Monday, January 22, 2018

Council Meetings - 23 January 2018

***Update: Other than the bumbled discussion of the Welcome Home resolution (Council Meeting Item #3), Tuesday's meetings went well. There is so much to do!***

There are a number of important decisions and discussions happening tomorrow: Committee assignments, Timp-Kiwanis (Bounous) Park update, East Center Street Design Corridor, Electronic Signs, a new department, and a call to action.

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Work Meeting Agenda

12:30 PM, Tuesday, January 23, 2018

Work Meetings are designed to be a less formal venue for discussion among Council Members. Generally, no public input is taken during the meeting.

    Business

  1. A follow-up on the Priorities and Outcomes discussion (18-004)
    Council met on January 16 to discuss priorities and outcomes to focus on in the next 1-2 years. Preliminary suggestions were brought forward and the discussion will continue in this meeting and at a January 30 meeting. We will be diving back into this in a retreat next week, but this is an opportunity to remind councilors of the assignments and answer any questions that have come up. This item was replaced by one proposing to adjust Council committee structure. (See next Item)
  2. A discussion regarding a proposed amendment to Provo City Code Section 2.50.110 adjusting Council Committee structure. (18-019)
    A motion to refer this item back to the Rules Committee for further discussion and direct that the Administration is part of the conversation before a proposal is returned to the Council was Approved 7:0. The Council has a number of committees, but they don't all function the same way. In some committees, counsilors are the only voting members. Other committees have voting members selected from the public. In some cases, who exactly are voting members isn't clear and may change over time. This proposal was designed to bring clarity to the issue by having the Council determine what type of committee we are establishing at the time of its creation. This proposal came out of the Rules Committee of which I'm a part.

    The Administration strongly objected to this proposal. The Rules Committee hadn't anticipated any concerns to what we considered an internal Council issue so we didn't reach out beforehand to get their opinion. I moved to return the item the Rules Committee to address their concern and see if we can find a mutually agreeable proposal.
  3. A discussion on Council assignments for boards, committees, etc. (18-002)
    Each year the Council must set and approve the assignments for Council members working on various boards and committees. The chair and vice chair for each committee is also set at this time. Last year I served in RDA leadership, on the Rules, Development Approval Process Review, and West Side Planning committees, and on the Library Board. I feel that much of the impact that I had was through committee work.

    It will be interesting to see how the committee assignments play out.     A motion to keep the mission statement and purpose of the Zoning Committee unchanged, with David Knecht as Chair and George Handley as Vice-Chair was Approved 7:0.

    A motion to name George Stewart as Chair of the Budget Committee with Kay Van Buren as Vice-Chair was Approved 7:0.

    A motion to approve all board appointments and liaisons as outlined in the document titled “2018 Council Assignments to Boards and Commissions” was Approved 7:0.     We started out by accepting by motion each committee assignment, but then decided to accept the rest at the end of the discussion. Here is a spreadsheet that shows all the committee assignments from last year and this year. This is from my own records, but I believe it is complete and accurate.

    I received all of the assignments that I was hoping for. There were a few more that I am very interested in, but I didn't want to over-extend myself too much.
  4. A discussion on a proposed franchise agreement with Comcast(18-010)
    This is a renewal of Comcast’s franchise agreement to be able to operate in Provo City. This franchise agreement is a little more interesting than most since Comcast is an important service provider for so many of our residents. Presentation only. This item was already scheduled for the January 23, 2018 Council Meeting. My main concern, after perusing the contract, was that we don't tie our hands in a way that will give us less flexibility to work out the best arrangement possible with Google once the seven-year agreement expires. During the discussion, I received the answers I needed. (See my related report for item 2 in the later meeting)
  5. A discussion regarding the proposed joint resolution in support of the LeRay McAllister fund. (18-009)
    This is a proposed joint resolution of the Mayor and Council to request that the Utah State Legislature sustain budgetary support of the LeRay McAllister Fund, created to help permanently protect Utah’s agricultural lands. This is being requested by the Sustainability Committee. This was also part of the West Side Development Policies that were developed and recommended by the West Side Planning Committee and adopted by the Council. A motion to strike “counties, and cities” from line 32 and revise that sentence to read “we call upon the state,” and to strike the last sentence of lines 42-43 was Approved 7:0. This motion approved the version of the resolution which would be presented as the implied motion for the item which was already scheduled for the January 23, 2018 Council Meeting. I appreciate the suggestions that Councilor Van Buren made. He brought up a couple details in the proposed resolution that made me think, "now why didn't I think of that?" I'm grateful that there are seven of us serving on the Council.
  6. A discussion regarding the Timp-Kiwanis (Bounous) Park Land Water Conservation Fund conversion and the surplus of the property. (18-018)
    The purpose of this proposal is to bring the public and City Council up to speed on the Land and Water Conservation Fund conversion and proposed surplus of the Timp-Kiwanis Park property owned by Provo City. Over the past year the Parks and Recreation Department has been working with Clegg Consult and the State to remove the LWCF designation on Timp-Kiwanis Park. Upon approval of this conversion, Parks and Recreation proposes that the property is surplussed and sold to Provo School District. Provo School District needs the property to meet Title IX requirements. The proceeds of the purchase are required to be used to purchase land only. The School District and the City have been working on this for a long time. It was a very hot topic for a while, but has gone quiet for a few months. It'll be good to get an update on where they are in the process. A motion to move this item to the first available Council Meeting for a public hearing on a surplus of the property was Approved 7:0. I'm impressed at how closely the School District has listened to the concerns of the surrounding neighbors, and how much they've been willing to accommodate their concerns.

    7. Policy Items Referred From the Planning Commission


  7. A discussion on a request for an ordinance amendment to Provo City Code sections related to Residential Design Standards. Citywide impact. (17-0024OA)
    Planning staff observed some inconsistencies in residential design standards and prepared this amendment to clarify design regulations. This doesn't appear to be a major change, but my reading of the proposal shows that there are some substantive changes. I look forward to the presentation. They usually make it a lot clearer. I'll have a few questions if it doesn't. Presentation only. This item was already scheduled for the January 23, 2018 Council Meeting. These are not minor changes, but seem consistent with our overall goals, and are steps in the right direction. Community Development agreed to reach out to various builders who are active in these types of developments for feedback. We agreed to continue this item for two weeks in the later meeting (item 8).
  8. A discussion on a request for an ordinance amendment to Provo City Code to add East Center Street as a Design Corridor. Joaquin, Maeser, Foothills, and Provost Neighborhoods. (17-0020OA)
    The four neighborhoods bordering East Center Street have collaborated with Planning staff to develop a draft design corridor ordinance for East Center Street from 200 East to the roundabout at Seven Peaks Boulevard. The additional design regulations would protect the unique character of the street. This item has been pushed along through the hard work of numerous residents from the Joaquin and Maeser neighborhoods. The City had called for a design corridor to be created, but hadn't gotten around to it. It looks pretty good to me, but, like the last item, I look forward to the presentation. I noticed a couple discrepancies between the proposed design corridor regulations and the Residential Design Standards proposed in the previous item. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it will be good to hear the reasoning behind it. Presentation only. This item was already scheduled for the January 23, 2018 Council Meeting. The differences between the designs standards in this and the preceding item can be attributed to the difference of scope. The last one is for higher density housing and mixed use projects, while these standards are for all structures along East Center Street. (See also the report for item 9 in the later meeting)

    9. Business


  9. A presentation of the Utah Transit Agency BRT Economic Study results. (18-017)
    Utah Transit Authority (UTA) commissioned an economic analysis to study the economic impact completion of the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system will have on property values along the corridor. Current land values and projected land values have been examined. The purpose of the study is to aid cities plan for economic development and redevelopment. Presentation only. This one generated some buzz on Facebook. Here are the slides from the presentation, and here is the video. This is a report on a study into the economic impact of the BRT project. Not surprisingly, it focused on the economic impact. It didn't focus on non-economic aspects of the project. Overall, if found that the project will have only a small impact, mostly in the area directly around the stops. More granularly, it found the biggest impacts around the Provo Intermodal Hub and near 300 S and University Ave, and was very unlikely to have an impact on the stretch that wraps around BYU.
  10. The Provo City Council Office requests ordinance amendments to Sections 6.06 and 14.38 for signage within the City. Citywide impact. (17-0019OA)
    Council had a first hearing of this item at the January 9 meeting and decided to continue it. This is a request to amend sections of the City Code to allow reasonable adjustments to the sign ordinance in relation to electronic messaging. The proposed amendments involve two separate Chapters of the Ordinance.

    The first is an addition to Title 6 “Business Licenses and Regulations, which adds Section 6.06 dealing with Use of Electronic Signs. It requires that any business operating an on-premises electronic display sign, comply with the requirements of the Chapter in order to qualify for a business license. This change provides a significant change in the enforcement capabilities of staff in regards to electronic sign violations.

    The second is to Chapter 14.38 “Signs and Outdoor Advertising” as contained in Title “Zoning.” Those changes principally relate to allowance for changing messages on electronic signs. These message changes are classified as low-churn and high-churn electronic signs, with generally greater restrictions on high-churn signs.     This item was on the agenda last time. Here is what I wrote afterward, "I asked for some visuals for how it would impact Center Street between the freeway and 500 W. I may ask that this stretch be removed from the 'high churn' areas. Also, I'm not sure that 8 seconds is long enough in the 'high churn' area. I realize that it is the national standard, but what's good enough for interstate freeways may not be good enough for our city." Presentation only. This item was already scheduled for the January 23, 2018 Council Meeting. Community Development did not have the visuals that I had asked for. I still wonder if Center Street, between the Freeway and State Street should be removed from the high churn area. During our discussion, it was explained to me that the proposed ordinance didn't change what is allowed along this stretch. Businesses already can put in electronic signs that can change every 8 seconds. It's just that none have yet. I agreed to move forward with this proposal and then bring a new ordinance proposal forward if, after study, I feel that a change needs to be made.

    At the very end of the discussion, Community Development asked me what exactly I was looking for in the requested visuals. In restating what I was wanting, and how it might be accomplished, the Director said something that raised a concern that I hadn't thought of. The discussion was continued in the later meeting. (See item 7 below).

    11. Closed Meeting


  11. The Municipal Council or the Governing Board of the Redevelopment Agency will consider a motion to close the meeting for the purposes of holding a strategy session to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation, and/or to discuss the purchase, sale, exchange, or lease of real property, and/or the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual in conformance with § 52-4-204 and 52-4-205 et. seq., Utah Code.
    Closed meetings (aka executive meetings) are held without the public present and must meet one of the conditions listed above. A closed meeting was held.


PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Regular Meeting Agenda

5:30 PM, Tuesday, January 23, 2018

    Opening Ceremony

    Items in this category do not involve legislative action.

    Presentations, Proclamations, and Awards

    Items in this category do not involve legislative action.

  1. A presentation of the Popular Annual Financial Report (18-006)
    A high level summary of select portions of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), the PAFR is like a “City Financial Report for Dummies.” Ever wonder where Provo City gets its money? Ever wonder how we spend it? If so, the PAFR is for you. Presentation only. Provo's RAFRs are recognized in the industry as great examples of making the financial information of the City available and digestible for the public.

    2. Public Comment

    This public comment period is intended to allow comment on matters that do not appear on the agenda. Each speaker will generally be limited to two minutes. Fifteen minutes has been set aside for this comment period.

    For items on the agenda requiring a public hearing, time to comment will be provided, after the item is presented, for all those who wish to speak.

    For items not requiring a public hearing, public comment will still be taken following presentation of the item, but will be limited to a ten minute total comment period.     No comments were given

    Consent Agenda

    Items on the consent agenda are generally routine in nature, have been fully vetted in other meetings, or do not need additional discussion. They are approved together as one item.

  2. An ordinance renewing Comcast’s nonexclusive franchise to operate a cable system in Provo City, Utah.. (18-010)
    This is a renewal of Comcast’s franchise agreement to be able to operate in Provo City. As I wrote above, "This franchise agreement is a little more interesting than most since Comcast is an important service provider for so many of our residents." Approved 7:0. This one also generated some buzz on Facebook. Some people worried that this meant that Comcast would be taking over the former iProvo fiber network. This franchise agreement is simply a renewal of the long standing arrangement that allows Comcast to access the public right-of-way for things like utility poles.

    3. Action Agenda


  3. A joint resolution calling upon citizens to continue the tradition of welcoming and caring for others. (18-012)
    This is a proposed joint resolution of the Mayor and Council to go along with Provo City’s tagline of “Welcome Home.” Here is the wording:

    Provo is recognized as a great place to live, work, learn, and play. The secret to our success is the people who call this city home. We take seriously our individual responsibility as well as our responsibility to our community. We come from a long tradition of taking care of ourselves and caring for others.

    The Mayor and City Council call on the people of Provo to continue this tradition regardless of what may be happening elsewhere. Let us resolve to always be warm and welcoming; to be kind and caring in our interactions; to strive to understand each other; to be civil in public discourse; to communicate in a manner that is mutually respectful; and to protect against the persecution or alienation of people because of differences — real or perceived.

    To all people of goodwill, we say: “Welcome Home.”     It's good to finally be acting on this. Provo is a special place, and it is the people that make it that way. People make Provo. Let's be the best we can be. A motion to continue the item indefinitely was Approved 4:3, with Council members George Handley, David Sewell, and David Harding opposed. I deeply regret the way this item played out. Two weeks ago, when we discussed this in the Work Meeting, we had unanimous (and mostly enthusiastic) support on the Council and from the Mayor. Just before we began our meetings a concern was raised. Without any time to work through the concern or consider how to handle it, some wanted to continue the item. I believe everyone was amenable to continuing it, but some thought it would be done after discussing the concern at the meeting and others thought it would be continued before the discussion. There was a lot of confusion and the discussion became very awkward.

    I am very hopeful that we will be able to work through the concern and will be able to pass this very positive resolution.
  4. An ordinance amending Provo City Code to create the Department of Customer Service (18-016)
    The Administration proposes changing the existing Customer Service Division of the Mayor’s Office as a fully functioning and independent department within the administrative departmental framework. This was discussed in the January 9, 2018, work meeting and announced by Mayor Kaufusi in her State of the City address. I support this. As I said previously, "In the past, functions have been brought under the Mayor's Office when they need extra attention, and then are spun out after they are fully better established. I think this is the case with our Customer Service division and the move to 311." Approved 7:0. This is a positive step for Provo.
  5. A resolution adding the structure generally located at 957 East Center Street to the Provo Landmarks Register. Foothills Neighborhood. (17-0001LMN)
    This is a request to place a house on the Provo Landmarks Register. Provo City Landmarks Commission recommended approval. We heard this in the Work Meeting two weeks ago. This is what I said, "Both Staff and the Landmarks Commission recommended approval. They found that it meets all three of the primary inclusion criteria and four of the six secondary criteria. I'm personally grateful for individuals who are willing to register their historically significant homes and buildings for preservation." Approved 7:0.
  6. A joint resolution of the Provo Mayor and Municipal Council urging sustained support and increases in the Annual State Budget allocated to the LeRay McAllister fund for the preservation of farms and open land in the State of Utah. (18-009)
    This is a proposed joint resolution of the Mayor and Council to request that the Utah State Legislature sustain budgetary support of the LeRay McAllister Fund, created to help permanently protect Utah’s agricultural lands. This is being requested by the Sustainability Committee. From agenda Item #4 in the earlier meeting, "This was also part of the West Side Development Policies that were developed and recommended by the West Side Planning Committee and adopted by the Council." Approved as amended 7:0. See the report for item 4 in the earlier meeting
  7. An ordinance amending Provo City Code regarding signage. Citywide Impact. (17-0019OA,)
    Council had a first hearing of this item at the January 9 meeting and decided to continue it. This is a request to amend sections of the City Code to allow reasonable adjustments to the sign ordinance in relation to electronic messaging. The proposed amendments involve two separate Chapters of the Ordinance.

    The first is an addition to Title 6 “Business Licenses and Regulations, which adds Section 6.06 dealing with Use of Electronic Signs. It requires that any business operating an on-premises electronic display sign, comply with the requirements of the Chapter in order to qualify for a business license. This change provides a significant change in the enforcement capabilities of staff in regards to electronic sign violations.

    The second is to Chapter 14.38 “Signs and Outdoor Advertising” as contained in Title “Zoning.” Those changes principally relate to allowance for changing messages on electronic signs. These message changes are classified as low-churn and high-churn electronic signs, with generally greater restrictions on high-churn signs.     From agenda item #9 in the earlier meeting, "This item was on the agenda last time. Here is what I wrote afterward, "I asked for some visuals for how it would impact Center Street between the freeway and 500 W. I may ask that this stretch be removed from the 'high churn' areas. Also, I'm not sure that 8 seconds is long enough in the 'high churn' area. I realize that it is the national standard, but what's good enough for interstate freeways may not be good enough for our city."" Approved 7:0. (This is actually incorrect. See my report) I actually voted against this. The proposal allows an electronic sign anywhere a backlit sign is allowed. The idea is that if electronic signs are kept static (changing no more than three times a day) they function like backlit signs but are easier to change (without getting out a ladder). I fully support this. In some commercial corridors in the City, the signs can change every 8 seconds. I am less comfortable with this, but it is already allowed in these corridors. The concern that was generated at the end of the discussion in the Work Meeting is that each sign, including secondary signs, can be converted to an electronic sign, and each electronic sign, for businesses in these 'high-churn' corridors, could be changing every 8 seconds. I don't know how likely this is, but I brought up Google Street View and counted 6 signs on one Center Street business.

    The general consensus on the Council seemed to be that we need to take a broad look at signs in our community, but that we can do this after passing this ordinance. I was torn about which way to vote, but my concern about multiple 'high-churn' signs per business was too great and I voted against it.
  8. An ordinance amending Provo City Code to clean up inconsistencies and correct references to the Residential Design Standards. City-Wide Impact. 17-0024OA
    Planning staff observed some inconsistencies in residential design standards and prepared this amendment to clarify design regulations. From agenda item #6 in the earlier meeting, "This doesn't appear to be a major change, but my reading of the proposal shows that there are some substantive changes. I look forward to the presentation. They usually make it a lot clearer. I'll have a few questions if it doesn't." This item was continued for a second hearing at the request of a Council member. We'll return to this in two weeks after reaching out to multiple builders for comment
  9. A discussion on a request for an ordinance amendment to Provo City Code to add East Center Street as a Design Corridor. Joaquin, Maeser, Foothills, and Provost Neighborhoods. 17-0020OA
    The four neighborhoods bordering East Center Street have collaborated with Planning staff to develop a draft design corridor ordinance for East Center Street from 200 East to the roundabout at Seven Peaks Boulevard. The additional design regulations would protect the unique character of the street. From agenda item #7 in the earlier meeting, "This item has been pushed along through the hard work of numerous residents from the Joaquin and Maeser neighborhoods. The City had called for a design corridor to be created, but hadn't gotten around to it. It looks pretty good to me, but, like the last item, I look forward to the presentation. I noticed a couple discrepancies between the proposed design corridor regulations and the Residential Design Standards proposed in the previous item. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it will be good to hear the reasoning behind it." Approved 7:0. In the meeting I remarked that this a great example of concerned residents seeing a problem and organizing themselves and working with the City Government to address the problem.

    10. Adjournment

Posted by at No comments:

Monday, January 8, 2018

Council Meetings - 9 January 2018

Happy New Year to you all. I hope everyone enjoyed the holidays. Things are a little quieter for the Council, but much is going on behind the scenes. Tomorrow will be our first Council Meeting of the year and it has several important agenda items including selecting Council leadership for next year, the next chapter in the Rental Contracts saga, the next step for the Medical School proposal, and an electronic sign proposal that has the potential to make a large impact on our city well into the future.

Everything but the "Previews" are the work of the Council or City Staff. All of the support material can be accessed here. 

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Work Meeting Agenda

12:00 PM, Tuesday, January 9, 2018

Work Meetings are designed to be a less formal venue for discussion among Council Members. Generally, no public input is taken during the meeting.

    Business

  1. A semi-annual report from the Sustainability Committee and Agricultural Commission (18-009)
    The Sustainability Committee and Agricultural Commission were established by the Mayor and present a report to the Council twice each year. The group will also be making a request that the City of Provo approve a resolution requesting that the Utah State Legislature sustain budgetary support of the LeRay McAllister Fund, created to help permanently protect Utah’s agricultural lands. In addition to requesting the State Legislature increase funding for the preservation of agricultural land in Utah, the Agricultural Commission would like the City to seek these funds to preserve agricultural land within our city-limits.
    Additionally, the Sustainability Committee is proposing that the City fund a sustainability program, including full-time staff support, to aid in our efforts to reduce air pollution, improve our economic vitality, and potentially save tax-payers money.     A motion to place this item on the Work and Council Meeting agendas on January 23, 2018 was Approved 7:0. The item that was placed on the January 23rd agenda is a joint resolution asking the State Legislature to fund the LeRay McAllister fund which can be used to secure agricultural easements to protect agricultural land in perpetuity.

    The Council also seemed open to the idea of hiring a sustainability coordinator, particularly after hearing that other cities have found that this position can more than pay for itself in savings generated from their work.
  2. A recap on Council's 2016-2017 Priorities (17-011)
    Council established a list of priorities in early 2016 and decided in 2017 to continue to focus on the same priorities. Council staff will give an update on the progress in each priority area as Council members prepare to consider their priorities moving forward. We have made great progress in some areas, and will be able to check some items off (not that we can ignore them going forward, but will be able to shift our focus elsewhere). Other areas still need a lot of work and I expect to see them on our 2018-2019 priorities. Presentation only.
  3. A discussion on the Vision 2050 effort (18-011)
    During October through December of 2016, the Council reviewed most of the sections from the proposed “Vision 2050” document. This is an update to Provo City’s Vision 2030. Recently, Council Member Dave Harding completed a proposed revision for Vision 2050, Section 10, Diversity and Unity. A lot of work went into updating Vision 2030 into Vision 2050, but then it stalled. I hope we will be able to use that work in some form. Vision 2030 had a section entitled, "Diversity and Unity," but it was not fully formed and thought out. I'm proposing that we completely rework it and call it "Community, Responsibility, and Culture" A motion to continue the update of the General Plan and align it with Vision 2030, incorporating any portions of Vision 2050 which have completed the review process to date, then once the General Plan update is complete to continue with the process for updating Vision 2050 as guided by the Administration was Approved 6:1, with David Harding opposed.

    Council member David Harding shared proposed changes to section 10 for Vision 2050. Council members David Harding and George Handley will make further revisions to this draft and share with Council members for input throughout the process, before bringing this item back to a future meeting.     I voted against the motion because I think it's putting the cart before the horse. I feel we should complete our Vision 2050 update, which establishes the vision for our city, then we should update the General Plan to ensure it is aligned with Vision 2050.
  4. A discussion on a proposed "Welcome Home" resolution (18-012)
    This is a proposed joint resolution of the Mayor and Council to go along with Provo City’s tagline of “Welcome Home.” Here is the wording:
    Provo is recognized as a great place to live, work, learn, and play. The secret to our success is the people who call this city home. We take seriously our individual responsibility as well as our responsibility to our community. We come from a long tradition of taking care of ourselves and caring for others.
    The Mayor and City Council call on the people of Provo to continue this tradition regardless of what may be happening elsewhere. Let us resolve to always be warm and welcoming; to be kind and caring in our interactions; to strive to understand each other; to be civil in public discourse; to communicate in a manner that is mutually respectful; and to reject the persecution or alienation of people because of differences — real or perceived.
    To all people of goodwill, we say: “Welcome Home.”     This agenda item is connected with the previous one. About a year ago, a few of us were drafting this joint resolution. Though we never found consensus on it, the Mayor was very supportive of the language and suggested that we work it into the Vision 2030 update. The question was where would it make sense in the document. I was working on Section 10 at the time, not knowing what exactly to do with it and realized that we could expand the scope of the section to include people's responsibilities to the community. A motion to change the word “reject” to “protect against” and to send this resolution to a future Council Meeting for approval with the change was Approved 7:0. We'll be voting on this joint resolution on the 23rd of January.
  5. Training on the Open and Public Meetings Act and training on Government Records Access and Management Act (GRAMA) requests (18-013)
    Utah State law requires Council members to receive annual training on the Open & Public Meetings Act. In addition to the required training, some Council members have expressed interest in learning more about GRAMA requests. This will make sure we are familiar with these rules we must abide by. Presentation only.
  6. A presentation on the Redevelopment Agency(18-014)
    In 2017, various department heads presented overviews of what they and their staff do. Council members have requested that the Redevelopment Agency give a similar presentation. David Walter has indicated that he will focus his presentation on three categories: 1) RDA project areas, 2) tax increments, and 3) CDBG funding. I think this is part 3 or part 4 from the RDA. Based on ongoing discussions, I'm excited for the leadership and vision that our RDA board will have in 2018. Presentation only.

  7. An update on the Nevada Avenue Trail (18-015)
    Nevada Avenue from approximately 1000 South to Slate Canyon Drive is a narrow, privately held, unimproved roadway that is used by many local residents as a walking/biking route. The roadway is also used as a shortcut for vehicle traffic entering and exiting the Slate Canyon neighborhoods. Due to the narrowness of the road, the neighborhood has requested that improvements be made to accommodate pedestrians and provide separation from vehicular traffic that often travel above advisable speeds. Provo City, neighborhood chairs, as well as Councilman Knecht, and former Councilman Hal Miller, have all worked with private property owners in an effort to provide for a walking path alongside Nevada Ave. I believe this update was requested by the Council after a resident raised the issue in the public comment portion of a Council meeting. (Go Melanie!) A motion for the Administration to explore and enter negotiations with the property owner to find out what the property would cost and to begin the process to purchase this if neighboring property owners agreed to stand by the agreements they had made in the past was Approved 7:0. This is a sticky problem with no good solutions. Hopefully, we can work together with local property owners to help out the residents who live in the area and use this trail/road.
  8. A discussion on creating the Department of Customer Service (18-016)
    The Administration proposes changing the existing Customer Service Division of the Mayor’s Office as a fully functioning and independent department within the administrative departmental framework. When does it make sense to break off a division and make it a department? In the past, functions have been brought under the Mayor's Office when they need extra attention, and then are spun out after they are fully better established. I think this is the case with our Customer Service division and the move to 311. A motion to place an ordinance for creating the Department of Customer Service on the January 23, 2018 Council Meeting agenda was Approved 7:0. It'd be pretty awkward if the Council doesn't approve this on the 23rd since the Mayor announced it in her State of the City address.
  9. Norman Thurston nominates the Pierpont House, located at 957 East Center Street, to the Provo Landmarks Register. Foothills Neighborhood. (17-0001LMN)
    This is a request to place a house on the Provo Landmarks Register. Provo City Landmarks Commission recommended approval. Both Staff and the Landmarks Commission recommended approval. They found that it meets all three of the primary inclusion criteria and four of the six secondary criteria. I'm personally grateful for individuals who are willing to register their historically significant homes and buildings for preservation. A motion to place this item on the January 23, 2018 Council Meeting agenda was Approved 7:0. This'll be a good addition.

    10. Administration

    The Mayor or other members of the city administration often use this time to give updates on current issues, good news, coming events, etc.

    Policy Items Referred From the Planning Commission


  10. Nathan Chappell requests a Zone Change from A1.5 to R1.8 for 2.32 acres of property located at approximately 1282 North Geneva Road. Lakeview North Neighborhood. (17-0009R)
    A zone change is being requested in order to facilitate a subdivision. This application has been heard three times previously by the Planning Commission. In all instances, the accompanying subdivision drawings have remained almost identical, with only superficial changes occurring. In order to provide a path forward, staff recommends that the City zone the property R1.10, per the Planning Commission recommendation in 2016. This decision would create clear expectations and eliminate the need of relying on additional documentation, such as development agreements, to ensure appropriate development. I'm torn on this one. I certainly don't support a rezone to R1.8. But I'll need to be convinced that rezoning it to R1.10 is any better than leaving it as agricultural. This item was already scheduled for the January 9, 2018 Council Meeting and due to time constraints, the related Work Meeting presentation was continued until the evening meeting. See the report for item 6 in the later meeting.
  11. The Provo City Council Office requests ordinance amendments to Sections 6.06 and 14.38 for signage within the City. Citywide impact. (17-0019OA)
    This is a request to amend sections of the City Code to allow reasonable adjustments to the sign ordinance in relation to electronic messaging. The proposed amendments involve two separate Chapters of the Ordinance. The first is an addition to Title 6 “Business Licenses and Regulations, which adds Section 6.06 dealing with Use of Electronic Signs. It requires that any business operating an on-premises electronic display sign, comply with the requirements of the Chapter in order to qualify for a business license. This change provides a significant change in the enforcement capabilities of staff in regards to electronic sign violations. The second is to Chapter 14.38 “Signs and Outdoor Advertising” as contained in Title “Zoning.” Those changes principally relate to allowance for changing messages on electronic signs. These message changes are classified as low-churn and high-churn electronic signs, with generally greater restrictions on high-churn signs. This is an important change. One that is needed, but also one that we need to get right. I have some concerns about the impact on businesses with existing signs. My biggest concern, though, is which areas would have the "high churn" designation. Presentation only. This item was already scheduled for the January 9, 2018 Council Meeting. See the report for item 7 in the later meeting.
  12. The Provo City Community Development Department requests an Ordinance Amendment to Section 14.06.020 to adopt a definition for 'Road.' Citywide impact. (17- 0023OA)
    This proposed amendment is a result of an issue occurring during a Board of Adjustment meeting where having the proposed wording, may have saved some confusion in the discussion. Staff believes the proposed clarification in the definition would significantly lessen or eliminate any confusion in the term. This item is a proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to add a reference definition for ‘Road.” The resulting amendment would simply read: “Road” See definition of “Streets” I see this as a house keeping item. This item was already scheduled for the January 9, 2018 Council Meeting and due to time constraints, the related Work Meeting presentation was continued until the evening meeting. See the report for item 8 in the later meeting.

    13. Closed Meeting


  13. The Municipal Council or the Governing Board of the Redevelopment Agency will consider a motion to close the meeting for the purposes of holding a strategy session to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation, and/or to discuss the purchase, sale, exchange, or lease of real property, and/or the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual in conformance with § 52-4-204 and 52-4-205 et. seq., Utah Code.
    Closed meetings (aka executive meetings) are held without the public present and must meet one of the conditions listed above. No closed meeting was held.


PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Regular Meeting Agenda

5:30 PM, Tuesday, January 9, 2018

    Opening Ceremony

    Items in this category do not involve legislative action.
  • Roll Call
  • Prayer
  • Pledge of Allegiance
  • Approval of Minutes
    • September 5, 2017 Board of Canvassers
    • November 21, 2017 Council Meeting
      • It was painful to read through these minutes, reliving the struggles that the County had running this past election. Approved by unanimous consent.

    Public Comment

    • This public comment period is intended to allow comment on matters that do not appear on the agenda. Each speaker will generally be limited to two minutes. Fifteen minutes has been set aside for this comment period.
    • For items on the agenda requiring a public hearing, time to comment will be provided, after the item is presented, for all those who wish to speak.
    • For items not requiring a public hearing, public comment will still be taken following presentation of the item, but will be limited to a ten minute total comment period.

    Action Agenda

  1. The election of Municipal Council officers; chair and vice-chair. (18-001)
    Council members elect their leadership at the first regular meeting of the year. Nominations are made and votes are taken. By code, no discussion on the nominations is allowed. The Council Chair conducts Council meetings, signs documents on behalf of the Council and is considered the Council’s spokesperson to the public, the media, and the Provo City Mayor. With no discussion allowed in the meeting, this has to be hashed out between Councilors in one-on-one and small group discussions beforehand. Gary Winterton was elected Council Chair and David Harding was elected Council Vice-Chair. I'm looking forward to supporting Councilor Winterton as he chairs the Council this year.
  2. A resolution acknowledging the election of the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Provo Municipal Council for calendar year 2018. (18-001)
    This resolution formalizes the result of the election. Approved 7:0.
    3. Redevelopment Agency of Provo
  3. The election of Redevelopment Agency of Provo officers; chair and vice-chair. (18-001)
    The Provo Municipal Council serves as the governing board of the Redevelopment Agency (RDA) and elects leadership at the first regular meeting of the year. The RDA Chair conducts the portions of Council’s meetings where redevelopment items are discussed (listed separately on the agendas). Similar to the election of Council leadership, but for the RDA executive board. David Knecht was elected RDA Chair and George Stewart was elected RDA Vice-Chair. I've enjoyed serving in RDA leadership with George Stewart these past two years. I'm excited about the vision and passion that Councilor Knecht has for the RDA. He has decades of experience working to improve the housing situation in Provo. I hope to be able to work with him on housing efforts.
  4. A resolution appointing the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Redevelopment Agency of Provo City for calendar year 2018. (18-002)
    This resolution formalizes the result of the election. Approved 7:0.
    5. Action Agenda (Continued)
  5. Consideration of an ordinance to amend Ordinance 2017-51 regarding rental contracts. (17-104)
    Council members met on January 3, 2018, to discuss with the Zoning Committee the recently passed rental contract ordinance. A change to the implementation date is being proposed. A lot of work has been going on this behind the scenes over the past month or so, as evidenced by this non-veto. Based on our Work meeting last week, we will be delaying the implementation date of the Rental Contract ordinance that we recently passed in order to see if we can make some improvements. Approved 7:0. We pushed back the implementation date to give the Council more time to work out some improvements to the regulations.
  6. An ordinance amending the zone map classification of approximately 2.29 acres of real property, generally located at 1282 North Geneva Road, from Agriculture (A1.5) to One-family Residential (R1.10). Lakeview North Neighborhood. (17-0009R)
    A zone change is being requested in order to facilitate a subdivision. This application has been heard three times previously by the Planning Commission. In all instances, the accompanying subdivision drawings have remained almost identical, with only superficial changes occurring. In order to provide a path forward, staff recommends that the City zone the property R1.10, per the Planning Commission recommendation in 2016. This decision would create clear expectations and eliminate the need of relying on additional documentation, such as development agreements, to ensure appropriate development. As I said about this request in the earlier meeting, "I'm torn on this one. I certainly don't support a rezone to R1.8. But I'll need to be convinced that rezoning it to R1.10 is any better than leaving it as agricultural." Approved 7:0. I was torn on this item, but the deciding factors was the neighborhood support for the rezone and the fact that the property should be held to higher standards if it is zoned residential. It's an eyesore right now.
  7. An ordinance amending Provo City Code regarding signage. Citywide Impact. (17-0019OA,)
    This is a request to amend sections of the City Code to allow reasonable adjustments to the sign ordinance in relation to electronic messaging. The proposed amendments involve two separate Chapters of the Ordinance. The first is an addition to Title 6 “Business Licenses and Regulations, which adds Section 6.06 dealing with Use of Electronic Signs. It requires that any business operating an on-premises electronic display sign, comply with the requirements of the Chapter in order to qualify for a business license. This change provides a significant change in the enforcement capabilities of staff in regards to electronic sign violations.

    The second is to Chapter 14.38 “Signs and Outdoor Advertising” as contained in Title “Zoning.” Those changes principally relate to allowance for changing messages on electronic signs. These message changes are classified as low-churn and high-churn electronic signs, with generally greater restrictions on high-churn signs.     As I said about this request in the earlier meeting, 'This is an important change. One that is needed, but also one that we need to get right. I have some concerns about the impact on businesses with existing signs. My biggest concern, though, is which areas would have the "high churn" designation.' This item was continued to the January 23, 2018 Council Meeting. Councilor Handley wants more time to get up to speed on this item. I asked for some visuals for how it would impact Center Street between the freeway and 500 W. I may ask that this stretch be removed from the "high churn" areas. Also, I'm not sure that 8 seconds is long enough in the "high churn" area. I realize that it is the national standard, but what's good enough for interstate freeways may not be good enough for our city.
  8. An ordinance amending Provo City Code to adopt a definition for "road." Citywide Impact. (17- 0023OA)
    This proposed amendment is a result of an issue occurring during a Board of Adjustment meeting where having the proposed wording, may have saved some confusion in the discussion. Staff believes the proposed clarification in the definition would significantly lessen or eliminate any confusion in the term. This item is a proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to add a reference definition for ‘Road.” The resulting amendment would simply read: “Road” See definition of “Streets” As I said about this request in the earlier meeting, "I see this as a housekeeping item." Approved 7:0. 'Road' now has the same official definition as 'street' in Provo City Code.
  9. A resolution to place approximately 24 acres of real property at the northwest corner of the East Bay Golf Course on the Surplus Property List. (17-143)
    Provo City has received a proposal that would involve building a medical school on a portion of the East Bay Golf Course. Presentations were made at several Council meetings and there have been changes to the proposal to ensure a better balance between the development and the existing uses of the site. An Open House was held on January 4 so the public could learn more and ask questions. Public input was also gathered on Open City Hall. This agenda item is a public hearing to decide whether or not to place the property on the surplus list. Much has already been said on this proposal. Some are still upset about it, but many are feeling better with the changes that have been made. This is the first formal step towards accommodating the medical school proposal. The Council will still need to approve any deal before it becomes valid. Other steps are being considered to support the long-term commitment to the Golf Course. Approved as amended 6:1, with Kay Van Buren opposed. The biggest question was whether we relinquish the ability to approve the deal that the Administration will negotiate. We ended up taking a middle-of-the-road approach by requiring Council approval but committing to approve any deal that stays true to the deal points that are currently agreed on.
  10. ***CONTINUED TO FUTURE MEETING***Celeste Kennard, acting Joaquin Neighborhood Chair, requests an amendment to Section 14.34.290 of the Provo City Code to add East Center Street as a Design Corridor. Joaquin, Maeser, Foothills, and Provost Neighborhoods. 17-0020OA
    This item was continued by the Planning Commission on December 13, 2017. It will be noticed again when it is assigned to future Planning Commission and Council dates.
  11. ***CONTINUED TO A FUTURE MEETING*** The Provo City Community Development Department requests Ordinance Amendments to Sections 14.34.285 & 14.34.287 which are Residential Design Standards. City-Wide Impact. 17-0024OA
    This item was continued by the Planning Commission on December 13, 2017. It will be noticed again when it is assigned to future Planning Commission and Council dates.
    12. Adjournment
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)