Thursday, May 21, 2015

City Council 19 May 2015: Tentative Budget–Library, Pageants, and Parks

Highland Playground15 residents attended the council meeting (half were scouts :) which was a bit disappointing since we were discussing the budget. The meeting was productive and I particularly enjoyed how the council was able to disagree without being disagreeable when discussing the budget.

 

Thursday, May 14, 2015

City Council 5-May-2015: Dry Creek Trail, Budget Notes

16 residents attended the council meeting.

Note, I’ve updated the online budget data to reflect the most recent input from the finance director. Council members are still sharing ideas on budget changes that will put more money into roads and more appropriately allocate costs. A recent suggestion, which has not been formally discussed in council meeting, is to allocate the following in the library budget:

Tuesday, May 5, 2015

City Council 21-Apr-2015: Impact Fee Study Report

We received an updated 2015-2016 budget which included current YTD data for 2014-2015. I’ve updated the online budget data to reflect the data. Council members are still sharing ideas on budget changes that will put more money into roads and more appropriately allocate costs.

2015-05-06 General Fund Expenses

Appearances

  1. Public Comment:

    • One resident commented regarding a letter which had been sent to council by several Dry Creek home owners regarding the trail issue and their desire to have it resolved. Below is a copy of the letter and a picture of the trail under discussion.

      2015-02-10 Bull River-Dry Creek Trail

      Re: Dry Creek Highlands phases 1-3 trail

      Dear Mayor and City Council:

      We want to thank you for your time and bringing this long overdue matter to anticipated resolution in the upcoming City Council  meeting on April 21, 2015. A solution to this improperly built trail has stagnated in the hands of Highland City for more than 9 years. We recognize the current city administration was not responsible for those decisions but, commend you for resolving the problem.
      The signatories of this letter are residents of Highland and landowners who are directly burdened by the existing trail. Many of us have met numerous times with the city officials, employees and representatives over the past 9 years seeking rectification of the design and installation errors. Some of us have significant and costly damages to our property due to the problematic trail and corresponding easement.

      During the January 13, 2015 public discussion on the trails, the following items were discussed:

      1. The trail was built outside of the designated easements in many places.
      2. The trail is not and cannot be properly maintained as is.
      3. The trail presents a life and safety hazard to users and there are serious questions around property owner liability.
      4. Trail design, placement, slopes and maintenance make it non ADA compliant.
      5. Feasibility of re-installing the trail in the prescribed easement is a significant financial and logistical concern to the city and residents.

      We are grateful that Mayor Thompson committed to a final resolution to the problem within 90 days. We have experienced 9 years of deferral, delays and inaction.

      There are two solutions that we view as acceptable:

      1. Commit the necessary resources to rebuild the trail as originally intended within the designated easements according to ADA specifications.
      2. Remove the asphalt trail and corresponding easements.
      We believe the past 9 years has provided ample time to study and put to rest the trail issues. The time for action is long overdue. We would regard further delay as unwarranted and a cause of further damage to residents. Furthermore, we would find any solution which redefined or re-designated the trail leaving the existing easements in place but did not rebuild the trail as originally intended as untenable.

      Highland Residents of Dry Creek Highlands Phases 1 – 3
      Those whose properties are burdened by the trail

      This item is on the agenda for the May 5 Council Meeting but I did ask a couple of questions to the resident. I agreed that the city needs to resolve the issue of the trail having been built outside of the easement and on their land. However, I didn’t understand why in addition to removing the offending trail the city would have any obligation to remove the trail easement.

Consent Items

  1. MOTION: Approval of Meeting Minutes for City Council Regular Session – March 17, 2015.Unanimously approved with no changes.
  1. RESOLUTION: Approval of the Municipal 2014 Wastewater Planning Program – Self-Assessment Report. Unanimously approved. This is an optional self assessment survey that the city can submit to the state. A series of questions are answer and points are assigned to the responses. The score can help procure state funds on future wastewater related projects. We had not previously submitted assessment

ACTION ITEMS

  1. MOTION: Selection of Consultant – Park Maintenance Building.

    The Council has selected a site for the future park maintenance building. The next step in the process is to prepare the documents needed for the conditional use permit and the permit and construction documents. Staff requested bids from three different engineering firms. All bids included the
    following services:

     Building Elevations
     Site Plan
     Landscape Plan
     Structural Engineering
     Mechanical and Plumbing Design
     Electrical Engineering

    The bids are as follows:

    Epic Engineering $23,700
    Forsgren Associates, Inc. $23,300
    JUB Engineers $30,329.15

    The council unanimously approved the staff recommendation of Forsgren Associates.
  2. ORDINANCE: Adopting Impact Fee Facilities Plan - Transportation, Culinary, PI, Parks, Sewer, Public Safety Fees. Unanimously approved. Zion’s Bank presented an overview of their impact fee reports (258 pages in total). The net of the report is that our fees on average will be reduced. Below is a table showing a comparison of the old fees vs. the new ones. In the sample case shown the fee has been is substantially. With other lot sizes and the fees could end up being slightly higher. The bottom line is that the cost of development in Highland has been reduced. If want more clarity please take a look at the overview presentation provided by Zion’s Bank. To read the entire report look at the April 21, 2015 Agenda pages 47-305

    Impact Fee Comparison

    Fee

    Existing

    Proposed

    Change

    Culinary Water (Southeast Area Only)*

    $0

    $1,653

    $1,653

    Pressurized Irrigation

    $1,350

    $886

    ($464)

    Transportation

    $1,210

    $2,084

    $874

    Sanitary Sewer (Central Area)**

    $2,296

    $2,126

    ($170)

    Sanitary Sewer (Southeast Area)**

    $2,296

    $2,175

    ($121)

    Parks and Recreation

    $6,834

    $4,378

    ($2,456)

    Public Safety

    $997

    $1,116

    $119


    Impact Fee example based on 1/4 acre lot

    Location

    Current

    Proposed

    Change

    Southeast Area*

    $12,687

    $12,292

    ($395)

    Central Area

    $12,687

    $10,590

    ($2,097)


    *The southeast area for culinary water only includes the property south of Lone Peak High School. The central area is the remainder of the City.

    **The southeast area for sanitary sewer includes the property south of Lone Peak High School and area around the Greens on the Highlands and Wild Rose subdivisions. The Central Area is the remainder of the City.

ADJOURN TO A CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION

  • The sale of real property Pursuant to Section 52-4-205(1)(e) of the Utah State Code Annotated.

  • The character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual. Pursuant to Section 52-4-205(1)(a) of the Utah State Code Annotated.

Pending Action Items

Description Requested
by / Owner
Due Date Status

Road Capital Improvement Plan for FY 15-16 Prioritize and Communicate to Residents

City Council

Ongoing

Contracted with King Engineering.

HW Bldg. – PW Storage Status

City Council
Mayor/PW

April 21

In Progress

Determine Park Use For Recreation

City Council

3rd qtr. 2015

Staff to make recommendations

SR74 Median at Pebble Lane Subdivision

Staff

                

Waiting to hear from council.

Building use Policy and Fees

Rod Mann
Emily

3rd qtr. 2015

Gathering information


Links: