PUBLIC HEARING AND CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Tuesday, August 21, 2007 7:00 p.m.
Public Safety Building
3925 W Cedar Hills Drive, Cedar Hills, Utah
Present: Mayor Mike McGee, Presiding
Council Members: Charelle Bowman, Jim Perry, Joel Wright, Gary Maxwell, Eric Richardson
Konrad Hildebrandt, City Manager
Kim Holindrake, City Recorder
David Bunker, City Engineer
Greg Robinson, Assistant to the City Manager—Planning
Rich Knapp, Finance Director
Courtney Hammond, City Meeting Transcriber
Others: Mark Edminster, Nathan Clark, Ken Kirk, Cliff Chandler, Amy Choate-Nielson, Scott Jackman, Sam Hurley, Helen Anderson, Michael Stuy, Garrett Yearsley, Barbara Yearsley, Brent Uibel, H.R. Brown, Shanna Wilkinson, Diane Kirk, Karissa Neely
COUNCIL MEETING
1. This City Council Meeting of the City of Cedar Hills, having been posted throughout the City and the press notified, was called to order at 7:13 p.m. by Mayor McGee.
Invocation given by C. Maxwell
Pledge of Allegiance
2. Public Comment (7:14 p.m.)
• Sam Hurley: There are no trespassing signs posted on the trails on the mountainside. He does not want the City to block hikers from accessing the public land.
• Shanna Wilkinson: Ms. Wilkinson said that the City and county are taxing her out of her house. Her utility bill has increased, and her property taxes have increased. The small increases add up. She is on a fixed income. She suggested that the City tighten its belt rather than increasing taxes.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
3. Certified Tax Rate for Fiscal Year 2008 (7:26 p.m.)
• Ken Kirk: Mr. Kirk stated that he sympathizes with Ms. Wilkinson. He understands inflation and that city services cost money. Cedar Hills’ tax rate base is the highest in Utah County. The next closest city is American Fork. Every other community in the county has a lower tax rate. Inflation went up 4%. Tax revenue went up 15%. He stated that the City Council has said there is a good reason for the increase. Mr. Kirk had his property bill with him. He stated that the golf bond is on it. He would like the increase justified. He said that he hopes the tax rate will be discussed during the meeting. C. Perry stated that without the golf course bond, Cedar Hills would have one of the lowest tax rates in the county. C. Maxwell stated that the Council has put a lot of effort into the golf course. They are very close to solving the golf course debt. Mayor McGee clarified that once the golf course is paid for, that portion of the tax bill vanishes. Mr. Kirk said that his question does not involve the golf course. He is interested in the other portion of the tax bill. C. Perry stated that the Council reviewed the budget for two months. The inflation rate is 4%. That is a nice inflation number. There are many things that increased more than 4%. The golf course debt will be paid off soon and the City will have among the lowest rates in the county. Taxes will go down. Mayor McGee said that after the golf course is paid off, taxes will be cut by almost half. Everyone will think that they have never seen their taxes go down before.
• Brent Uibel: Mr. Uibel said that he is also anxious about the tax rate increase, not because he can’t afford it, but because there are many in the City that are looking at the golf course bond, the utility building, other rates increasing, and county taxes. He would like to see the City Council plan now so that the City can walk before it runs. Residents need to know that they can trust the Council to handle its finances. Mayor McGee said that he wanted to comment on a few issues. There are many reasons why costs are increasing. Until 2007, the City had access to a water source called CUP. The City wasn’t required to pay for unless it used the CUP water and in 2007 that vanished. The City now has to pay for the water, whether it is used or not. There are several things like that. Inflation costs are not a true cost of running the City. The costs of asphalt and concrete went up 100%. All that comes into play when the City repairs roads and potholes. A 4% inflation rate and a 15% growth rate is one factor among many. In the 6:00 p.m. work session the Council discussed many of these things, including the elimination of the golf course debt in the very near future. That issue has been on the forefront of his mind for the past three years. Unfortunately, it has moved at the lightning fast speed of government. Mr. Uibel just wants to ensure that the tax increase is not funding a wish list. C. Wright said that he is frustrated that while most residents in the City have to tighten their budgets, the City can just raise taxes.
4. Amendments to the Fiscal Year 2008 Budget (July 1, 2007 to June 20, 2008) (7:36 p.m.)
No comments.
5. Capital Facilities Plan for Park Development, Park Land, and Recreation Facilities (7:37)
• Helen Anderson: Ms. Anderson is representing Utah Valley Home Builders Association. She stated that Greg Robinson was helpful in letting her see the study before hand. One of her concerns was how the City arrived at the $300,000 per acre figure and were there any comparisons. Mayor McGee stated that the City had Lewis & Young prepare the analysis and did a lengthy study. Konrad Hildebrandt stated that the $300,000 was what the City had actually paid for park land. Ms. Anderson said that she just wants to point out that the impact fee statute states how the fees should be based. She thinks that in order for the analysis to be valid it needs to spell out exactly what was just said. It needs to state what the cost was based on, what purchases, when were they made and where were they. She thinks that still needs to be added to the study before the ordinance can be passed. Especially right now because land values are in flux. The market has changed. It is actually a buyer’s market, not a seller’s market. It has significantly changed. She has talked to some Realtors and they say that nothing is selling in Cedar Hills. C. Maxwell stated that what tends to happen is costs go up and then the impact fees are raised. The City gets behind the eightball. The City can’t follow that line exactly. It is what it costs the City to replace parkland. He is sympathetic. Current residents don’t pay for future parks. Ms. Anderson said that they acknowledge what the City needs to do. Konrad Hildebrandt stated that one of the difficulties on the opposite side is that prices have been escalating substantially since the City last changed its impact fees. Unless cities do it on an annual or semiannual basis, prices go up and cities miss out. Now you are saying it is going the opposite way and the costs are dipping. It is suggested that cities look at impact fees every two years. The City is actively looking at impact fees and trying to stay close, not to gauge people. C. Perry stated that there needs to be rigor in the process. Raw land is $150,000 per half acre. If you buy land for less than $250,000, he wants to know. Ms. Anderson stated that a couple of months ago, she wouldn’t be surprised if it was $150,000 for a half acre. But things have changed a bit. If it is what you have to pay in the future, you need to look at what current land is and not make up for what is in the future. C. Maxwell stated that costs are going up. How does the City steer the price up or down over time. The City is behind the curve. His tax bill is over $5,000. Ms. Anderson said that it is possible to take a couple weeks and do a market analysis. The second issue is that it is her understanding that the impact fee is not to include the cost of the study itself or updates. There is $20,000 right now included in the impact fee. She just wanted to raise that as well. C. Wright asked if that is a threat. Is she going to sue the City? Ms. Anderson said she is stating that the $20,000 shouldn’t be included in the impact fee. C. Perry stated that the City wants to follow the law. Ms. Anderson said that the third item is out of the ordinary. It is the first time she has raised it. She doesn’t agree with the methodology used even though it is common. There seems to be an understanding that impact fees should be used to pay for any infrastructure. That is how most cities approach it and it is how they have allowed them to approach it. The impact fee statute actually says is to be achieved equitably. What is saying is that cities don’t just look forward but also backwards. Divide that up so that new residents are paying a proportionate share. Mayor McGee said that the way he sees that is it would be even higher. Ms. Anderson said that you wouldn’t know. She proposes that if the City is going to pass an ordinance tonight, reconsider the cost of land. Ideally she thinks the City can take a couple of weeks and get some data. It may go up. The fee should be based on the best numbers possible.
6. Proposed Amendments to the Zone Map to Change Portions of Juniper Heights, Plat D, Lots 1 & 2, Currently Zoned TR-1 Townsite Residential Zone to the R-1-11,000 Residential Zone and PF Public Facilities Zone. The Property is Located at Approximately 10470 North and 4375 West along Cottonwood Drive. (7:52 p.m.)
No comments.
CONSENT AGENDA
7. Minutes from the June 19, 2007, Public Hearing and City Council Meeting
Minutes from the July 17, 2007, Public Hearing and City Council Meeting
Minutes from the August 7, 2007, Regular City Council Meeting
MOTION: C. Perry - To approve the consent agenda. Seconded by C. Wright.
Aye-C. Bowman
C. Maxwell
C. Perry
C. Richardson
C. Wright Motion passes.
SCHEDULED ITEMS
8. Review/Action on Final Acceptance of Subdivision Improvements and Beginning of Durability for Bridgestone, Plat D (7:52 p.m.)
Staff Report:
See handouts. David Bunker stated that the final walk through was performed. There have been several inspections. Some portions of concrete had to be replaced several times because of the rigors of construction. They are now ready for durability.
MOTION: C. Richardson - To approve acceptance of subdivision improvements, release of the performance guarantee, and the start of the durability period for Bridgestone, Plat D, subject to an appropriate durability bond to be put in effect and all inspection fees paid. Seconded by C. Perry.
Aye-C. Bowman
C. Maxwell
C. Perry
C. Richardson
C. Wright Motion passes.
9. Review/Action on Board/Committee Appointments - Planning Commission (7:55 p.m.)
See handouts. Mayor McGee stated that he visited with each of the three applicants. He said they are all good applicants, well qualified, and committed. His recommendation is based on diversifying representation throughout the City. He recommended appointing Larry Locken to the Planning Commission.
Council Discussion:
• C. Maxwell stated that he feels all applicants care about the City and are qualified. It is hard to make a decision between three qualified candidates.
• C. Richardson stated that he is the City Council representative to the Planning Commission. He has been impressed by the number of meetings Scott Jackman has attended.
• C. Perry agreed that all three candidates are good applicants. He stated that he has a problem with the way appointments are made and justification. One time it was said that location doesn’t matter; this time it was the deciding criteria. Cedar Hills does not have geographic districts. Every council or commission member needs to represent the entire city.
• C. Wright stated that while he thinks geographical location should be considered, it should not be the deciding factor.
• C. Bowman agreed with everything that was said. She is impressed that Scott Jackman has been to many City Council and Planning Commission meeting.
MOTION: C. Bowman - To deny Mayor McGee’s appointment of Larry Locken. Seconded by C. Perry.
Further Council Discussion:
• C. Perry stated that he doesn’t have anything against any applicant. Rather, he has a problem with the basis of the appointment because it has been said many times before that location doesn’t matter.
• Mayor McGee said that he knows C. Richardson attended many meetings prior to being elected. He asked each of the other Council Members how many times they attended meetings before being elected. C. Perry said he attended every meeting from the summer before the election. C. Maxwell attended a few City Council meetings and every Planning Commission meeting when he served on the Planning Commission. C. Bowman started attending City Council meetings the summer before the election. C. Wright said he did not attend meetings before joining the Council. Mayor McGee said that since Council Members had varying involvement prior to appointment or election, meeting attendance would not be a good basis for appointment to the Planning Commission.
• C. Bowman said that the Planning Commission’s focus will likely shift from residential to commercial development issues. She asked what the applicants said about the commercial area. Mayor McGee said they made similar comments such as they like what is being done and want to continue forward.
• C. Richardson said that because the Commercial Design Guidelines are set and 2/3 of the commercial has been approved, commercial development might not be a new focus.
• C. Perry said that the number of meetings an applicant attended shouldn’t be the only factor, though it does show a level of commitment.
Aye-C. Bowman
C. Maxwell
C. Perry
C. Richardson
Nay - C. Wright Motion passes.
10. Review/Action on the Capital Facilities Plan for Park Development, Park Land, and Recreation Facilities (8:15 p.m.)
Staff Report:
See handouts. Konrad Hildebrandt said that the City is getting to the final steps of overhauling and analyzing the Capital Facilities Plan Impact fees. Lewis & Young and Civil Science have done analyses. Lewis & Young has looked at parkland and park development.
Mark Edminster of Lewis & Young stated that he was not involved in the analysis of these impact fees but has been apprised of the information. The consultant that worked on this project could not be present tonight. Impact fees are subject to some interpretation. They are based on the current level of service. The methodology that Lewis & Young employs is valid and defensible. Land values can be indexed, but he would recommend re-evaluating annually. Indexing is problematic when the factors are things that fluctuate wildly, like land values. The $85,000 development figure is based on what the City has paid in the past for park development. The cost of the impact fee analysis was about $16,000, which translates to $16 per single family home. That cost is commonly included in the impact fees. The City’s legal counsel can review the appropriateness of including the cost of the analysis in the impact fees. Mayor McGee said the City provided Lewis & Young with an estimate of the cost of land at $300,000. The consultant, Alex Soria, indicated the estimate was defensible.
Council Discussion:
• C. Maxwell would like the City to stay as close to the curve as possible. For that reason he would like to look into the possibility of indexing the variables of the cost of park land and the cost of park development.
• C. Perry stated that he feels there is no reason to question the professionals that the City hires to conduct its impact fee analysis.
• C. Richardson said that park land impact fees are collected at plat recording. There are no plats that are in the preliminary process. The City would not lose any money by taking a few weeks to add verbiage to make the ordinance airtight.
• C. Wright stated that he is in favor of passing the ordinance tonight and revising it in the future.
MOTION: C. Wright - To approve Ordinance 8-21-2007A, an Ordinance adopting a Parks and Recreation Capital Facilities Plan for Park Land and Park Development Impact Fee Evaluation, and within six weeks from today have staff come back to us with any recommendations to increase or decrease the impact fees. Seconded by C. Maxwell. Vote taken by roll call.
Aye-C. Bowman
C. Maxwell
C. Perry
C. Richardson
C. Wright Motion passes.
11. Review/Action on Certified Tax Rate for Fiscal Year 2007 (July 1, 2007 to June 30, 2008) (8:40 p.m.)
Staff Report:
See handouts. Rich Knapp stated that it is proposed that the current rate of .00169 be maintained. The rate of the General Obligation bond for the golf course will be .00929.
Council Discussion:
• C. Wright stated that he feels it is immoral for the county to reduce the rate and then increase the county sales tax. He is concerned about the golf course and feels that the City has missed the window with land prices going down. He feels that the City should not be taking more money from the residents when the golf course issue has not been resolved in a timely manner. He proposed that the City make paying off the golf course debt its first priority and address it as the first item of discussion in every City Council meeting. He further proposed that the mayor and city council salaries be put in a fund to be applied toward the golf course debt, and staff bonuses and wage increases be put on hold until the golf course debt is eliminated. He would like to add a sense of urgency to the golf course situation because he thinks there is at least a 50% chance that the General Obligation bond will still be on the property tax bill next year. If it isn’t, he will come to the City Council meeting and eat his property tax bill, literally.
• C. Perry stated that the tax money is going to police, fire, ambulance and other costs. The City is not pocketing the extra money. If the City does not increase revenue, it would be spending its equity. The proposed increase is for city operations, not for the golf course. The golf course is a separate issue.
• C. Richardson stated that if the Council cuts taxes it needs to cut the budget. He is opposed to C. Wright’s proposal of halting staff wage increases because the staff is not married to the City. He cautioned against driving away the City’s knowledge base in order to make the issue appear more urgent.
• C. Bowman said that she felt the tax cap a few years ago was a bad decision. The City has been working hard on eliminating golf course debt. She is not in favor of increasing taxes as long as residents are paying for the golf course. She would rather cut the budget. If the golf course were resolved, she would feel differently.
• C. Maxwell stated that everyone agrees that the City needs to pay off the golf course. That plan is progressing and should remain the top priority. After that issue is resolved, the City will have one of the lowest tax rates in the county. He can’t justify cutting an expense that is needed in the City. He said his parents are on a fixed income, similar to Ms. Wilkinson. He said he will donate his August salary of $300 to Ms. Wilkinson to put toward her tax bill because she took the initiative to attend today.
MOTION: C. Richardson - To certify the tax rate of .002619 by Resolution 8-21-2007A, a resolution setting the total property tax levy assessed upon real and personal property for general governmental purposes for the 2007-2008 tax year for the City of Cedar Hills, Utah. Seconded by C. Maxwell.
• C. Perry stated that he hates raising taxes. Other cities employ more employees per capita. Cedar Hills does more with less. He spent hours going over the budget and couldn’t find anything else to cut. He is unwilling to cut community services because, while no one wants to pay for the golf course, surveys have shown they do want to pay for community services.
• C. Richardson said there are two sides of the equation—how much to spend, how much to collect. If the City collects less, it needs to decide how to spend less. He is willing to talk to anyone about the budget. He feels that anything else that is cut from the budget will have real repercussions.
• Mayor McGee said that the City has no nonessential services.
• C. Maxwell said that he doesn’t like raising taxes, but feels that current services the City offers have to be in place.
• C. Wright said that he thinks all of the Council is at least 40% right. He is frustrated over the golf course. He wants the Council to get to the point where there is increased pressure to pay off the golf course now.
• C. Perry requested an agenda item to reevaluate salaries for the mayor and council be on the next agenda.
Vote taken by roll call. Aye - C. Maxwell
C. Perry
C. Richardson
Nay-C. Bowman
C. Wright Motion passes.
C. Bowman excused (9:31 p.m.)
MOTION: C. Maxwell - To move item number 15 to the next item. Seconded by C. Perry.
Aye-C. Maxwell
C. Perry
C. Richardson
C. Wright Motion passes.
15. Review/Action on Proposed Boundary Line Adjustment Located at 4069 and 4064 West Red Pine Cove (9:32 p.m.)
Staff Report:
See handouts. Greg Robinson stated that Tom Frey has proposed a property line adjustment so that he can access the back of his property and put an accessory building behind his house. The proposal fits the zoning ordinance. The only concern is that this will not be a recorded plat, which makes looking it up for verification reasons more difficult. The other option is to vacate the plat and replat the lots.
Council Discussion:
• C. Perry stated that if it meets all the City’s requirements, he can’t see a reason to deny it or require a plat vacation.
• C. Richardson stated that he would like to see it recorded on a plat, but this is a legitimate way to address these issues, and, as such, the City needs to recognize it.
MOTION: C. Maxwell - To approve a Notice of Approval of Property Line Adjustment for 4064 West & 4069 West Red Pine Cove of Juniper Heights, Plat F. Seconded by C. Perry.
Aye-C. Maxwell
C. Perry
C. Richardson
C. Wright Motion passes.
12. Review/Action on Amendments to the Fiscal Year 2008 Budget (July 1, 2007 to June 30, 2008) (9:40 p.m.)
Staff Report:
See handouts. Konrad Hildebrandt stated that there are three items for amendments. The animal control fee was left out of the budget. The City pays per animal collected. If the owner picks up the animal, the owner pays applicable fees. If the shelter needs to destroy the animal, the City pays the fees. The assessment for the year is $3,100. Because the Family Festival spans the fiscal years, there is an amendment of $17,000. The sewer construction of $25,200 that was approved in the last meeting needs to be added to the budget. There may be reimbursement by the LDS Church.
MOTION: C. Perry - To take a two-minute break. Seconded by C. Maxwell.
Aye-C. Maxwell
C. Perry
C. Richardson
C. Wright Motion passes.
Reconvened at 9:57 p.m. C. Bowman returns.
MOTION: C. Richardson - To adopt Resolution 8-21-2007B, a resolution adopting the amended 2007–2008 fiscal year budget for the City of Cedar Hills, Utah. Seconded by C. Perry. Vote taken by roll call.
Aye-C. Bowman
C. Maxwell
C. Perry
C. Richardson
C. Wright Motion passes.
13. Review/Action on Resolution Adopting Fees (9:58 p.m.)
See handouts.
MOTION: C. Richardson - To approve Resolution 8-21-2007C, a resolution adding, amending or deleting certain fees to the official fee schedule of the City of Cedar Hills. Seconded by C. Maxwell
Council Discussion:
• C. Bowman pointed out that the section on when the fees are collected is blank. Kim Holindrake stated that the time of collection will not change.
Vote taken by roll call. Aye - C. Bowman
C. Maxwell
C. Perry
C. Richardson
C. Wright Motion passes.
14. Review/Action on Amendments to the Zone Map to Change Portions of Juniper Heights, Plat D, Lots 1 and 2, Currently Zoned TR-1 Townsite Residential Zone to the R-1-11,000 Residential Zone and PF Public Facilities Zone (10:00 p.m.)
Staff Report:
See handouts. Greg Robinson stated that Cottonwood Estates, part of the golf course reconfiguration, is zoned TR-1, which restricts some of the development. Zoning needs to be changed to the R-1-11,000 zone to make it contiguous with adjacent zoning. The City is the only property owner. At a later date the area south of Cottonwood Drive will be rezoned.
Council Discussion:
• C. Maxwell stated that the area flows better with the proposed zoning.
MOTION: C. Perry - To approve Ordinance 8-21-2007B, an ordinance adopting the zone map change from TR-1 Townsite Residential Zone to R-1-11,000 Residential Zone and PF Public Facility. Seconded by C. Maxwell. Vote taken by roll call.
Aye-C. Bowman
C. Maxwell
C. Perry
C. Richardson
C. Wright Motion passes.
16. City Manager Report and Discussion (10:07 p.m.)
• The City is in the midst of its annual independent audit with Hawkins, Cloward and Simister. They are working to get the audit to the Council in October. C. Perry would like the City to bid out the audit next year.
• The LDS Church is proposing a new site plan next to Mesquite Park. It is no longer a stake center. The building design is called Heritage and has a baseball field.
• There was a main water line break on Bayhill Drive at the pump house.
• The draft of a landscaping agreement is ready. It would allow residents who abut public land to beautify the land.
• American Fork City and Highland City are actively seeking to purchase the debris basin at the mouth of American Fork Canyon for $315,000. American Fork City would like to put a pressurized irrigation line and tank there. If the Council has interest, the City can contact the county with interest in bidding as well. The Council is interested.
• PacLand anticipates submitting construction drawings to the City within the week for Wal-Mart. The plan check would be two weeks out, after which they will be ready to break ground.
• Waste Management is getting recycling data to Konrad Hildebrandt. C. Wright stated that he is disappointed with Waste Management’s lack of effort to promote and facilitate recycling.
• Residents of Highland, Alpine and Cedar Hills will vote in the November election on the creation of a Recreation District. The proposed building would fit on the City’s nine-acres parcel on 4800 West. It needs to be a legislative item, and there needs to be a sponsor in the next legislative session. The tax increase for the recreation center would be about $300/year.
• David Bunker presented information on the City’s pressurized irrigation (PI) system. See handouts. When the City initially decided to go to a PI system, it put in dry pipes. The dry pipes were connected to wet pipes and reservoirs in 2002. The City is able to get water into the PI system in several different ways. In 2004-2005, David Bunker suspected that there wasn’t sufficient flow from pond 10 to pond 12. The pumps were designed to meet maximum capacity of the pipes. A flow meter was installed and it has now been verified that the pumps are not meeting the flow for which they were designed. The pumps have an internal check valve. The check valves reduce the amount of water that can be sent through the pumps. That should have been accounted for by the manufacturer in the design of the system. The check valves should be removed from the pipes and placed in the wet wells in a manifold. The current manifold is a six-inch piping; it needs to be at least 8 inches or ideally 10 inches. The report recommends: (1) Remove the discharge check valve. (2)Take out the flow-matic check valve and put an 8-inch check fold on the manifold. (3) Adjust the trims on pumps 1 and 2. (4) Adjust the trims on the pumps 3 and 4. (5) Install two new 75 hp pumps. It may be difficult to get the designers and engineers to fix the problem with the system they designed. David Bunker estimates that to change out the pumps and trim would cost about $50,000. The manifold would cost an additional $10,000. Cedar Hills uses four times the amount of what the state recommends. There is a 5% shortfall in source. At buildout there will be a 15-20% shortfall in source at current usage levels. The City needs to find a source that will cover the 410-acre-foot shortfall. Putting meters in city wide would cost $1.5-2 million plus significant maintenance costs. The best meter option would be to meter major water users—HOAs, PUDs, golf course, city parks, churches, schools.
9. Review/Action on Board/Committee Appointments - Planning Commission (Revisited)
Mayor McGee would like to readdress Item 9 and make Scott Jackman his appointment to the Planning Commission.
MOTION: C. Richardson - To revisit item #9 and affirm Mayor McGee’s new appointment of Scott Jackman to the Planning Commission. Seconded by C. Maxwell.
Council Discussion:
• C. Perry stated he was impressed when he reviewed Scott Jackman’s application. It was well written, with extensive answers that were compelling. That is his basis for supporting the appointment.
• C. Richardson stated that Scott Jackman has a great understanding of the general plan and code.
• C. Maxwell said that not all Planning Commission members are created equal. Some don’t come as often as they should. Attendance is a big deal to him. He feels that Scott Jackman has proven his commitment to attend the meetings.
• C. Wright said he would vote for Scott if he was willing to put his real name on the Cedar Hills Forum. Scott agreed.
Aye-C. Bowman
C. Maxwell
C. Perry
C. Richardson
C. Wright Motion passes.
MAYOR’S REPORT/ITEMS REFERRED BY CITY COUNCIL
17. Board and Committee Reports (11:10 p.m.)
• Mayor McGee: Mayor McGee spent many hours at a meeting discussing SR-92. The most recent proposal is a six-lane, arterial alternative that would put 14 stop lights along SR-92, doubling the number of stop lights. Mayor McGee prefers an option that is a six-lane grade separated alternative. Lehi opposes that option. The compromise is a four-lane road with 4–5 grade-separated accesses. Unless the cities come together in opposition to more stop lights, it will likely be the six-lane arterial with fourteen stop lights for a cost of $117 million. The four-lane, grade-separated option would cost $207 million. The six-lane, grade-separated option would cost $216 million. C. Wright suggested passing a resolution that gives an official voice to Cedar Hills opposition to the six-lane arterial. Mayor McGee stated that there will be a public meeting soon. It will be announced in the next newsletter.
• C. Bowman: C. Bowman asked if landscaping fines are being assessed? Konrad Hildebrandt stated that letters have been sent out to residents. C. Bowman requested that review of the landscaping ordinance be on a future agenda because it is being interpreted differently than the Council intended. She also requested that C. Richardson’s resolution on the Manila area be on a future agenda.
• C. Perry: C. Perry attended the UTOPIA meeting. Roger Black has retired.
• C. Richardson: The Planning Commission made a positive recommendation on Cottonwood Estates. He attended a site plan meeting where the LDS Church presented their new development. The owners of the southwest parcel of the commercial area presented a site plan that removes the gas station and puts in a bank. He is frustrated with trying to keep track of the Council’s docket and requested that a review of council procedure be put on the next agenda.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
18. Motion to go into Executive Session, Pursuant to Utah State Code 52-4-5
* * * EXECUTIVE SESSION * * *
19. Motion to Adjourn Executive Session and Reconvene City Council Meeting
No Executive Session
ADJOURNMENT
20. Adjourn
This meeting was adjourned at 11:30 p.m. on a motion by C. Wright, seconded by C. Maxwell and unanimously approved.
/s/ Kim E. Holindrake
Kim E. Holindrake, City Recorder
Approved by Council:
September 4, 2007