CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Tuesday, September 5, 2006 7:00 p.m.
Public Safety Building
3925 W Cedar Hills Drive, Cedar Hills, Utah
Present: Mayor Mike McGee, Presiding
Council Members: Joel Wright, Jim Perry, Eric Richardson, Charelle Bowman, Darin Lowder
Konrad Hildebrandt, City Manager
Kim Holindrake, City Recorder
Courtney Hammond, City Meeting Transcriber
David Bunker, City Engineer
Rodney Despain, City Planner
Others: Stephanie Martinez, Trisha Atkinson, Stuart Johnson, Alan Richardson, Jeremy Richardson, Zonda Perry, Haylie Perry, Michael Perry, Shaun Johnson (7:10 p.m.)
1. This meeting of the City Council of the City of Cedar Hills, Utah, having been posted throughout the City and the press notified, was called to order at 7:05 p.m.
Invocation given by C. Lowder
Pledge of Allegiance
2. Public Comment (7:07 p.m.)
• Stephanie Martinez: Ms. Martinez addressed landscaping at Falcon Ridge. She came to the Council a year ago to voice complaints that the builders did not follow the landscaping plan. Ms. Martinez lives by an area that was supposed to be fully grassed and no landscaping has been done. David Bunker and Mayor McGee will look into the issue.
• Trisha Atkinson: Ms. Atkinson stated that she is opposed to any changes to the fencing restrictions in The Cedars. She does not want to devalue the properties by having mismatched fencing. She would like to maintain the wrought iron requirement. Part of the reason that they chose to live in that area was for the view, and she does not want to have the views restricted by privacy fences.
3. Minutes from the August 15, 2006, Public Hearing and Regular City Council Meeting (7:14 p.m.)
MOTION: C. Wright - To approve the minutes with C. Bowman’s corrections alone for the Public Hearing and Regular City Council Meeting of August 15, 2006. Seconded by C. Bowman.
C. Wright Motion passes.
4. Review/Action on Final for Canyon Heights at Cedar Hills, Plat J (Resubdivision of Canyon Heights at Cedar Hills, Plat G, Lots 5 & 6) (7:15 p.m.)
See handouts. David Bunker stated that this plat is a resubdivision of Lots 5 and 6 of Canyon Heights, Plat G. There will be two lots in this new plat. They are existing with the same boundaries, but there are some setback changes on the lots. A nine-foot side lot setback between the lots is proposed. Neither home being constructed met the previous setback requirements; the previous setback was 12 feet. Both parties are in favor of this proposal.
C. Perry is the homeowner of one of the lots. He said that the homes are not adjacent. His home sits far back on the lot, and the other sits toward the front. A surveying or pin error led to the problem. The points have been reset by a surveyor. This issue has happened before when pins were moved and the City has dealt with the issue in a similar way. These lots had to be vacated from the original plat because the setbacks were specifically written on the plat and recorded. A letter has been sent that noticed all property owners of this proposal. No written objections were received. Kim Holindrake received one phone call asking about the change.
MOTION: C. Richardson - To adopt the Planning Commission’s finding that 1) A variance from the default setbacks does not create a hazardous condition, 2) That varying from the designated setback envelope is appropriate for the zone and property location, 3) The revised setback does not change the development’s density nor the required distance between dwellings, 4) There are no safety concerns, 5) It complies with the zoning regulations, and 6) That the City received no written objections. To move that we adopt the final plat for Canyon Heights at Cedar Hills, Plat J (Resubdivision of Canyon Heights at Cedar Hills, Plat G, Lots 5 & 6). Seconded by C. Bowman.
Abstain- C. Perry Motion passes.
C. Richardson excused - 7:26 p.m.
5. Review/Action to Grant an Adjustment to the Side Setback on Juniper Heights, Plat C, Lot 9 (7:26 p.m.)
See handouts. Kim Holindrake stated that the City is allowed to make a finding on a setback requirement if the variance does not create a hazardous condition, the variance from the designated setback envelope is appropriate for the zone and property location, the revised setback does not change the development’s density nor required distance between dwellings, and complies with the zoning regulations. This proposal asks for an 8-foot side setback. Mayor McGee would need to sign the Release of Building Setback. In this situation, the setback is set by the City code.
• C. Perry stated that he was at the Planning Commission meeting where this was discussed. Neither property owner has any objection.
MOTION: C. Perry - To adopt the finding from the Planning Commission regarding setback adjustments for Juniper Heights, Plat C, Lot 9 as follows: (1) The variance does not create a hazardous condition, (2) Varying from the designated setback envelope is appropriate for the zone and property location, (3) The revised setback does not change the development’s density nor required distance between dwellings and (4) complies with the zoning regulations. To approve the 8-foot, westside setback, and authorize the Mayor to sign the Release of Building Setback. Seconded by C. Wright.
• C. Bowman asked why the problem occurred. Kim Holindrake stated that it happened because of a pin issue in the back of the lot.
C. Wright Motion passes.
C. Richardson returns - 7:30 p.m.
6. Review/Action on Revised Landscape Plan for Avanyu Acres, Plat B (7:30 p.m.)
See handouts. David Bunker stated that Bald Mountain has submitted a revised landscaping plan for the retention pond located between Aztec Drive and Canyon Road. Originally all of the slopes were 3:1 or less and were landscaped with sod. The new proposal has steeper slopes, the sides of the basin are gravel, and sod is at the bottom. They have already done the work, though David Bunker informed them that they needed approval first. He is concerned because the slope is steep and it is not possible to walk up the slope without the gravel toppling down. David Bunker recommended that the improvements be installed per the original plan.
MOTION: C. Richardson - To not approve the revised landscaping plan and authorize the City Engineer to engage in any dialogue on the issue to allow the developer to understand the requirement. Seconded by C. Lowder.
• C. Bowman stated that she would like David Bunker to emphasize that developers need to get approval before making changes.
• C. Perry stated that he is open to a change if there is a technical problem, but is unwilling to approve a plan that the City Engineer feels is inappropriate.
C. Wright Motion passes.
7. Review/Action on Resolution Adopting Fees (7:35 p.m.)
Kim Holindrake stated that in addressing the landscaping ordinance, the City Council wanted to institute a fee. This resolution addresses the landscaping fee along with some other fees that needed to be added or changed.
• The “0-3 Day No Account Water Turn On/Off Fee” is primarily for builders that want to show a house and need the water turned on, but have no account.
• The landscaping fee was put in at $50 per month.
• There is also a “Street Closure Fee & Deposit” for neighborhoods that want to close the street for neighborhood parties. In such instances, the City calls the fire and police department to let them know. The City also provides cones to close off the street.
• The “Utility Disconnection Fee” has also been raised, and a deposit is no longer required.
• Under Development Fees, “Annexation - With policy declaration” is no longer charged. State law no longer requires a policy declaration. Annexations will be changed $250.
• C. Richardson stated that he would like clarification on how those who violate the landscaping ordinance would be billed and how the fee is collected. Kim Holindrake stated that the citation could be the same as the watering fee and also charged on the utility bill.
• C. Bowman said that she feels that the landscaping ordinance is more lenient than what was intended by the Planning Commission and a $50 fee does not have enough bite.
• Konrad Hildebrandt will look into whether utilities can be shut off if the landscaping fine is not paid.
• The Council decided to increase the landscaping violation fee to $100 after 12 months.
MOTION: C. Richardson - To adopt Resolution No. 9-5-2006A, A Resolution Adding and/or Amending Certain Fees to the Official Fee Schedule of the City of Cedar Hills, as amended. Seconded by C. Perry. Vote taken by roll call.
Aye - C. Lowder
Aye - C. Perry
Aye - C. Richardson
Aye - C. Wright Motion passes.
8. Engineering Report and Discussion (8:02 p.m.)
• The dirt pile by the Public Works Building is shrinking. The Public Works Building is coming along. There have been several inspections.
• Pressurized Irrigation - Water usage is slowing down. The policy remains the same. David Bunker recommended that the water restrictions remain the same for next year so that residents can get used to the schedule and to curb confusion. Cliff Chandler has reported that he has caught many people who don’t care about the fee. He would rather have a graduated fee. C. Perry asked for an agenda item to discuss the water policy after the water season is over.
9. City Manager Report and Discussion (8:12 p.m.)
• Decisions 2006 is officially kicking off on September 6, 2006. Golf questions will be developed and sent to the Council. Old questions will be used to have a basis for comparison. C. Perry suggested more brackets in the income distribution and other demographics. C. Wright said that he does not want to wait for the Decisions process before moving forward on the golf course. C. Lowder said that the RFP process can move forward without making a decision on the golf course. C. Richardson pointed out that the proposals received will be more serious if the City narrows the options.
• There has been a dramatic increase in traffic citations throughout the City. A new police officer will be here from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. every day. The same officer will be doing the NOVA program at Deerfield Elementary and Cedar Ridge Elementary. Officer Richins will remain the main contact for Cedar Hills.
• Renovation of the City building will begin the weekend of September 9. Tile will be installed in the hallways and the building interior will be painted as well.
• The City is working on getting the speed trailer out. The police department believes that enforcement is the best form of traffic calming.
• There is some activity in the commercial zone on the south side that should be coming through the process shortly. The Council needs to first approve the 10-acre parcel and then the specific development. C. Perry expressed concern that there may be overlap in what different property owners want to do with the different parcels in the commercial zone.
MAYOR’S REPORT/ITEMS REFERRED BY CITY COUNCIL
10. Board and Committee Reports (8:28 p.m.)
• C. Bowman: There is a frisbee golf course proposed for Heritage Park as an Eagle Scout project. The City Council wanted to ensure that the layout didn’t interfere with other areas of the park. The Parks and Trails Committee will review the layout at its next meeting and forward their recommendation onto staff. At the last meeting, the Parks and Trails Committee discussed getting sponsors for the parks in the community. They would also like the Youth City Council to be in charge of the “Light Up Cedar Hills” contest. They discussed getting the fountain to work at the roundabout on Cedar Hills Drive. The sod in the Doral Drive Park will be installed the last Saturday of September. The next park on the list is the Canyon Heights Park, which will go out to bid in October. The City now has a Community Services Director, Ciara Decker, and some community services are scheduled to begin, including a scarecrow contest, Youth City Council, and flag football.
• C. Perry: He has been meeting with Pleasant Grove City about boundary issues. Mark Atwood and the engineers were going to get together and talk about the boundary issues from a services standpoint.
• C. Richardson: The Planning Commission began reviewing the City’s General Plan.
• Mayor McGee: The North Utah County Mayors’ Association has talked extensively about transportation. They are in the process of petitioning the governor to designate most of its surplus to build infrastructure. There is talk of improving SR-92 and also of an east-west corridor, which would connect Canyon Road with I-15.
11. Motion to go into Executive Session, Pursuant to Utah State Code 52-4-5 (9:05 p.m.)
Utah State Code 52-4-5 designates specific parameters for which a Closed Meeting/Executive Session may be held. This Executive Session was held to discuss the following: Strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange or lease of real property.
MOTION: C. Richardson - To go into Executive Session, Pursuant to Utah State Code 52-4-5. Seconded by C. Perry.
C. Wright Motion passes.
* * * EXECUTIVE SESSION * * *
12. Motion to Adjourn Executive Session and Reconvene City Council Meeting (10:15 p.m.)
MOTION: C. Lowder - To adjourn Executive Session and reconvene City Council Meeting. Seconded by C. Wright.
C. Wright Motion passes.
13. This meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m. on a motion by C. Richardson, seconded by C. Lowder and unanimously approved.
/s/ Kim E. Holindrake
Kim E. Holindrake, City Recorder
Approved by Council:
September 19, 2006