What's Up? - 7 March 2017

Finished by the skin of my nose.

What's Coming Up?

COUNCIL WORK MEETING

12:30 PM, Tuesday, March 7th, City Conference Room, 351 West Center

1. A discussion on an AMI Opt-Out Policy and fee request
   AMI-enabled power meters allow for electrical use to be read and billed without Provo Power employees visiting each property in Provo. There are a number of other advantages including near-real-time energy usage information that's available to the customer. Read more here.Provo City Power recognizes that some customers may not want to be a part of the Automated Metering Infrastructure (AMI) system. The objective of this policy is to outline the criteria under which such a customer may opt-out of the AMI system while still covering the costs of providing services for an older technology and for manual meter reading...Customers who qualify to opt out of having an AMI Meter will be charged a $25.00 Monthly fee to cover the cost of a truck roll and personnel for an older technology.
   $25 seems pretty steep for a monthly fee. I'll be inquiring if this truly is the cost to (not) provide this service.
2. A discussion on form-based code
   On January 12th, 2017, form-based code was a topic during the Council’s Development Approval Process Review Retreat. Council members desired to discuss the topic further at a future work meeting. The presenter for this topic will be Jake Young—a Landscape Architect and Land Planner with the Civil Solutions Group. He has experience with ordinance and form-based code development, and he will provide insight to supplement the information Council received at the original retreat.
3. A presentation on the Water Division
   During the February 21st, 2017 Work Meeting, the Council moved that the Public Works department provide presentations on the Water Division over the next several months.
   The upcoming presentation at the March 7th Work Meeting will be the first in the series of presentations regarding the Water Division. 
4. A discussion on creating a Public Works Board
   During a discussion about the Water Division in the February 21st, 2017 Work Meeting, members of the Council suggested creating a Public Works Board. The function of the Public Works Board would be similar to the Energy Board in the sense that it would make recommendations on public works-related items to the Council and Administration. The Energy Board, for example, advises on long range planning, capital improvement projects, rates and fees on Energy-related items. The Public Works Board could serve in a similar capacity, although it’s breadth of topics would likely be wider since Public Works encompasses multiple areas (i.e., Engineering, Water, Airport, Storm Water, Streets, and Sanitation.) 
   This is a very interesting idea. We'll need to evaluate the costs vs. potential benefits.
5. A presentation and discussion of the West Side Planning Committee's recommendations
   In the fall of last year, the Council formed a West Side Planning Committee with the charge to return with policy recommendations for development related issues in the area of Provo that is west of I-15 and south of the River. I was appointed to chair the Committee. We are now returning with our recommendations.
   Members of the Westside Planning Committee have met 15 times since September 2016, researching and discussing issues pertaining to the future of West Provo. Over the course of those meetings, the Committee identified the following seven policy areas:
1. Preserve Provo’s agricultural heritage and support agriculture for as long as farmers choose to farm
2. Preserve and Create Quality Usable Open Space
3. Encourage Sustainable Residential Development Patterns
4. Promote Development of Commercial Amenities and Employment Opportunities in Appropriate Locations
5. Create a Robust Transportation Network
6. Require Proper Integration and Sequencing of Development
7. Restrict Development in Wetlands and other Environmentally Sensitive Areas
6. A discussion on neighborhood boundary changes
   Currently, the only representation for the Downtown Neighborhood is through Downtown Inc. In effort to represent the residents living that area, staff recommends dissolving the Downtown Neighborhood into the Franklin, Timp, Maeser, Joaquin, and Dixon Neighborhoods, while preserving an overlay of the Downtown on the neighborhood map.
   In addition, after receiving feedback neighborhood chairs representing the Lakeview North and Lakeview South neighborhoods, and the Sherwood Hills and Edgemont neighborhoods, staff recommends boundary adjustments to these four neighborhoods.
   Here is a map of the proposed realignments.
   The changes in the North are a no brainer. I have mixed feelings about the Downtown proposal. Would the core Downtown residents be better served by staying together and electing one of their own (rather than the current arrangement of having the head of Downtown Inc. represent them). Or is it better to split them up into four adjacent neighborhood? What's better for the residents of the neighborhoods surrounding Downtown?
7. A discussion on a proposed amendment: Provo City Community Development Department requests amendments to the parking ratios for the Off-Street Parking Standards for Baching Singles (Section 14.37.060), the ITOD Zone (Section 14.23.120), the General Downtown Zone (Section 14.21A.150) and the Downtown Core Zone (Section 14.21B.140) to consider increasing the minimum parking requirement within these zones. City-Wide Impact.
   Continued from last Work Meeting. It will be heard in tonight's Council Meeting as well. Should the current relaxation of parking requirements in our more urban areas be removed? This strikes me as a very unimaginative solution. I might be okay with it if it is a short-term holding solution until our Parking Manager can get going. I fear, though, that short-term solutions have a way of sticking around (e.g. the RC zone).
8. A discussion on an appropriation for Vote By Mail
   Over the past several years, there has been growing interest in moving from voting at polling locations on Election Day to a vote-by-mail (VBM) election. In 2015, several cities in Utah County chose the VBM option and every one of them nearly doubled their voter turnout. Although the costs were higher, the cost-per-vote was less than previous years. In 2016, 21 out of 29 counties in Utah administered a VBM election. Turnout was very high, although that could have been due to the presidential election. Bryan Thompson and Scott Hogensen, with Utah County, held a meeting last month for all recorders/clerks in the county. Given the interest and push towards a VBM election, they have opted to administer that type of election for any city that contracts with them. They will be able to administer only one type of election so the electronic voting machines will not be available this year.
   I also have mixed feelings about vote by mail. But it doesn't matter much because it appears the decision of the County will force the issue this year.
9. A discussion regarding the appointment of temporary Justice Court judges
   A recent change to State Statute requires that we appoint temporary Justice Court judges. Judge Romney is recommending five local judges to be appointed.
10. Administrative update on the BRT project
    No files found.
11. Closed Meeting

COUNCIL MEETING

5:30 PM, Tuesday, March 7th, Council Chambers, 351 West Center

4. A presentation by the Provo Bicycle Committee of the Golden Spike Winter Bicycle Commuter Award.
   
   Public Comment
    
5. An ordinance amending Provo City Code with regard to permit parking areas
   This is mostly a clean up of the code and helps get us ready for license plate readers used for enforcement.
6. A resolution to adopt the Southeast Neighborhoods Plan as a component of the Provo City General Plan.
   The Southeast Neighborhoods Plan is back again (I wonder what the record is for the number of times a plan comes before the Council. This one might take the cake). I am interested to learn what the committee has done with it since we heard it last.
7. A resolution to renew the surplus status of unsold property on the Surplus Property List.
   Resolution to place 7.40 acres of real property on the Surplus Property list and then authorize the Mayor to sell the property in accordance with the purchase contract dated December 6, 2016...The Municipal Council renewed this property’s placement on the Surplus Property List in October of 2015; however, we were not able to get the property sold before its placement on the list expired. It needs to be placed back on the list in order to complete the sale of the property...The City has entered into a purchase contract which is subject to the approval of the Municipal Council. This contract is with David Gardner. 
8. An ordinance amending the Provo City Code to adjust the parking ratios for off-street parking.
   See item 7 in the Work Meeting agenda.
9. A resolution adding the structure generally located at 690 West 300 South to the Provo Landmarks Register.
   This house had previously been nominated, but the owner at the time objected. The current owner welcomes the designation. This sounds like a win-win to me.
10. A resolution appointing individuals to the Metropolitan Water Board of Provo.
    There is not much information in our packets on this one. I believe the Board recently voted to move from 5 to 7 members. That creates five vacancies to be filled. We have received seven applications. See past blog posts about the saga of filling this board.