Council Meetings - 12 October 2021

I only have five more Council meetings days left. And yet there is still so much to be done! The big topics for tomorrow are ADUs and on-street parking management.

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Work Meeting Agenda

1:30 pm, Tuesday, October 12, 2021

Business

1. A presentation regarding GRAMA in relation to public and confidential records retained by the city and how the process on how they are made public. (21-006)
   This is part of our ongoing training regarding GRAMA and how we treat documents created by staff. While most documents are subject to GRAMA requests, some of the information contained within those documents may not be public information and will need to be redacted prior to being released to the public. In addition, there is a process on how these documents can be released to the general public. This is the State dictated process for balancing privacy and the public's right to know. Presentation only. GRAMA is an important tool for transparency and properly balancing privacy and the public's right to know.
2. A presentation regarding an update on the Bridal Veil Falls Feasibility Study (21-031)
   The Utah State Parks Department is completing a feasibility study of Bridal Veil Falls (to be designated as State Monument or State Park) and will report back to the legislature this fall with a report evaluating whether it should be a state park or a state monument. CRSA, an architecture firm, is working on the stakeholder study. They are about 70% done with background research and ready to hold a Workshop with the leadership team with initial findings. They are also working on the Public Engagement Plan, which includes an online survey and public meeting(s). An update for the City Council, which earlier this year adopted a resolution in favor of protecting Bridal Veil Falls, regarding progress has been requested. Bridal Veil Falls is such a gem and is beloved by the people of Provo. Presentation only. It seems like the momentum was for the State to take over management of this area, but I'm not sure there is a clear-cut, best option. The public may be best served with more local management and funding.
3. A presentation from the Housing Committee regarding an ordinance change for ADU’s to comply with Utah State Law. (21-102)
   In the 2021 Utah General Legislative Session, lawmakers passed a bill regarding accessory dwelling units and conditions of their permitted use in cities throughout the state. All cities in Utah must adjust their city ordinances accordingly to align with the new state law. A new State law requires that we make adjustments to our zoning regulations. The question is should we do the minimum to comply or something more. I think that ADUs are a key piece of the housing puzzle. They increase the flexibility of the housing stock, encourage homeownership, make housing more affordable to both renters and homeowners, and increase housing options with minimal impact on surrounding properties. A motion that the Council submit the least restrictive version of the Housing Committee’s recommendations to the Planning Commission for review and to bring back to the Council to continue the discussion was approved 5:2, with David Sewell and Bill Fillmore opposed. By getting a recommendation from the Planning Commission on the least restrictive vesion, we will be able to implement anything between that and the current status. This gives us the most flexibility. I do believe that we should allow ADUs citywide, unless there is a compelling reason why they shouldn't be allowed in a particular area (like the sewer capacity in the area is almost reached and adding more units could cause problems). But I also strongly believe that we need to preserve the requirement that there be an internal connection in ADUs and that we leave the occupancy limit for ADUs at 2 (plus minors).
4. A discussion on towing fees (21-105)
   In 2013, the City adopted City Municipal Code 9.31.110 which included a limitation on the maximum fees and charges a towing company operator may charge for: (i) booting or otherwise immobilizing a vehicle, and (ii) towing a vehicle. The fee limits in question only apply to patrol type tows at residential properties. Provo does not impose a fee cap for any consent tows or for non-consent tows (1) at non-residential properties or (2) at residential properties where the property manager or designee calls for the tow. But in an attempt to prevent predatory towing, in 2013, Mayor Curtis proposed, and the Council approved, rules requiring patrol tows of residential properties to be done under a contract that meets certain requirements. One of those requirements is a cap on the fees. A local towing operator is requesting a change in the rates to help address costs increases (vehicle, employment, insurance, equipment, etc.). Options include: 1) reject the request for a change; 2) remove the cap; or 3) change the cap to: (i) a new fixed dollar amount, or (ii) a percentage of the state maximums. I was surprised to see this back. I didn't see any interest from the Council in making changes. A motion to direct staff to prepare for the Council’s consideration an amendment that would set Provo’s rate on patrol towing at 80% of the state’s rate was approved 5:2, with George Handley and David Harding opposed. This struck me as an odd conversation. We are interested in exploring reports that other Utah cities have prohibited patrol-type tows, but we are also considering raising the amount that businesses can charge for such tows. I'm a fan of the status quo, keep the cap where it is and inflation over time will increase the incentive to tow companies to move to a different model.
5. Presentation from Parking Committee. (21-028)
   The Parking Committee proposes a new parking paradigm called the On-Street Parking Management (OSPM) program that would be created with the proposed Provo City Code Chapter 9.90 and applied to the Joaquin Neighborhood with Provo City Code Chapter 9.91. The Parking Manager would have the authority to apply the solutions in Chapter 9.90 within a Council-approved OSPM area without returning to the Council for every change, though they would have to notify residents in affected areas. The Parking Manager could create parking zones where one of two parking management strategies could be applied:
   1. Paid timed parking
   2. Permit parking with paid timed parking
   After years of study, the Committee is ready to recommend action by the Council. The first chapter creates a new way of managing on-street parking. It is designed to be flexible, adaptable, demand-based, and as convenient as possible. The second chapter would create one of these areas to include the Joaquin Neighborhood. A motion to direct staff to present the proposed Chapter 9.90 on Open City Hall and gather public feedback with the intent to bring the item back for consideration by the Council was approved 7:0. A motion to direct staff to present the proposed Chapter 9.91 on Open City Hall and gather public feedback with the intent to bring the item back for consideration by the Council failed 1:6, with David Sewell, David Shipley, George Handley, Shannon Ellsworth, Bill Fillmore, and Travis Hoban opposed. Chapter 9.90 would create the program framework and 9.91 would create an area covering Joaquin where the program could be implemented when it is ready. The Council wants to get feedback on and decide on the broader framework before considering whether or not to create an area covering Joaquin Neighborhood.



Closed Meeting

Closed meetings (aka executive meetings) are held without the public present and must meet one of the conditions listed in Utah State Code (§ 52-4-204 and 52-4-205 et. seq.). If a closed meeting is needed, it will be announced at that time.



Adjournment

---

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Regular Meeting Agenda

5:30 PM, Tuesday, October 12, 2021

Opening Ceremony

Items in this category do not involve legislative action.



Public Comment

Instructions for making public comments at this electronic meeting can be found on the officially published agenda: agendas.provo.org.

Dial 346 248 7799. Enter Meeting ID 870 9093 6378 and press #. When asked for a participant ID, press #. To join via computer, use the same meeting ID and enter passcode: 201335.

Fifteen minutes have been set aside for any person to express ideas, concerns, comments, or issues that are not on the agenda:

Please state your name and city of residence into the microphone.

Please limit your comments to two minutes.

State Law prohibits the Council from acting on items that do not appear on the agenda.



Action Agenda

1. A resolution appropriating $8,772.09 in the Economic Development Division in the General Fund for a sales tax increment post performance payment to Day’s Market. The funding source of the appropriation is General Fund Sales Tax Revenues. (21-038)
   In early 2018, the Economic Development Office worked with Day's Market to craft a post performance sales tax increment agreement with Day's Market, located on North Canyon Road. The owners of Day's Market were planning an extensive remodel of their aging store and requested that Provo City assist in reducing the construction costs by entering into a sales tax reimbursement agreement on a post performance basis. Days Market would spend approximately $1.3 million dollars on the interior remodel of the store. Similar to other sales tax agreements, Day's would be able to earn back some of their costs if they produced sales above an established baseline -- which in this case was set at $39,800. Based on sales tax information and a calculation, they qualify for sales tax reimbursement of $8,772.09 for fiscal year 2021. This is a ten-year agreement. We heard this item in our Work Meeting three weeks ago. We are contracted to pay this amount, so there isn't much of a decision to make. It is nice to get an update, though. Approved 7:0. It's hard to imagine that this kind of incentive really tipped the scales to convince this business to move forward with a $1.3M renovation.
   
   To be clear, I'm a huge fan of Day's Market. I wish them all the success in the world, and wish they would open five more locations around Provo. My concern is the way that Provo uses TIF (tax-increment financing). TIF can be a powerful tool, but we apply it in situation that I don't think are impactful.




Adjournment