All present included Mayor Hart,
Council Member Elwell,
Council Member McDonald,
Council Member Roberts,
Council Member Densley,
and
City Recorder Kari D. Jimenez.
STAFF:
City Manager/Attorney Dale Coulam,
Building and Zoning Administrator Kevin Rudd,
Public Works Director Dave Glenn,
City Engineer Chuck Gillette,
Director of Finance Alan Rae,
and
City Recorder Kari Jimenez.
EXCUSED:
Council Member Mendenhall
Audience: DeAnne Hanson, Jay Beacham, Leon & Myrtle Ott, Gillian Papanikolas, Ken Miller, Delores Osborn, DeAnne Haut, Kerry Haut, Terry Haut, Lisa Rutherford, Lance Anderson, Robert Ence, William Papanikolas, Terry Martin and others who did not sign in.
Mayor Hart acknowledged there was a quorum present and indicated Council Member Mendenhall was excused.
Council Member Densley led the Flag Salute
Council Member Densley gave the Invocation
Council Member Roberts referred to agenda item 5)A and disclosed that the developer is a relative. There were no other disclosures or conflicts of interest with items on this meeting's agenda.
Rick Hughes provided an update to the City Council on the center piece. He extended a special invitation to the Mayor and City Council to visit the studio to view the center piece. He provided photos of the center piece. The photos are available by request through Ivins City Hall. The center piece has been covered in clay once and the next process is for Edward to go over it again with clay. The foundry will be coming down in the next two (2) weeks to take the first section away and Edward will be starting on the second section of the sculpture. They are on target to unveil the center piece at the Heritage Days celebration on September 20, 2014. They are ready to discuss site preparation for landscape design, concrete base and surroundings. He recommended concrete and aggregate to surround base and plants that can flow over the aggregate. Mayor Hart stated requested Benny Sorensen, Dave Glenn and other staff meet with Rick and Edward regarding landscape design and then bring it back to the Council.
TAB A Staff Report for Posovi Subdivision Phase 3
TAB A Concept Plan Posovi Phase 3
Kevin Rudd indicated the Posovi Subdivision Phase 3 consists of thirteen (13) lots on 21.08 acres. The property is zoned RE-43 (Residential Estates, minimum 43,000 sq ft.). The Technical Review Committee (TRC) reviewed the plan and determined that the plan exceeds the maximum distance of 750' for dead end/ cul-de-sac. A slope analysis is included in the plan and it appears that nine (9) lots are in sensitive lands. The Sensitive Lands Committee reviewed the plan and will provide a report at the next Planning Commission and City Council meetings. The Preliminary Plan will require a Lot Averaging Overlay to allow lot number 560 because that lot is less than 43,000 sq ft.
Dave Glenn provided a written report to the Mayor and City Council. A copy of the report is available by request through Ivins City Hall. He reported on the following items: there have been a lot of leaks over the last month; water use is down; the 400 West Water Line and Road improvement is nearly complete; the slurry seal project will begin at the end of May; a pre-construction meeting for the Center Street Widening project is scheduled for May 27, 2014 and will likely begin construction on that project June, 2014 and completed by August, 2014 before school starts; and the design will start soon for the Highway 91 improvements between 200 East and Swiss Village in Santa Clara.
Chuck Gillette provided a written report to the Mayor and City Council. A copy of the report is available by request through Ivins City Hall. He reported on the following: the solar panels are installed on the fire station and will be producing power this week; there will be a ribbon cutting and press release held at Heritage Days in September regarding the solar panels; the Luffberry wall is complete and staff is working on landscaping; and a trench drain was installed on Wintook and Taviawk Drive. Council Member Roberts referred to the paper reports that are handed out and requested those be available electronically and on the website.
Kevin Rudd reported that Ivins City is continuing to issue approximately ten (10) building permits per month, which is similar to last year. They are also seeing more discussion regarding commercial development. A Work Meeting with the City Council and Planning Commission will be planned for a future date to discuss a major commercial project. Family Dollar has purchased a piece of property in the City located at the Southwest corner of 400 South and 200 East although a formal application hasn't been received to date. They are moving forward with Code Enforcement and have been obtaining compliance. Code Enforcement Officer Dennis Murphy works with individuals and does a great job in obtaining compliance.
Chairman Loris reported that the Planning Commission held one (1) Public Hearing and approved a Class IV Conditional Use Permit for March Investment Company to expand the cell tower facility located at approximately 400 West and Highway 91. The Planning Commission also discussed Chapter 18 and 19 of the Ivins City Zoning Ordinance regarding architectural language.
Kevin Rudd stated the Cliffrose Subdivision consists of 65 lots with a total acreage of 20.56 and is zoned RE-12.5 (Residential Estates 12,500 min sq. ft. lots). The applicant is requesting a density bonus of 5% for "Consistency in Design Elements" and 10% for "Convenience in Layout, Variety of Lot Sizes, and Unique Subdivision" for a total of a 15% density bonus, which is necessary to achieve the 65 lots. Staff does not make recommendations on the density bonuses unless it is related to open space. This project does not provide increased open space other than the minimum required amount which qualifies them for the base density of 57 lots. The Planning Commission approved the application to go forward to City Council for the full density bonus. Mayor Hart inquired if there are CC&R's (Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions) that will be adopted. Kevin Rudd indicated there will be a Development Agreement that references design guidelines and CC&R's. Mayor Hart opened the Public Hearing. Lance Anderson resides in Ivins and referred to portions of the Transportation Master Plan (TMP) and stated in 2008 Ivins City passed the TMP where the residents adopted a rural cross section on the west side up to Kayenta. He think curb and gutter works in all places. He voiced his opinion at the Planning Commission and was against curb and gutter on 600 West. He feels that flooding is not an issue, he isn't sure there's a safety issue and he would like to keep the natural landscape. Dwayne Lee resides on the north side of the project and inquired if there was a recent ordinance passed restricting height. Mayor Hart indicated stated not recently but the maximum height is twenty-five feet (25'). Dwayne Lee commented that block walls are a good idea and those should be required. He asked that the City Council require single story homes in this development and not allow two-story homes. Jay Beacham resides in Ivins and agreed with Lance Anderson. He would also like to see the density kept at 12,500 sq. ft. per home and that block walls should be required. Ken Miller was present representing the Developer. He stated the comments are noted regarding the block wall and offered a consistent wall, although one is not required on the north side of the development. Regarding drainage, that is more of a concern on 400 South and that has been addressed. Mayor Hart inquired if he's obligating the developer to landscape around the perimeter and indicated that the project is pretty standard. The Council will need to review what the developer is offering in order to obtain the density that's being requested. Ken Miller stated the project is unique because it's surrounded on three (3) sides by major collector roads. Mayor Hart inquired what the developer's preference is for drainage. Ken Miller indicated that curb is easier to install but they can engineer the project with or without curb and gutter. If there's no curb and gutter, they would use some type of berm with rock for erosion control. Kerry Haut resides in Ivins City and referred to the Preliminary Plan and stated he has not seen a plan with the base density and would like to see that. Mayor Hart clarified that the developer is not required to do that. Kerry Haut indicated that the property is zoned for 12,500 sq. ft. lots but there is only one (1) lot that meets that criteria and 54 lots are 8000 sq. ft. or less. He quoted from the City Council meeting of January 2, 2014 wherein Council Members indicated RE 12.5 zoning was appropriate. The Planning Commission members felt the block wall was extraordinary but he thinks they're common and the developer shouldn't get the bonus for that or any other bonus. He referred to the Subdivision Enhancement Overlay process and quoted "To receive density incentive for design elements, the subdivision drawings, covenants, conditions and restrictions shall be reviewed and accepted by the Commission and Council as including sufficient guarantees to provide subdivision features and building design elements". (The quoted language is from Section 16.07.514 regarding 10% density bonus for Convenience of Layout, Variety of Lot Sizes and Unique Subdivision Features. It is not a requirement of an application for the Subdivision Enhancement Overlay.) He is not aware that this has happened or if that is a mandatory prerequisite to receive a density bonus. Dale Coulam stated it is not a required prerequisite because it depends on the City Councils' determination as far as what the density bonus is and the Development Agreement is then drafted. A Development Agreement locks in the City Council's determination and what the developer has agreed to do. It would be a "condition" imposed to receive a density bonus but not necessarily mandatory. (See Sections 16.07.406 & 16.07.508 which state a Development Agreement "may" be required.) Kerry Haute feels that is contrary to what City documents stated. He referred to the single story and two story homes and indicated that was not discussed at the Planning Commission. There was no consideration given to the current land owners to the north of the project and he felt they were ignored. Two story homes should be part of the consideration as to how those would affect the current landowners. He referred to the Planning Commission minutes and paraphrased Commissioner Lance Anderson "When you decide zoning, you need to consider the overlay." He stated he will be coming forward with a request to review the overlay in the future. He doesn't see anything unique, creative, extraordinary or anything else about the current plan and strongly urged the City Council to deny the density bonus. Deanne Haute resides at 418 West 280 South on the north side of this project. She has the same concerns that have been voiced and the largest concern is the number of homes and size of the lots. She is opposed to the overlay, only single story homes should be allowed, the lots should be 12,500 sq ft. and there should be no connecting road on the north. Lance Anderson responded to the suggestion of moving the road on the north and stated major collectors are trying to limit the access and thinks what staff has suggested is good. Lisa Rutherford resides in Ivins and stated she's in support of what's been said regarding the residents' concerns. It's confusing for citizens that sit through meetings and then see something different come back. Kerry Haute responded to Lance Anderson's comment regarding the road going north and indicated he met with City Engineer Chuck Gillette and Building and Zoning Administrator Kevin Rudd and discussed that. If the road is moved, it still ends up at 600 West in the end. Regarding emergency services, the quickest response you can get is the best but emergency responders will not be driving through subdivisions. They will stick to main roads to access the emergency. There being no further comments, Mayor Hart closed the Public Hearing. Mayor Hart requested Dave Glenn and Chuck Gillette respond to traditional curb and gutter versus no curb and gutter. Dave Glenn stated the importance of curb and gutter to him are 1) it defines the waters channel. Water erosion in roads may occur if the storm drains are to far apart; 2) it provides pavement edge protection where if there's no curb and gutter, the pavement eventually breaks away and erodes. The curb saves that and is less maintenance; 3) it's a safety factor. A curb line in the dark helps delineate the road; and 4) curb and gutter have a cleaner look. A good example is the Historic Township where curb and gutter was recently installed. Mayor Hart inquired if the City is going to use the cross section for the western part of the City that hasn't been developed and impose curb and gutter all the way through. If so, that goes against what the intent of the plan was for the rural feel of that area. Dave Glenn indicated the TRC (Technical Review Committee) agreed with the cross section with curb and gutter up to Center Street. Chuck Gillette stated there are opinions on both sides but his concern is safety. Curb and gutter gives a margin of safety that ditches don't. If the engineering or hydrology study isn't quite the right information needed, and a storm comes, curb and gutter carries more water with less damage than what a natural ditch does. In the Transportation Master Plan, the City was uncomfortable saying someone could just use ditches to drain areas from high density residential or medium residential areas or commercial. The areas around 600 West on the Land Use Plan have designated commercial and high density areas that has curb. If the City Council likes the idea and agrees with Kayenta regarding the rural look, he is ok with that but cautioned that there would likely be additional maintenance and safety concerns. One day there's going to be a big flood in Kayenta and they don't really know what's going to happen. A channel finds its own bottom, which can be fixed with rock, and then when the 100 year storm comes in it finds a new bottom. There are more margins of safety with the curb and gutter. Staff's position is that curb and gutter is best.
TAB B Cliffrose Staff report & documents
TAB B Cliffrose Preliminary Plan
Mayor Hart would like to address the subdivision first and then the drainage issue, along with the street going north, the density bonus and then finish with the two story homes and heights. Council Member Elwell recalled many years ago the City Council trying to look at ways to enhance the City but the City cannot cause an owner to give up more than is required which is also referred to as an exaction or taking from the owner. Recognizing densities, if a developer were to put in 500 lots in a cookie cutter way, and line nothing to the streets, what you are going to see is not going to be something you would like. He inquired then how you make the developer give up extra land and put in landscaping that is aesthetically pleasing to citizens. To cause this to happen and to avoid exaction, the City offers enticements to a developer to give more than he has too and those enticements are bonuses. This is consistent with what the City was trying to accomplish, to make it pleasing to everyone. He can envision homes with no fences and only acreage but that is unrealistic because people who own property have a right to develop and the whole cannot be the same and cannot all look the same. It's the difference that creates an atmosphere of strength for Ivins City. Regarding the location of the road, the reason for having that is the connectivity that was identified sometime ago and is in the master plan. Council Member Densley stated he needs to be educated more and sit down with Kevin Rudd and be brought up to speed on the overlay system and the developer's rights to develop the property. He would also like to go out to the property and look at it and the surrounding owners' property and suggested this item be tabled. Council Member Roberts had similar thoughts as Council Member Elwell regarding the value of open space and trails as opposed to high density. He's amenable to the fifteen percent density bonus 15% if it can be justified. Mayor Hart explained that if a developer were to abandon the overlay and the land put back into lots, there would be more lots that would be closer to the 12,500 sq ft and it's important to recognize that the developer has given up land that could have been lots. The size of the lot may not be as important. The majority of the smaller lots are on the inside of the perimeter and are not visible except to those who live in the area. Dale Coulam referred to a section in the Subdivision Enhancement Overlay regarding required open space. The ten percent (10%) minimum is a mathematical calculation and that has been met to qualify for the Subdivision Enhancement Overlay. He also referred to the trail and landscaping along 600 West and indicated that is not required and there would be no trail or landscaping and the road would not be developed if the developer chose not to do that, which would mean those things would be paid by existing tax payers. Once an applicant meets the 10% rule, legally they are entitled to the base density and, in this case, that is 57 lots. The Council then needs to decide what bonus beyond that would be allowed. The developer is putting in a trail and landscape on all perimeters of the 3 sides because they're all collector roads. Regarding the homes being one or two stories, even if there are two story homes, the homes would have to stay under 25'. The main distinction with this project is if the lots remain at 12,500 sq ft., the improvements on 600 West would not be required by the developer. Council Member Densley referred to block walls and inquired if the developer will be placing a block wall on the project. Dale Coulam clarified that some walls are required and the developer is requesting a bonus because he's willing to put a block wall along the north that isn't required. Mayor Hart stated it's a significant expense to the developer to provide the improvements on 600 West. He inquired if the developer has gone beyond 10% open space. Kevin Rudd indicated the developer had because of the 600 West improvements. Council Member McDonald inquired if the Council could consider the additional block wall that the developer is providing as a bonus. Mayor Hart clarified that anything that is not required can be considered in exchange for the density bonus. Kevin Rudd stated that the developer is also proposing to landscape the yards and Ivins current ordinance does not require that so that could be consideration as well. Chuck Gillette clarified that the homes on the east side near 400 West will be lower than what the natural grade will be. Council Member Roberts inquired if there isn't curb and gutter, could the developer take their lots right up to the road. Dale Coulam stated the application was filed prior to the new road alignment for 600 West so there would have been no improvements required along the western boundary. The developer is also giving up property so the City can put in the roundabout.
Mayor Hart indicated that it comes down to what is the value of what the developer is providing over and above the minimum that is required and if the developer had not applied under the overlay system, the lots would be closer to the street so technically the City is getting an enhanced version. Kevin Rudd stated the developer has the option of filing a conventional plan with no density bonus. Council Member Elwell indicated the developer deserves the 10% bonus. Mayor Hart stated the 10% bonus is pretty generous and if he were voting, he would propose that the requirement be that the single story homes surround the perimeter of the project because it would lower the roof lines. Council Member Roberts disagreed because they are already limited by height and if trees are planted, that obstructs the view anyway. Council Member Densley referred to the curb and gutter in the Historic Township and how much that has been enhanced and indicated he prefers curb and gutter. Council Member Roberts agreed. He lives in the Historic Township and he likes the curb and gutter. He referred to the concept plan and stated it isn't a Kayenta or Taviawk type development and definitely prefers curb and gutter and stated that 600 West currently becomes an eroded gully when it storms. Council Member McDonald indicated he understood what the Kayenta Development was trying to do with creating an entrance into their development that doesn't have curb and gutter but he has also seen 600 West become a gully. Mayor Hart stated that area is anticipated to be commercial development and higher density. Chuck Gillette clarified that with higher densities, there isn't room for a ditch. Council Member McDonald referred to the subdivision further up the road that already has curb and gutter. Council Member Elwell likes curb and gutter.
Dale Coulam clarified that the items to be included in the development are the north block wall, landscaping of all front yards of the homes that are within the subdivision, 600 West fully developed as shown with half street improvements, curb and gutter, trail and landscape, dedication of property for a roundabout at the southwest corner, extra landscape buffer as shown on the preliminary plan and single story homes along 600 West, 400 South, 400 West and lots 2 through 8 on the northern boundary. Ken Miller clarified they have already agreed to use hip roofs and after discussion, agreed to a maximum of 22' on the single story homes.
MOTION: Council Member Densley moved to approve 4)B, a Preliminary Plan for Cliffrose Subdivision with a Subdivision Enhancement Overlay District (SEO) with the improvements mentioned above for a 15% density bonus
SECOND: Council Member Roberts
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Council Member Elwell |
AYE |
| Council Member McDonald |
AYE |
| Council Member Roberts |
AYE |
| Council Member Densley |
AYE |
| Council Member Mendenhall |
ABSENT |
| 8. |
Municipal Building Authority Fund |
Dale Coulam stated there have already been several meetings where the proposed tentative budgets have been discussed, then published and put on the website for review before they moved forward to this public hearing. Mayor Hart opened the Public Hearing. Lisa Rutherford resides in Ivins City and supports the Public Safety Department but she was startled with the increase in staffing summary from 2006 to 2015. Mayor Hart clarified that is partially due to the merger with Santa Clara City. Council Member Densley clarified that EMT's and the ambulance service are also included. Lisa Rutherford indicated she looked at the salaries from 2005 to 2015 and sees considerable increases in Public Safety. She understood that the City was growing but requested that everyone look carefully at the budget and make sure the City is not growing beyond what is needed. She doesn't see a huge presence of Public Safety in Ivins and she sees people speeding down Snow Canyon Parkway and wondered what the City is getting from Public Safety. She also saw a large increase in the Parks and Recreation piece and Commercial and Economic Development has gone up. Council Member McDonald clarified that the numbers do not reflect reimbursement from Santa Clara that comes in later. Dale Coulam clarified that Parks has been down two (2) employees: one was a Parks Supervisor, where Benny has been doing the job for three (3) or four (4) years; and the other anemployee who left last year. Some numbers were artificially low in prior years and the City is just getting back to where it was. There being no other comments, Mayor Hart closed the Public Hearing. Council Member Roberts stated that a lot of the increase was in the bus service, which is a value that some citizens need. He would like to stay status quo and work on tax relief for the residents in the future. Alan Rae indicated they would have to address the school district for that. He referred to Public Safety and stated that Ivins' cost share of law enforcement is lower than it was prior to the merger because of the reimbursement. The Parks and Recreation department will have one (1) additional person than they did in 2008.
TAB C 2014-07R Adopting Final Budgets
MOTION: Council Member McDonald moved to approve Resolution No. 2014-07R, a Resolution of Ivins City, Utah, Amending the Budgets for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2014 and Adopting the Final Budgets for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2015
SECOND: Council Member Elwell
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Council Member Elwell |
AYE |
| Council Member McDonald |
AYE |
| Council Member Roberts |
AYE |
| Council Member Densley |
AYE |
| Council Member Mendenhall |
ABSENT |
Roll call vote. All Council Members that were present voted in favor.
Mayor Hart recognized Alan Rae for his outstanding and dedicated service and presented him with a plaque.
TAB D Photo 1
TAB D Photo 2
TAB D 2014-13 Revisions to Chapters 18 & 19
Dale Coulam stated there was a good discussion at the Planning Commission to come up with an alternative for the City Council regarding the 4 foot offset requirement. The Planning Commission thought an 18" or 2' offset would be more reasonable than the 4' currently required. The Planning Commission also suggested the spacing of the offsets be stated as a percentage of the length of the building instead of specifically every 40'. As an example, if there was a maximum of a 120' building, there would be a minimum of three (3) offsets for that length but could be spaced by a percentage calculation. He also showed photos that Council Member Densley provided showing how offsets could be accomplished. A copy of the photos are available by request through Ivins City Hall. Mayor Hart clarified that percentages work on any scale because of varying dimensions vertically and horizontally. He recommend the scale be 5% of the longest adjacent wall. Lance Anderson indicated the intent is to change the plane, which is determined by the distance of the offset. The parapet height is done the same way. He suggested a minimum offset for vertical and horizontal with a percentage based on the scale of the building. Mayor Hart clarified that the object of the ordinance was to not allow a long straight building with a singular parapet or roofline and just a flat face. There needs to be massing. Establishing the character of the City with architecture becomes a significant part of this and if the City is a destination City, the City should differentiate itself. There are ways to make buildings work without extreme costs. He inquired of Kevin Rudd if a percentage is more reasonable. Kevin Rudd indicated "yes". Council Member Roberts referred to Ivins being a "destination city" but stated he didn't see that in the Goals in the General Plan and inquired where that fits. Architecture is subjective. What one may like, another may not. Kevin Rudd clarified that's the problem and inquired if you can create a one size fits all. Very few ordinances tie someone to an exact measurement. Mayor Hart suggested a general statement that wall and roof plains are required and then some definition. Terry Marten indicated it's a tough situation with the way the ordinance is currently written. A lot of the cities have gone to design review or architectural committees but the City could set a standard that limits what someone can do and then give them the opportunity to expand on what they can do based on how much articulation they do in their design.
Council Member Densley inquired as to Terry Marten's opinion regarding a maximum building length of 120 feet for multifamily and if that length was too restrictive. Terry Marten stated it's not too restrictive. To make it work you need a good landscape plan and some level of articulation and diversity of architecture. Bill Papanikolas indicated Ivins has Kayenta, Tuacahn, Red Mountain Spa, Fitness Ridge, borders the Entrada development and there are so many things that are unique in Ivins. Part of that is coming up with good aesthetic design. It is important to have streetscape that looks nice. Mayor Hart referred to an angular reference to the height of the building as to soften that to allow a percentage of a building to come forward and not being able to see the full building. He inquired of Jeff Loris regarding the angle that he came up with and inquired how he came up with that. Jeff Loris stated it was approximately every 300' to 400' feet from Center Street to the top of the mountain, five (5) feet above grade which would be approximately eye level. The change in elevation will change the angle and you will see more. Mayor Hart referred to a potential development as you drive up Tuacahn Drive and where the mountain is. He suggested that angle may not work for something that is going in that area and the angle may be different there. Council Member Roberts referred to the angle being applied to Center Street and Tuacahn and suggested they may need to look at other view corridors. Dale Coulam suggested that instead of a fixed angle that is designed off of Center Street for a view of the Red Mountain, to state it as the actual view angle to a minimum of 15 degrees. His concern is if the view is less than a 15 degree angle, there is no view to protect. Being defined as view angle probably wouldn't be held up in court. He recommended that if it's steeper than 15 degrees, you go by the actual view angle to preserve the view. If it less than 15 degrees and they aren't protecting a view, you should define it by a minimum set back. Lance Anderson believed the 15 degrees should apply to both sides of the road for openness. Council Member Densley suggested addressing the developer's application. Dale Coulam stated until the ordinance is changed, the existing ordinance applies and the application as filed does not meet the existing ordinance. The developer is faced with moving forward risking a denial amending his plan to conform to the current ordinance, or continue to wait until Chapter 18 is amended. Mayor Hart inquired if the City Council is ok with a minimum 2' offset on a 120' building. The City Council agreed to the concept. Council Member Densley inquired if the developer could have his draftsman start on plans while the City Council works on changes to the ordinance. Dale Coulam indicated the developer would do so at his risk. He suggested that since it is a Conditional Use Permit, when actual building designs are submitted they must be conditioned upon whatever the ordinance states at that time. They could handle it in the form of conditions but the developer would still have some risk in proceeding immediately. The City is willing to give a permit to remove the building but the developer is at risk for grading and preparation for curb and gutter if the offsets aren't set. Kevin Rudd stated he thought the location of the curb and gutter would not change under either form of Chapter 18. Dale Coulam indicated the developer has the go ahead to start the dirt work. Mayor Hart stated the Council needs to address language for roofs but it was getting late.
MOTION: Council Member Elwell moved to continue this to the next City Council meeting
SECOND: Council Member McDonald
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Council Member Elwell |
AYE |
| Council Member McDonald |
AYE |
| Council Member Roberts |
AYE |
| Council Member Densley |
AYE |
| Council Member Mendenhall |
ABSENT |
TAB E MOU for Ivins Reservoir
Dale Coulam raised a question on behalf of Terry Marten and stated that Terry Marten and Lance Anderson were not copied on this agreement from the Water Conservancy District. One of the questions was, whether Terry Marten should be a party due to access across their property. He suggested this item be tabled and provide feedback to the Conservancy District that Terry Marten needs to be a party to this agreement in order to have access to the proposed recreation area.
MOTION: Council Member Densley moved to table to the next City Council meeting
SECOND: Council Member McDonald
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Council Member Elwell |
AYE |
| Council Member McDonald |
AYE |
| Council Member Roberts |
AYE |
| Council Member Densley |
AYE |
| Council Member Mendenhall |
ABSENT |
Council Member Elwell - no report
Council Member McDonald reported that he attended solid waste meeting and had a lengthy discussion on recycling. Washington County is offering a recycling program that could cost between $3.00 and $7.00 per month and would be picked up every other week. The life expansion of the landfill will be greatly reduced by the recycling program. No decision has been made at this time to make it happen.
Council Member Roberts - no report
Council Member Densley reported he attended a Citizen Advisory Board Committee Meeting for Snow Canyon State Park and they are moving forward with prioritizing, discussing lowering the fee for locals, widening the road, bicycle paths and relaxing areas where people they can hike.
Mayor Hart reported that Lyman Whitacker did a remarkable thing at the Veterans Nursing Home. An anonymous donor donated money for outdoor art. Lyman makes wind sculptures and the value he put in it was at least 3 times the value of what was donated. He would like to recognize him in some way. The City Council agreed. There was one suggestion of Grand Marshal.
Dale Coulam reported that a joint meeting with the Planning Commission and City Council needs to be scheduled to discuss a potential development south of Tuacahn on the Layton property. The Mayor and City Council agreed to meet on Tuesday, June 3, 2014 at 6:30 p.m. after the regular Planning Commission meeting.
| D. |
Items to be placed on future agendas |