail around facility.

Debra ?? – Concerned about children who are walking to school in that area. 300 units would be 600 cars if each unit has 2 cars each. Worried about impact on school system.

David Jardine – Owner of Harts Gas Station. Excited to see development in the area. Would like to see access from Cedar Hills Drive. Feels what has been presented looks nice.

Marisa Wright – Would prefer to see an outdoor mall or whole foods, but those parties have never approached the city with interest. Feels Blu Line has jumped through several hoops to get this far. Drawings are beautiful. Worried that real estate market will fall and Smart family has to fire sell the property. Might get a tacky strip mall and this project looks much better. Asks Planning Commission to not keep making them jump through hoops so much that Blu Line gives up and moves on. She’s in favor of the development.

Stephanie Martinez – Would like to commend Blu Line and all businesses who are here and kept standards high. Was happy to see height come down to 3-4 stories and more brick added. She is for the development and hopes it’s approved.

Trent Augustus – Development agreement that developer would be required to sign can limit the ages of people living there and how many people can live in each unit. Also, this corner lot where the senior center would be located is the least desirable space in our commercial area as it isn’t located on a main street and has zero visibility on North County Blvd. This is why there hasn’t been much interest from commercial businesses. Bringing in a residential component brings in more sales tax revenue from increase in shopping at WalMart, Harts, etc.

Planning Commission Discussion

Blu Line has made significant changes after listening to feedback from residents, Planning Commission, and City Council. There hasn’t been a significant desire from other commercial entities and doesn’t feel it is our right to keep property owners from selling to Blu Line because we want different commercial. Height is within our design guidelines. Doesn’t feel units will have too many cars or cause traffic concerns. Doesn’t feel this corner lot lends itself to different commercial. Blu Line is working on site plan for the 9 acres owned by the City so it can accommodate what the residents living in that area are looking for. They have a vested interest in getting the commercial area developed as it will attract people to live in the facility.

The city has received multiple calls regarding purchasing this property, but every call has been from parties interested in building apartments on that lot. This area has been zoned commercial for almost 20 years without significant interest from commercial businesses.

General feel is that we have gotten as many changes as we can get and still have this make sense for the developer. Planning Commission unanimously recommends the plans move forward to be presented to the City Council.

Council Meeting - February 18, 2014

Work Session

Eric Johnson (city attorney) provided our annual training and the Open and Public Meetings Act.

Council Meeting

Public Comment

Kim Groneman – Speaking about GRAMA requests and has concerns. Anyone can make a GRAMA request and we as a city know nothing about them. Law says city doesn’t have to make person pay for a request but can provide for free. We aren’t in a position to judge if a person’s motive is in the best interest of the public. Best option for the city is to treat each citizen equally, don’t make special exceptions for anyone, and require everyone to pay what is legally acceptable for any GRAMA requests.

Ken Kirk – Treat everyone the same for GRAMA requests. It is inappropriate to give special exceptions for some. It is fair and within the law to charge for requests. On North Pointe Solid Waste, we have been a member for 30 years. It is a non-profit organization that is made up of member cities. Don’t make mistake of thinking that the agreement is to raise tipping fees, it is to guarantee a certain tonnage to keep the business going. Stay with the service provided by the community and don’t go with a profit making organization.

Mike Dunn – Manager of DCD Transfer station in Orem. There have been changes in the valley with municipal landfills that has changed the game. There are now other options and the Council should review them all. Knows there is a big cost savings and renewal periods are smaller. He is willing to discuss further with any member of the council.

Tonya Edvalson – (via letter to Mayor). Believes that requestor should be charged for GRAMA requests as it takes staff time and effort. Requests take a considerable amount of time and effort and she is concerned about resources being taken away from other city services.

Ken Cromar – Wants to thank CM Zappala and Crawley for sitting down to talk with him. Feels his requests have met with ridicule and harsh comments. Met with city representatives in December to discuss his request. Feels that sorting emails takes a matter of minutes and doesn’t understand why the city is stating it will take longer. Wants documents as is and feels it is in the public’s best interest for him to receive. Hopes he won’t have to appeal his request for free records.

Darin Lowder – Followed the GRAMA topic. Appreciate council members’ efforts in defining what is a benefit of the public. Trusts the majority of residents and council. Feels the majority is a safe approach. Makes sense to stay consistent with fulfilling requests. Feels GRAMA laws are a good thing and most residents would agree with that. Feels most would agree that this recent request is not reasonable. Appreciates being informed via the newsletter so residents know how money is being spent. Feels like we can’t put time and effort into other city issues when often dealing with this.

Joe Phelon – Been a resident for 10 years. Believes council has done what we feel is best for the city as we make decisions for the city. Asking that council approve the commercial development as it will bring in additional revenue and enable the city to meet its obligations. On GRAMA he appreciates his ability to petition city for records but also recognizes the cost. Suggests each household get three free GRAMA requests each year up to one hour of work. He is concerned with waste of tax dollars and knows excessive requests become a burden on taxpayers.

John Howard – GRAMA laws are a good thing but feels there should be a fee after the 15 free minutes. Excessive requests need to have a cost to them. Thinks it would be good to figure out what is in the public’s best interest. What public issue will the request solve would be a good question to ask on each request.

Consent Agenda

The minutes from the January 21, 2014 Council meeting were approved.

City Reports

CM Rees – Issued a press release on the upcoming mix and mingle in the Vista Room. This will be held on the 22^nd and there will be a variety of vendors in the industry attending. It’s a great time for residents and others to come see the Vista Room and what it offers. The Family Festival Committee will be meeting tomorrow night. YCC met and discussed a possible dodge ball tournament.

David Bunker – Golf course opened today and had some business. Indoor golf lessons starting next week. Jr. Jazz has two more weeks and has been successful. Had annual BYU game invitation for residents and Cedar Hills had the most attendees. Meet and greet at the Vista Room this Saturday. Members of the community are invited and vendors will be available. This is from 10am-2pm. February 28^th will be bid opening for city streets projects.

CM Geddes – Planning Commission meets next week.

CM Crawley – Parks & Trails meeting this week. CM Zappala and Crawley met with Mr. Cromar’s group a week ago to discuss GRAMA request and established some common ground. Feels it was a productive meeting. Mr. Cromar has decided to postpone taking his appeal to the State Records Committee, (though he still has time to file it). He feels goodwill was established and asks for additional meetings in a more formal setting. Feels it will reduce costs to city.

Mayor Gygi – Created Water Conservation Committee and they had their first meeting last week. Went well and will be working with city staff on water usage.

CM Augustus – North Pointe meeting two weeks ago and will discuss during agenda item. Still working with UVHBA on reviewing our impact fee study.

Discussion on Concept Plan by Blu Line Designs

Based on Planning Commissions and City Council requests, as well as resident feedback concerning the overall layout of the site plan, Blu Line Design and Doug Young have modified the proposal to accommodate these concerns. The proposed modifications further reduce the impact of the proposed commercial development on the residents in the surrounding area. The proposal incorporates three and four stories, rather than four and five.

Please see my notes from the recent Planning Commission meeting as the plans are mostly the same. They did add a small park near the senior living center. Another change is adding green space between the parking lot and the homes on the south side (near the proposed movie theater). Traffic studies will determine if losing this much parking space will still work. Mayor Gygi complimented Blu Line on listening to the residents and making changes. He is concerned that Blu Line still hasn’t talked to the city about purchasing the 9 acres owned by the city and doesn’t want to go too far down the high density without knowing the 9 acres will be developed. He still feels there are too many units. We have Charleston, Osmond Senior Assisted Living, and Bridgestone in our community that meets many of the needs of the same demographics. Mayor would be happier with 150 units instead of 300. I mentioned that we are still receiving a lot of feedback from residents that four stories is too high and that 300 units is too many units. Designer presenting tonight isn’t the developer so he doesn’t know what the minimum number of units that the developer insists upon to make this financially work for them. This is something that still needs to be figured out. CM Zappala would prefer that the entire first floor be retail with residential on upper floors, but would be willing to give on this if the building was less than four stories. CM Augustus said we are trying to maximize our commercial space, which is why it was talked about making the building taller instead of wider, so we don’t reduce our commercial space.

Blu Line indicated that this type of building is working in Utah. They will be presenting more detailed information next week to the Planning Commission.

Discussion on GRAMA Fees and Charges

The City Council has asked to discuss GRAMA requests, fees and charges. During calendar year 2013, approximately 50 GRAMA requests were received and filled. During the calendar year 2012, approximately 56 GRAMA requests were received and filled. The average compilation time spent to fulfil an average request is approximately 30 minutes or less. Several voluminous requests have also been received. The compilation time spent to fulfil those requests varies depending on the scope of the information provided. In addition to compilation efforts by staff, redaction of private, protected, or privileged information is also necessary and may require legal review. Fees and charges for legal review are borne by the City.

Eric Johnson presented on difference between personal versus public benefit. Mr. Cromar uses the emails he obtains for his own personal political agenda, which is seen by the way he editorializes each of his posts on his website. He portrays items as illegal or unethical when they are not. In a case handled by the Idaho State Supreme Court, it was indicated that the use of public funds to help a political agenda is never appropriate. This is one of the reasons why the city does not provide email records to Mr. Cromar at no cost. Mr. Johnson believes if we fulfill this new request for free we will be violating constitutional principles.

CM Crawley asked for clarification on how we charge and when something is in the public’s interest. Mr. Johnson explained we can charge for copying and compilation. First 15 minutes of work is always done at no cost, per law. If the request is going to exceed $50 then city is allowed to ask for prepayment before working on the request. Assessing whether something is in the public’s best interest is done on a case by case basis and Mr. Johnson recommends the requestor indicate why they feel it is in the public’s best interest. He believes that as a general rule it is good for us to charge as other taxpayers shouldn’t be on the hook for paying for the request. Should be fair and equitable so as to avoid discriminating against certain groups or people.

Most of the Council expressed a desire to treat each GRAMA request the same so that one person or group isn’t receiving special treatment, and agreed that we should charge for compilation of records. It was discussed that there is no such thing as a “free” request – if the requestor doesn’t pay for compilation then the rest of the taxpayers are paying for it. CM Crawley indicated that Mr. Cromar’s group was unaware of the cost that went into compiling this many records and had they been made aware they may not have made such large requests. I mentioned that I have been in more than one meeting where the city discussed how the compilation of emails has to be handled so it is untrue to state that Mr. Cromar was not aware of the process. I also clarified that the city has never been unwilling to meet with Mr. Cromar (multiple meetings have already occurred) nor has the city been unwilling to provide public records. Once compilation fees have been paid then the city will begin working on the request. The thing that Mr. Cromar is appealing with this request is our refusal to provide him with all of these records at no cost.

Review/Action Proclaiming February 24^th – March 1^st as Non-Traditional Student Awareness Month

The Utah Valley University Non-Traditional Student Recruiters are participating in Governor Herbert’s “On PACE to 66% by 2020” plan. The plan is to ensure that Utah is on pace to have 66 percent of the adult population earn a post-secondary degree or certification by the year 2020.

UVU has asked for the City’s participation and support with this initiative by declaring the week of February 24 – March 1, 2014 as “Non-Traditional Student Awareness Week.”  UVU will be hosting a Non-Traditional Mini Conference on March 1st at the UVU Sorensen Student Center. The conference is designed to help the non-traditional student overcome obstacles that stand in the way of receiving a degree. They invite the City to display their proclamation at this mini conference. Also, at their UVU men’s basketball game on February 27th, there will be special announcements and recognition of city officials at the game. This was unanimously approved.

Review/Action on North Pointe Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement

The North Pointe Solid Waste District acting as administrator of the solid waste special service district of Utah County has prepared the proposed Interlocal agreement. Some key points include the following:

·         The initial term shall commence immediately through a term to December 31, 2019.

·         Twelve 2-year terms will automatically renew the agreement following the initial term.

·         A 13-month notice is required to withdraw from the District.

·         Upon withdrawal, cities would forfeit any interest and pay additional fees to dispose of waste.

·         A fee will be assessed to rejoin the District at a later date. It is also important to note that the contract REQUIRES the city commit its entire waste stream regardless of our contracted hauler. This may limit some haulers from giving the city a competitive bid in the future.

·         The tipping rate for North Pointe is currently $31.50/ton. The City tips approximately 3,650 tons/year.

We received tipping rates as proposed by Intermountain Regional Landfill. In addition to tipping fees, our contract hauler would have an increase in hauling cost. We also received a proposal from DCD Transfer for MSW if delivered to their facility in Orem.

IRL will charge $15/ton, but does not include any hauling so we would need to find out what our waste company would charge for this. IRL is much farther from our current station.

DCD will charge $28/ton and guarantee those rates for five years. Waste Management already hauls near this location so we wouldn’t have any additional hauling fees.

Item has been tabled until we have numbers back from Waste Management on direct haul if we go with IRL.

Discussion on City Code Regarding Fences

City Council has requested that a discussion be held concerning the current City Code regarding fencing (10-5-18). Current City Code has special language regarding fencing adjacent to public parks, trails, and certain major streets. In these areas identified on the City’s master plan for parks and trails, only open fences may be constructed (open is defined as 40% open). Council has asked to discuss this provision and possibly make a recommendation to the Planning Commission for its modification.

I have been approached by some residents who live on the east side of Sugarloaf, where their backyards are along Canyon Road. Because there is a trail behind their yard they are unable to have a privacy fence. However, just a few houses down on Canyon Road there are other residents who are allowed to have a privacy fence simply because it is a sidewalk there and not a trail. These residents would like the same right to have a privacy fence installed. I have suggested that the Planning Commission review this and make less restrictions for those homes that are on a trail but where there will never be a privacy fence on the other side of the trail. In this instance, the other side of the trail is Canyon Road and then the golf course, so the trail wouldn’t be enclosed on both sides. This would also allow residents on Bayhill west of Canyon Road and residents on Silver Lake Drive to be able install a privacy fence. CM Zappala recommended the Planning Commission look at requiring some landscaping in that area if privacy fences are allowed and CM Augustus recommended the city check for any development agreements regarding fencing. This will go to the Planning Commission for further discussion.

City Council Meeting - February 4, 2014

Work Session

Public Officials Governance/Risk Training Session

Presented by Olympus Insurance Agency. Elected officials policy that we have covers wrongful acts of elected officials, administrative personnel, and employees. Doesn't cover breach of contract or contractual disputes, inverse condemnation or zoning decisions, outside board involvement not related to the organization, criminal, malicious, dishonest or fraudulent acts, and/or debt financing. Common causes of claims include failure to follow a prescribed duty, conflicts of interest, overreaching organizational authority, overreaching individual authority, and violation of protected rights, including the inadvertent release of protected information. E&O coverage for public officials does cover allegations of wrongdoing as legal counsel would be obtained.

Discussion on Canyon Road (SR-146)

David has been working with JUB Engineers to determine costs for Canyon Road improvements. UDOT has $4.4 million to put into Canyon Road for repairs, would include a 6 inch mill and overlay on top of that, which doesn't fix drainage, just gives new surface to street. UDOT would like CH and PG to take ownership of the road. Drainage is a huge issue now in several areas. UDOT has never provided any drainage control for this road. Without addressing drainage, that road will always have issues. We also have issue with rocks from the mountain ending up on the road at the mouth of the canyon. Estimated cost for all improvement is $8-9 million. Mayor has been working with MAG to see if they would be willing to cover the difference between what is needed and what UDOT is offering. Ongoing maintenance, which includes snow removal, would be around $75,000 per year for 25 years. At that point, we would need millions of dollars for another mill and overlay. Capital outlay at beginning for additional snow plow would be $180,000. This continues to be researched and no proposal is yet before the Council.

Council Meeting

Public Comment

Nobody signed up.

Public Hearing on Impact Fee Plans and Fee Schedule

Nobody signed up.

Consent Agenda

Appointment of Members to the Water Conservation Citizens Advisory Committee. Members of the Water Conservation Citizens Advisory Committee are appointed by the Mayor with the consent of the City Council. Mayor Gygi wishes to appoint the following residents to serve on this committee:

Chairperson: Richard Noble

Regular Members: Joel Wright, Brad Daley, Pricilla Leak, Cliff Chandler, Betty Jo McKinlay.

City Reports

CM Rees - Meeting with Sam on press release for Vista Room gathering. YCC is planning for dance on February 7th and discussing ideas for Easter egg hunt. Family Festival committee meeting this month and sponsorships already being obtained. Continue to get more likes on social media, but much slower. Hoping to get emails from the townhall event this month to help with proactive messaging.

David Bunker - Tomorrow all cities will fly flags at half-staff in memory of the fallen officer.

CM Augustus - North Pointe Solid Waste met. Four cities have signed interlocal agreement, four have not yet, and four most likely will not. They are anxious for all cities to get this signed. We are still waiting on bids from Waste Management and IRL for direct haul.

CM Zappala - Students at BYU have approached him to build an issue tracker for the city. It is a mobile app and website where residents can take a picture with their phone of any city issue and send to city staff. Staff can then update the site when issue is handled and resident would get an update letting them know. This app would be small and cost-effective for a small city. Students have already met with David and begun to work.

CM Geddes - Planning Commission had meeting regarding commercial zone. Both Blu Line and Amsource presented options for their areas. More details will be presented to Planning Commission and Council soon.

CM Crawley - Met with golf course manager to discuss sending out gift certificates to each household so that residents are more aware that free golf is offered to each household.

Review/Action on Adopting an Impact Fee Facilities Plan, Impact Fee Written Analyses, and

Fee Schedule

The City has authorized the preparation of a comprehensive update to the Impact Fee Facilities Plan (IFFP) and associated Impact Fee Calculations for the Public Safety, Culinary Water, Sanitary Sewer, Parks and Transportation systems. Zions Bank Public Finance and Bowen, Collins & Associates have reviewed and prepared the updates based on approved methodology as outlined in Title 11, Chapter 36a of the Utah Code Annotated (the Impact Fees Act). Based on the requirements for the preparation of the IFFP and information gathered for each facility, the IFFP has been updated and recommendations for amendments to the Impact Fee schedule are presented to the Council.

See my notes from the last meeting for more details on the analysis that was done. The only change is that at the prior meeting we did not have the road impact fee analysis. This has now been done and the impact fee for transportation will go down by 52%. This item was tabled so that representatives from the city can meet with UVHBA to go over the findings.

Review/Action on a Resolution Authorizing the Mayor to sign an Interlocal Cooperative Agreement for NPDES Phase II Storm Water Public Education and Outreach Best Management Practice Compliance

As part of our participation in the Utah County Storm Water Coalition, Cedar Hills is an active partner with the County and other participating cities in multiple Minimum Control Measures and Best Management Practices (BMP) of the City’s Storm Water Management Program (SWMP) as required by the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II

Storm Water regulations. The BMPs specifically targeted as a coalition include 1) Public Education and Outreach on storm water impacts, and 2) Public Involvement and Participation.  The City is currently participating in these activities through an interlocal agreement with the County. The current agreement was ratified in 2008.

The new agreement only has a few changes. The proposed Interlocal Cooperation Agreement would allow participation in the program for up to 50 years. However, any entity participating in the agreement could terminate its participation in and responsibilities under the Agreement at any time and for any reason by providing a 60 day written notice.

Having a coalition agreement with other cities helps us meet DEQ requirements but reduces our cost by sharing expenses with other cities. This new agreement was unanimously approved.

Review/Action on FY 2014 Budget Amendments

Golf Course Driving Range Posts and Netting Replacement - for the new posts we will pay $2500 in cash and the rest would be payment in the form of corporate season passes to the entity providing the posts. We will be replacing 5 posts and these will be 52 feet (currently they are 30 feet). We will also be replacing all netting. This is a better long term solution. The total cost is $19,700 with $12,200 coming from the capital projects fund and $7,500 being given in season passes. The breakdown will be as follows:

Golf Fund

20-95-202     Driving Range Fence     $19,700 increase

20-30-990     Use of Fund Balance     $12,200 increase

20-30-600     Season Passes                $7,500 increase       

20-35-300     Transfer In From Other Funds $12,200 increase

Capital Projects Fund

40-97-100     Transfer To Golf Course Fund $12,200 increase

The total amount we approved for LPPSD for the FY14 budget was missing the admin fee. Because our insurance costs were less than we anticipated (we switched vendors in July), we can cover this increase through that line item.

Lone Peak Public Safety District Admin Fee not included

10-55-300    Fire Services $11,000 increase

10-40-510    Insurance $11,000 decrease

Adjustments were unanimously approved.

Discussion on FY 2015 Capital Projects Fund, Motor Pool Fund, and Vehicle Replacement Plan

Proposing to replace 4 vehicles and 1 ATV. Process on vehicle replacement plan is to look at several models and get bids from the state on these models. These need to function for the tasks assigned to that department. Then looks at resale value in future as well so that we are getting the best value. Advantage is that we don't pay taxes when we purchase. Having a rotation schedule makes a more consistent cash flow. We keep vehicles until the warranty runs out and then we sell them. Overall, this saves us money that we don't pay for repairs.

Significant changes suggested for the Capital Projects Fund:

• $300,000 from Street Impact Fees for Harvey Blvd roundabout on Harvey and 4600. We have many residents who have expressed concern about this intersection, both speed and visibility issues. Placing a roundabout here would resolve these concerns while not stopping traffic flow, just slowing it down.
• CARE Tax and Park Development Impact Fees totaling $50,000 for Bayhill Park Phase I. Would mainly include the playground area.
• $400,000 for Canyon Road sewer. This would give sewer access to all of our residents on Canyon Road who are on a septic system. This amount is if County takes over Canyon Road. If UDOT maintains the road, the expenses would be $600-$800k because their requirements are higher. We have to work in conjunction with repairs on Canyon Road as they won't allow us to cut up the road and install sewer lines after they've done their repairs. Staff will provide information on how many residents this affects and how the cost would be impacted if we were to delay this project.
• $300,000 for updating the golf maintenance shed. We have some serious safety issues with our current shed. It is also not in compliance with storm water requirements. This fee would include a new shed and would fix storm water issues. CM Crawley suggests that we look at ways to improve safety issues without building a new shed so as to reduce the cost. David will work with staff on proposal as to what our needs are for this facility.

Notes from Planning Commission Meeting

Tonight the Planning Commission was presented with concept designs from both Blu Line group for the property in the northeast corner of our commercial area, and from Amsource who owns the property in the northwest corner. Here are some pictures of those designs.

This first one shows the concept for the entire commercial area, though the only thing that could be approved tonight is the senior living center as that is the property owned by the Smart family that is being sold. The rest of the property development will be discussed more thoroughly at a later time. Some of the biggest changes:

• The senior housing is now 3 and 4 stories high. Most of the building is four stories with only the very last units (a total of 8) in the back being 3 stories high. Overall, the estimated height of the building is 45-47 feet, which is below our design guideline of 50 feet. The presenter wasn't 100% sure of that height but that information will come to the next meeting.
• The building has been shifted so the entrance is right on Cedar Hills drive, giving a greater buffer between the building and the current homes south of the development.
• Right at the edge of the property line on the south will be garage units to create even more of a buffer between the parking lot and the current homes.
• Though it was not up for approval tonight, the new drawings show they would recommend moving the movie theater so it backs up along 9900 N. instead of backing against the existing homes, as shown in earlier drawings. They also removed one exit onto 9900 N. so there would only be one, and that would be a right turn only towards North County Blvd.

• The developer proposes that they give each of those homes on the south an extra 5 feet of yard space. The developer will deed that land to each property owner and will build a new fence. The developer has also spoken with the electric company and would remove the existing power poles in the back. To the north of that fence would be a 10 foot space that would contain landscaping and a trail that goes around the perimeter of the senior housing unit. To the north of that are the garages, then the parking lot. This drawing shows the sight line of an individual standing in the backyard of the homes just to the south of the housing development. This drawing does not show the very last units on the back would be 3 stories instead of 4.

• This shows the front of the building. They have added more brick so it comes up 3 stories on most of the building.

• This shows the northwest corner of the building, which would be retail space.

• These are the drawings Amsource presented for their corner property. America First Credit Union has expressed an interest in building there. You can see the drawings show AFCU would be on the northwest corner. They would have 5 lanes for drive thru banking. People coming through the drive thru would have the ability to turn left and go through the parking lot to get back to North County Blvd, head straight and make a right onto Cedar Hills Drive, or turn right through the parking lot to get to the street between the credit union and Harts, which would allow them to either go left into the commercial space or right onto North County Blvd.
• The two other buildings would be retail of some kind, though they don't feel either would be a sit down restaurant as there isn't enough parking on their property for that.

Top of this picture is the west part of the property, right along North County Blvd. The right side of this picture would be Cedar Hills Drive.

These initial concept designs were approved to be submitted to the City Council for the next meeting. We welcome any comments during the public comment portion of the meeting. On the Blu Line design, we will only be discussing the senior living center as that is the only thing being approved as of right now. The rest is just an idea of what it could look like. Feel free to contact me at any time with feedback.

January 21, 2014 City Council Meeting

Work Session

Discussion on Impact Fees

Zions Bank presented their findings from the impact fee study.  This was also presented at a public hearing last week. Fee study was performed by Zions and Bowen, Collins, & Associates. Value of impact fees is that needed infrastructure can be built, whereas without impact fees the infrastructure would have to be paid with property taxes, which may inhibit certain development. Process for determining impact fees includes looking at number of current users, current facilities, number of future users and future facilities, and excess capacity. Impact fees should share burden of cost on existing homeowners and future homeowners so infrastructure and/or facilities aren't being funded only by new development. Impact fees can only be used to fund items that meet existing levels of service.

Governor's office determines growth for each city. For Cedar Hills the population in 2060 is projected to be 11,900, 2023 is expected to be 10,778. Laws regarding impact fees changed in 2011 and 2013. Anticipated changes due to findings: culinary water in lower zone to decrease 13%, culinary water in lower zone to decrease 3%, sewer to increase 59%, public safety to decrease 10%, parks to decrease 60%. The total change, minus roads (which is still to be determined) is an overall decrease of 43% in upper zone and 47% in lower zone. Sewer is going up because, before the law changed, the cost of the existing sewer facilities was not included. With law change, these will now be included. This overall change reflects future spending by city for these needs.

Council Meeting

Public Comment

Nobody signed up.

Consent Agenda

The minutes from the January 7, 2014 Council meeting were approved.

City Reports

David Bunker - City will host an emergency preparedness townhall on February 13th at 7pm. This is for all residents.

CM Zappala - Utah Valley Dispatch had a meeting for all member city officials to attend regarding dispatch facility. Started with a tour of the current facility, which is in the Utah County Sheriffs office and is very small and doesn't allow for proper staffing. Looking at constructing new facility. Need 1.5 - 2 acres. Total cost is about $5.5 million, including land costs. Other cities  have looked at having their own dispatch, but expenses are much greater than contracting with Utah Valley, even with this growth. PG pays $600k to $800k per year for in-house dispatch while going with Utah Valley Dispatch would reduce their costs to around $300k. Estimated impact on Cedar Hills would be an increase of about 10-20%, depending on length of bond.

Mayor Gygi - Lone Peak Public Safety will be meeting within next 30 days and will elect new officers.

CM Rees - YCC is planning a dance at the CoRec on February 7th for kids 12-15. Cost will be $1 per person and will go towards Santa's Workshop.

CM Crawley - Parks & Trails met. Discussing Arbor Day contest, having additional Christmas lights at the roundabout, and planning to work with local congregations to identify five families who are in need of help with their yards. CM Crawley would like to look at providing gift certificates to residents in the newsletter for their free golf offered by city in order to raise awareness of this benefit.

Review/Action on Resolution Creating Cultural Arts Citizen Advisory Committee

Mayor Gygi has recommended that the City Council approve a resolution creating a Cultural Arts Citizens Advisory committee. This ad hoc committee will assist the Mayor, Council, and staff to discuss, recommend, plan, prepare and implement various Cultural Arts events and opportunities such as, but not limited to, summer concert series, community cultural gatherings, art exhibitions, talent showcase events, plays, etc.  The committee will be voluntary and will consist of a Chair, Vice Chair, five to seven regular members, with City staff and City Council representation. Unanimously approved.

Review/Action on Ordinance Dissolving Traffic Safety & Livability Oversight Committee

This committee was created when WalMart was approved in order to make sure resident concerns with regards to traffic safety were addressed. Staff recommends dissolving the Traffic Safety and Livability Oversight Committee as they have not met since November 2010. The issues this committee would look at overlap with Planning Commission and City Council. Along with the dissolution, staff recommends removing the criteria forming the committee from the City Code, Section2 Boards, Commissions & Committees, Chapter 4-Traffic Safety and Livability Oversight Committee. Unanimously approved.       

January 7, 2014 City Council Meeting

Work Session

Swearing in ceremony for Mayor Gygi, CM Geddes, Crawley, and Zappala.

Council Meeting

Public Comment

Nobody signed up.

Consent Agenda

The minutes from the December 3, 2013 Council meeting were approved.

Appointments to the Planning Commission were approved. Glenn Dodge and Donald Steele will serve through December 31, 2016. Bradley Weber will fill a vacancy and fulfill a one year term through December 31, 2014. Alternate members are Jeff Dodge, John Dredge, and LoriAnne Spear and will serve through December 3, 2014.

City Reports

David Bunker - Jr Jazz is up and going with several participants. February 13th we will have our second Emergency Preparedness town hall meeting for residents.

CM Zappala - Utah Valley Dispatch is having a special meeting on January 16th in Spanish Fork to discuss the findings regarding a new facility they would like to build. Presentation of recommendations will be made to Utah County mayors and councils and we are all invited to attend.

Mayor Gygi - Discussing with UDOT the issues with Canyon Road. UDOT would like Cedar Hills and PG to take ownership of this road. UDOT has $4.4 million they are willing to give to Cedar Hills and PG for improvements but cities have estimated it will take about $10 million for repairs. Meeting with MAG to discuss other ways to receive funding that would be needed if we took on this road. Discussions continue to occur.

CM Rees - Attended YCC meeting today. They are working on scheduling some community events over the next few months. Discussing a Valentines Dance for 12-15 year olds and a Dodgeball tournament citywide. They are discussing options now.

CM Augustus - No updates.

Approval of Mayor Pro Tempore

Each year a new mayor pro tempore is appointed to fulfill the duties of the mayor in his absence, disability, or refusal to act. The rotation is based upon the number of votes received. I served last year and this year CM Augustus will be serving as mayor pro tempore. This was approved.

Setting Time and Place for 2014 Council Meetings

The Council has traditionally met the first and third Tuesdays of each month; however, CM Zappala has asked about the possibility to changing to a different day of the week. After discussion it was determined to keep the same schedule.

Assignment of Council and Staff to Boards or Committees

The Mayor has the ability to appoint members of the Council to serve on boards or to fulfill some administrative duties. The proposed appointments are as follows:

CM Augustus - Board of Adjustment, North Pointe Solid Waste, Finance Committee

CM Crawley - Finance Committee, Parks, Trails, Beautification and Recreation Committee

CM Geddes - Economic Development, Planning Commission, Celebrations/Events

CM Rees - Celebrations/Events, Communications, Youth City Council

CM Zappala - Utah Valley Dispatch, Lone Peak Public Safety, Emergency Preparedness

A few changes were made. Anji Branch was removed from the Family Festival committee at her request. CM Augustus requested the following changes and they were made: the Cultural Arts Committee was removed until formally created; "Budget", "Employees", and "Council" were removed from the description of mayoral duties as those items are already covered by ordinance. CM Augustus expressed some concern with being able to serve on the Finance Committee as their meeting schedule may conflict with his work schedule. Mayor Gygi is keeping appointments as is and will see if there is a better meeting time to work with CM Augustus’ schedule.

Approved 4-1 with CM Augustus voting nay.

Review/Action of Portable Utility Sheds

Planning Commission has reviewed the ordinance regarding sheds. Currently we have codes regarding sheds that are considered portable, meaning they are under 120 square feet, they can be built in a setback and can be easily moved. Sheds over 200 square feet are considered accessory buildings as they need footings, inspections and permits. However, our code does not address sheds from 120’-200’ SF. The proposed changes include the following:

Portable Utility Sheds:

·         No portion of the shed’s structure is permitted to cross the property line or to drain onto a neighboring property.

·         Where the property is located on a corner lot, the portable utility shed may be located within the optional enclosure area.

·         Portable sheds will be limited to 120 sq ft floor area, maximum eave height of 10’ from the finished floor surface to the bottom edge of the main roof eave, a roof pitch not to exceed 8/12, and will not have a traditional type footing or foundation and will be built upon a hard surface.

Utility Shed:

·         No portion of the shed’s structure is permitted to cross the property line or to drain onto a neighboring property.

·         Utility sheds may be located on the rear or side lot area, no shed over 120 sq ft may be built in a setback area.

·         Utility sheds will be limited to 200 sq ft floor area, maximum eave height of 10’ from the finished floor surface to the bottom edge of the main roof eave, a roof pitch not to exceed 8/12, and will not have a traditional type footing or foundation and will be built upon a hard surface.

Approved 4-0. CM Augustus abstained from voting as he is building a shed and this affects him.

Review/Action on Ordinance Amending Employee Titles

Staff recommends the council approve the proposed ordinance amending Title 1, Chapter 6, changing the text to provide for appointment of appointed officers pursuant to state code provisions, and updating descriptions of office created. The existing titles no longer match what is in the ordinance and this will correct that. These updated titles include finance director, public works director/chief building official, assistant city manager/city planner/zoning administrator, and city manager/city engineer/city treasurer. Also, the code would change that the Council would only need to reappoint the city recorder and treasurer every other year instead of all executive staff, as that is all that is required by State code. All department heads serve at the will of the Mayor and Council and may be appointed or re-appointed at any time. Unanimously approved.

Discussion on Branding Strategy

Updated Council on branding goals and what has happened so far. Going through the survey results, focus is on bringing more recognition to our city to those who do not know who Cedar Hills, to attract and retain residents, build our commercial area, and increase revenue through recreation and events. This will include updating the website with a one page infographic, which will serve as our landing page for those interested in getting detailed information about the city all in one location, meeting with employers in northern Utah County, meeting and maintaining relationships with potential commercial businesses, showing through video and pictures who and what Cedar Hills is.  Also, the survey shows that over 60% of residents stated their preferred choice for city communication is via email so we need to work to collect email addresses and providing pertinent and timely information via email. We have already implemented some of the action items, such as use of social media (Facebook, Twitter, YouTube), monthly City Connections video, and resident interviews. Big things to work on this year include the city infographic, collecting emails from residents who would like to receive updates from the city, and implementing the resident selected tagline. This will be topic for discussion at our next work session.