City Council - Regular Meeting

We welcome you here. We welcome those who have joined us in the council chambers. Council Member Freeman, can I call on you for some opening comments?

Our dear Father in heaven, we're thankful for the opportunity we have to meet tonight and for the positions that we hold and the responsibilities that we have to take care of the city and the residents who represent them and the different decisions that we have to make. We're thankful for all the workers of the city and for their efforts as well to help us and and the residents. We ask thee please for guidance and direction and discernment in all that we do. And we say these things in the name of Jesus Christ, amen. Amen.

OK, that's item one. Item two, working discussion items. We don't have a lot of items tonight, so we'll work through this one. Item 2.1, transportation funding resolution discussion. This was tabled in January 27th of 26. Along with this item, I know it was transportation and housing, if I remember correctly, Tisha. With that, Councilmember Harrison, I'm going to turn some time over to you on this. If you want to lead on that, that would be great.

Sure. So back in January, we passed two resolutions, one on transportation and one on housing. And then we tabled. A copy of that but built for a multi-city resolution for each topic so and correct me if I'm wrong Tisha But we we tabled those multi-city ones just because we had just come into office We didn't have really enough time to coordinate with our cities surrounding cities to get their buy-in. So I think now we're just discussing the multi-city resolutions for housing and transportation. And if we're good with the current language, then I think the plan was for the mayor to kind of coo

Any questions on that? I know Councilmember Harrison on that, that it will come to me eventually, and we'll go to our neighboring mayors for some follow-up on that. I don't know where we'll get on that, but I will leave that if the council opts that that's something we want to do.

guess for the other council members are we I mean we did pass our own version earlier this year so I don't know if anything has changed but is everybody is everybody good with the language that we had in both of those resolutions did we pass both of them or did we just pass one I felt like we just table

And the transportation one for the city, I think, was not sent or something. I recall just one, but maybe I'm

So we passed the housing one. Yeah, that's right. No, you're right.

My understanding is housing passed, both multi-city and Lehigh. Transportation, both multi-city and Lehigh, was tabled so that staff could work with us on developing Right, like process and numbers and all of those things, and then we were going to revisit now. That's what I remember.

So I guess now we're just discussing for, I guess, both of those for a multi-city resolution. And I'm good if we want to sign the transportation one as just an individual city as well. But I think it's more powerful coming from our neighboring cities that agree with our strategy and preferences. So... So I think I guess the goal is for the mayor to take both the housing and The transportation one once we're good with the language and the transportation one and then work with other cities is my understanding then Yeah, I think my concerns on the housing one and also on this one is just the ment

If there's consensus, I'd like to pull it from this one, too, just focusing maybe more locally instead of comparatively. But that's just consistent with my input from last time. But other than that...

I guess who would, members of staff, who would be willing to help us with some of the language and the numbers and the transportation one? Would that be Jason? I guess Jason, what's your preference?

Did we receive any response? Do we typically receive any responses when we send resolutions?

Yeah. I think a lot has changed just in the last six months.

With that said, I would also mention that I feel like we've made some good strides in six months with this. So I think in a resolution that we include, I think we'd be very specific to numbers and to progress, but to make sure that those are part of that resolution as we go forward. I would hate to stick something in an eye when there's progress that's working in our favor. So I think that resolution's got to be good enough to make sure that there's clarity

as to kind of where we're headed to so I would throw that in there I really like that point mayor to recognize what's being done that it's how you know important it is the you know the benefit to us we see the continued growth I think that that would be received really well too is almost an acknowledgement of what's happening and that you know we see some light at the end of the tunnel and we want to keep moving on that progress

So yeah, and I think that's a great idea. And I think on number three, where it talks about UTA, now we have that on-demand service. I do think we need to recognize the investments they're making in our area. So that's probably just another one to add.

I guess sorry I was just gonna say for the housing one the I think the one factor that's hit us pretty hard in the last few months is the water issue and I think I would be okay if we modified the housing one for a multi-city resolution at least to reflect concerns around you know considering water if the state does have certain mandates hopefully Any mandates are funded, but that's a wish. Regarding these state laws coming down on affordability or whatever, I think we should include the consideration that we would prefer that the state consider the water situation as they push down these mand

Yeah, I think that's a great point, Councilman Harrison. What I see here is just the transportation funding resolutions. It looks like I don't see the housing one. So maybe that's something to bring back at another time. Because I just see.

Yeah, we had our one city one, but we didn't do a multi-city one. Oh, so I see.

Yeah, I think we ran out of time for that one.

I understand we're just talking about the transportation resolution at this point, but maybe I'm not understanding it correctly. I just want to clarify, just on the agenda, I clicked on both of those resolutions that I looked over were just for housing. I mean, I'm sorry, just for transportation. I don't know if we want to bring back the housing one, too, if we want to redo something else with that.

Think the goal is still because we didn't really pursue the multi-city resolution either for housing or transportation Just because of timing, but I would be okay if we if we added something around water in the housing resolution and then Defer to staff on kind of getting us a solid resolution with some good numbers and a balanced approach as Heather mentioned and Michelle Then I guess the only other thing would be when would we want this to? to come back up. I imagine they're putting together their bills, and they're already kind of well into that process. So I would imagine probably at least

So I'm understanding that we should probably re-look at the housing one and look at some water additions, adding some water things, which I think would probably be, my opinion is it would be received favorably because I know that right now there's an adjudication process going on at the state where they're trying to reconcile water rights with physical water because they recognize there is an issue with that. So I think that would be really wise and smart to add in there. And the transportation one, what I'm understanding is that that needs to be workshopped a little with staff. Yeah. Okay. I'

We should definitely get it out before October or by October. Yeah. For sure.

So I will probably bring this back September in the pre-council in September. We'll have some drafts by then. That gives us a few weeks to put the drafts together. At that point in time, we can put them together and then we can go to work with the neighbors and see where we're at. And then by October, we should be in that slot.

Mayor, the one thing I might suggest to you, if this is going to be multi-city, I think it would be more successful if you start reaching out now and that you get their buy-in, their input, that they're involved in the creation of this. I think if we present something to them September,

They'll probably just push it back, but if they're involved and it does become a joint city yeah I was thinking the same thing so I will begin that outreach as we speak so All right any other questions on this item Jason we're good there. We'll get that together great work on that Okay, we'll move to item three agenda questions for this evening any agenda questions that are Anything that's on the agenda this evening No? OK, good. Jason, administrative report?

Great, thank you. And item number five, Mayor and Council reports. Any reports?

Mayor, if I may, I just want to remind the council of the day of service. It's going to be on September 12th, which is a Saturday. Lehigh serves, which I've been working with. They are doing it a little differently this year. They're going to have morning sessions from 8 to 11, and then the memorial service will be at noon. which gives everyone who's working on outside projects an opportunity to attend, which is different than years before. And then the inside service projects will be, I believe, 9 to noon. So they're also looking for project captains. So if anyone has availability to just kin

Sure. The fire department hosted Call to Courage, which was great. And my daughter was able to participate. It's where young women go and they get a train for two days and kind of experience some of the hoops of fire service. She had a great time. I was able to stop by. I know some of the others of us were. And I was really impressed. And I know my daughter at least wouldn't stop talking about it for a couple days and her friends. So I think they do a great job. And what I love is that they bring in other firefighters from other units that also help. So it kind of brings together, you know, it

Yes, Mayor. First of all, again, just to remind you, we have Heritage Days on Saturday, August 29. And if any of the council members, I know, Mayor, you mentioned you'll be out of town, but if you would like to participate in the parade that we have, Just let me know by today So just so I'll send this out a new email, but just so you know, the the parade is from 2 30 to 3 p.m 3 to 4 p.m. Is the honoree celebration and We'd love to have the City Council members be involved in that and I could let you know more about that later and then From 4 to 6 lots of fun events. We have a classic car show

I'll just add Michelle was very excited about repelling she tried to repel, but they wouldn't let her that's where the courage comes in Now just we had the people's co-op Historical marker unveiling last week. It was excellent I'm always just so impressed with our Historical Society and all the work that Michelle and Heather do in making that happen and just making it cool and unique and So thank you guys for that. And then also just an update on the Small Business Advisory Council. We passed that resolution earlier this year. We got a good number of applicants by the deadline at the end of Ju

The analysts helped a lot. Yeah, and the analysts. They're the ones that make everything work. So thank you guys for that. I look forward to that when the time comes.

I think we covered it all. James did awesome with his speech. So that was great. Great event to attend it for the co-op. And then, Mayor, are you speaking at the next one? When's the next one? The Lehigh Branch one. Is that sometime in September?

They'll be fun. I was gonna wait to our next meeting so I don't want to overload you I only look at a week forward.

So if you said September September 9th Okay, there are no closed session items tonight so I'd be happy to Take a motion to close our pre council meeting so moved Councilmember Newell second councilmember Harrison all in favor Okay, we will be adjourned until 7 o'clock Welcome those we all welcome all who are with us this evening and We're grateful that you're here to participate in our meeting today. We'll start With the Pledge of Allegiance that'll be led by councilmember Lockhart. I Thank you. All right, item two, presentation reports. Todd, it looks like item 2.1, presentation of the Water

Can you tell us more about the Water Wise Parade of Homes that is coming up?

The other thing that came up, and I didn't mention it during the meeting, I was able to attend that for Rachel, the environmentalist, is they talked about having Lehigh City on social media also talk about the Waterwise Home of the Month. So I don't know who best to ask that to, to see if we could do that, that it's great that the Lehigh Free Press is doing it, but if we could also highlight it on our Lehigh City social pages, too.

Thank you, Todd. Thank you. Appreciate it. Appreciate it. OK, item three, citizen input. Just a couple of things for citizen input. If there's something that's not on the agenda tonight that you'd like to give input on, we welcome you to come to the microphone. When you come to the microphone, we would appreciate it if you'd state your name. A clock will appear with some time on it. If you'll go ahead and give us your thought within that time allotment, that would be great. If the clock does go to zero, we would ask you to finish your comments. So with that, it is 7.08, and we'll open citizen

Mayor, sorry. If I may ask a question on item 4.3. It's such a significant payment. I was just wondering if we could get a little bit of explanation from staff on that.

Okay. Does that make sense? Yeah, and I appreciate the explanation. It's just a big number. Oh, it is. I agree with you completely. I was trying to figure it out.

Any other questions on the consent agenda? OK, happy to entertain a motion on that.

Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve the consent agenda as presented.

So I have a first from Council Member Harrison. Do I have a second? Second from Council Member Newell. Any questions on that motion? So we'll start with you, Council Member Newell. Yes. Council Member Harrison. Yes. Council Member Stallings. Yes. Council Member Freeman. Yes. Council Member Lockhart. Yes. Great. Thank you. All right, item number five, the regular agenda, we'll go to 5.1, consideration of ordinance 35-2026, approving a comprehensive development code amendment to chapter 23, signs, updating requirements, and simplifying the text. So before we start this, I will happily entertain a motion to untable this and bring it back to the dais.

Okay, so I have a first from Councilmember Newell, a second from Councilmember Freeman. All in favor? Aye. Okay. So with that, we'll start the discussion on this one. Kim, it looks like you're our representative tonight.

Yeah, so I reviewed it, and it looks great to me. I think Jacob's done a great job. My understanding was that it was a legislative decision for exceptions, since they're changing. He presented that the conditional uses present a challenge and have continually historically presented a challenge. Also, recommendation by Utah League of Cities and Towns is to try to minimize any conditional uses we have in our code. And I would support that going forward with other additional code changes. So yeah, I support it as is, and especially with the legislative decisions go to a legislative body, which is

Mayor, I have a question. So on that section 23.080 on B, I believe this is the language makes it a discretionary. Is that correct? I mean, it says the following signs may be approved by the city council. So that's discretionary, right?

Okay. I just wanted to clarify that because sometimes, I mean... that may be approved as the original language, may be approved as a conditional use, but it really can't. I mean, it has to be approved kind of thing. So I just, if that's adequate language to just ensure that it remains a discretionary decision, then I'm good with that. And I just support bringing it to the council for the reasons I expressed, I think, at our last meeting when this was brought up, is that we are the legislative body and I think it's our duty to enact code pass code and then if there are exceptions I think it sho

I don't know why every time my microphone does that. Sorry, it's like so dramatic. Mayor, if I may, I really, I also appreciate the work done. And I think just my one caution is moving it to, from the planning commission to the city council. Yesterday we had a discussion about eliminating the park tax committee. And today we're having a discussion about eliminating roles and responsibilities of the planning commission and bringing it towards us. And I'm just worried about the centralization of power. I think it's really important that our residents are involved in every level, that they have i

So I like everything but I am concerned about the centralization of power at this level This would still even though if it comes to planning or to City Council for exceptions It would still go through the process what it goes would it still go through if there's exceptions they would apply and go through like DRC and then Planning Commission and then Or what how would that how would that go? It would just go through DRC and then to City Council now we can you know tonight if you want to add any part of that I mean it would streamline it to go, you know, just a City Council and what I love is t

Can we also add that we get recommendations from the Planning Commission on the exception?

But we could say it's going to go through DRC to the planning commission for a recommendation and then to the city council with a mandatory public hearing.

I could support that. I'm finding a hybrid.

Yeah, I've heard from residents that sometimes it's confusing to them to have the public hearing at Planning Commission because they don't realize that that's their chance. And I love that they have the opportunity here to have public comment at the beginning of the meeting. So, I mean, yeah, we need to hear from them. We need to give them the opportunity to speak. And I'm happy to have them do it here. If there's strong feelings about doing a planning commission, that's fine too. I just have heard that from residents that they like to be able to speak at city council.

And I would support the public hearing coming to the city council. We are the elected representatives and I feel like the people have the right to petition their elected representatives. I'm going to question this idea of a consolidation or centralization of power. We get our authority from the state. And the state requires that we have a planning commission. But they are an administrative body. And, again, they are not elected, and they have the final say. And I think it's much, much better for, again, if we're granting exceptions to legislation, that it should come to those that are elected

I really like the idea of having the recommendation from the Planning Commission on that. I would think that would help us be consistent. And that's my biggest concern with exceptions, that if we're going to make exceptions, they should be consistent. And if we're making exceptions, Exceptions often that means our codes not right like I would hope that we got our code right to the point that we don't feel That we need to make exceptions and so that we're seeing that I think having more eyes on it helps with that I do like having the public hearing at the Planning Commission just because I Want

Yeah, I'll just add, I do, I mean, the law is very specific in this being a legislative action, and that's why I would support the City Council having the final say on exceptions. But I also agree, I think it would be good to have the Planning Commission have input, just because they've... They have background and context that we may not have. I'm kind of agnostic on whether the public hearing is before the council or the planning commission. I do like watching the commission meetings and kind of hearing that. And those public hearings may actually change the recommendation on the planning com

comments from them who are there? I don't know if, can we have it at both? Do we require it at both? Or is it usually, I don't mind having it required at both. But I mean, I feel like, Maybe it's a good reminder if it's on the agenda that it's a public hearing. And then to speak to the point where Rachel's had residents talk to her and say, like, I didn't know I missed my opportunity. If we say it actually is an official public hearing at the council, too, then maybe they feel a bit better they didn't miss their chance. So I'm totally good with that, too.

Just one question on that. Do we have, are there other instances where the Planning Commission makes a recommendation and the City Council gets the public hearing? Because in the past it's always been the public hearing at the Planning Commission meeting, right?

I feel like most of our public hearings are on the commission side. So I'm fine with that. But I tend to follow what Mayor Johnson did, where we give each item an opportunity for the public to speak. And I don't mind doing that. So I do think if you if you set up as two public hearings, I do think that's Probably a hair much, but knowing we're gonna open it Here and there's a 20-minute period anyway, so I you know public's always welcome to come and share so I Kind of both it's a little much, but I we've had bears in the past that I

have stuck to just what is technically a public hearing and haven't allowed the public comment. So I don't think we get that much on these things, hopefully. I always appreciate recommendations and the discussions from the Planning Commission and the opportunity to hear the public comment there. Again, I guess we're the ones who are accountable to the residents, and I always just feel like they should be able to speak to us directly. And we've got a great mayor here that does allow that, but we haven't always had that in the past. So I'd be okay having it both places. Again, I don't expect a t

I guess the problem is, too, is, like, we can't ever hold the future mayor. Like, if they decide, like, I don't want, they'll just, like, take it away, too. So I guess it...

So I do have a question for Tisha. Are there different noticing requirements for public hearings?

Well, I see the value in having it at the Planning Commission, too, I guess, because then you do have kind of a preview of, you know, and it says people's names. And if you want to, you can contact them and ask them further about what their thoughts are. Maybe I think we need consistency in kind of decisions. So if we're going to have... a public hearing at two public hearings for something. And if we're going to have one planning commission and city council, then I think that would need to extend to other. Other things, and I don't know if we're ready to do that. I think we need to, like Ryan

And honestly, there's other things that I would probably want more public comment on than signs. And I'm just wondering if we could just call it something else and come up public comment period or I don't know.

They have the public comment period at the beginning, right?

Oh, yeah, yeah. But maybe under, I guess because the concern is if they're 100 years from now and we have a different mayor, because you're going to be mayor for 100 years, right? Probably not. But if they don't allow public comment item by item, then they would, I'm assuming, would allow a free-for-all during the 20-minute public comment period in that circumstance. And just in my experience, the lengthiness from the signed discussion comes from the planning commissioners themselves and less from the public. And so we do get some public turnout, but it's mostly us and the planning commissione

The other thing to keep in mind with the Planning Commission is this is the first time they're able to speak with each other. They can't speak with the public. They can speak with staff. So it's the first time to really debate it, which is good for us to see that too. But maybe we're OK to just let our leader lead the meeting. And if we feel like we're not getting the public comment that we need, then We can make changes then. But right now, I like how it's working with being able to hear from the public on each item.

Yeah, I think I tend to agree. I think keeping the public hearing at the planning commission level, it's consistent with all the other things that come before us that are maybe more weighty and serious than signs. Who knows? Maybe we'll have like a crazy sign discussion in the next couple months. But I would be fine. And I would be fine. I think most mayors would open that up for comment. And you have that safety valve of having the public hearing the Planning Commission hearing the debate maybe some of those comments and then those same people can also come to the City Council meeting and mak

So is it, just to clarify, since I'm new, I'm going to say I'm new for probably five years. No, three years. Is it a requirement that we only take public comment on things that are not on the agenda? Is that just kind of a tradition? Is that?

CHRISTIE WOODARD- OK, so some mayors would not have the public comment, or they would allow comment on agenda items? There's just, it's kind of a .

If there's no further questions, I'm happy to entertain a motion.

Okay. I'll make a motion. May I move that we approve Ordinance 35-2026, approving a comprehensive development code amendment to Chapter 23, signs updating requirements and simplifying the text, and include in Section twenty three point zero eight zero that Just language where the the Planning Commission would review the Request and give a recommendation to the City Council with a public hearing at that point So I'm first from councilmember Stallings to have a second second have a second from councilmember Lockhart any questions on that motion I

Great. We'll start with you, Council Member Harrison. Yes. Council Member Stallings. Yes. Council Member Freeman. Yes. Council Member Lockhart. Yes. Council Member Newell. Yes. Great. Okay, Item 5.2, consideration of Resolution 2026-47, approving the intent to annex the pasture walk annexation on 4.4 acres located approximately 900 north and 1,000 west. Do we have a... There's Janine Walker. Tony Train is coming to speak to this. Hi, Mr. Train.

So before we go to any questions, are there any folks in the audience today who is here to speak to this item? OK. Any questions for Tony?

Yeah, this is just the intent to annex, but are you going to just do the holding zone?

There's no other questions. I'm happy to entertain a motion.

Mr. Murray moves to resolution 2026-47, approving the intent to annex the pasture walk annexation on 4.4 acres located approximately 900 north, 1,000 west.

So I have a first from Council Member Freeman. Do I have a second? Council Member Newell with a second. Any questions on the motion?

Sorry, did you include the DRC comments?

Well, I didn't really see. I don't know if I really saw much on there, but oh, yeah, I did. Oh, they're there. Let's include the DRC comments, please.

So the motion does now include the DRC comments. You're fine with that, Council Member Newell? Any other questions on the motion? Councilmember Stallings will start with you. Yes councilmember Freeman. Yes councilmember Lockhart. Yes councilmember Newell. Yes councilmember Harrison's Okay, I don't 5.3 consideration of concept plan approval for the Fox girl supervision now requesting nine Lots and a development agreement located at 2850 West 1500 North petitioners Symphony homes are they with us this evening. Would you come on up? When you get there, if you'll give us your name.

So if you're good, I'll have you take the chair. If there's anyone in the audience that is here to speak to this, we would ask that you come up and speak now. When you get here, this is like public comment. Please state your name. You will have time up on the clock. And so when that reaches zero, of course, wrap it up.

Your time's up, so if you want to wrap up.

Okay, if there's no further comments, we'll bring it back to the dais. Any questions?

I do have a question for staff, if that's all right. So typically when we give density bonuses, there's usually some kind of equivalent public benefit. And I know in the planning commission meeting that there was some concern about It doesn't meet that standard. And I know I was here about a year ago when this came before us, and the past city council denied it, the nine lot request. They granted one additional lot above the seven because there was a more considerable benefit to the city as far as right-of-way and the road expansion. So I'd just like to get staff's opinion on the about 80 feet

Yeah, it does. Thank you. don't want to give density away cheaply I mean it's the argument is just one more lot but just one more has got us to where we are and we're facing a lot of challenges because of our growth giving away density so much I do feel for the residents with that that missing sidewalk piece that little kids and their safety is close to my heart so I I would love for the city to look at just finishing that little piece and how much the cost would be. But again, I think we have to be protective of our density. And again, I was here a year ago, and I heard the residents come and

Yeah, I would just echo Councilmember Stalling's comments. I think, well, first of all, I think it's really impressive to see the HOA mobilize the way it did. I know I was talking to Neil, I think it was last night, and he said he doesn't envy my job and I don't envy your job either. I know it's difficult, but it's really rewarding to see. And I'm very impressed that Symphony was willing to work with the residents and offer some additional amenities. From my perspective, it's purely a public benefit. And I think it's great between two private parties that that would work out. And I agree, we s

The one thing I do like about this is I like consistency within the neighborhood. I think a lot of our Neighborhoods get kind of chopped up with zoning when we have new regulations when it comes to the widths of the roads and they're trying to fit within that certain mark. And then you end up with these odd lots that have the large side yards. People have to pay a premium to be able to be in the neighborhood for land that's not fully utilized. I want to be consistent. This seems very similar to the Bishop's property that we brought in. gave an extra lot to and did not have anything in lieu of

So that, and I do see a public benefit. I understand that it is going to the HOA, but that is a public benefit to those 109 families because they're no longer needing to utilize the public spaces. It makes it more accessible for our other residents to use. I agree that we're talking dollar for dollar, but my biggest selling point on this is consistency of the neighborhood. The fact I have a petition from 77 residents who want an extra lot in their neighborhood, that speaks volumes as well. And so I'm in support of it because of that. I was in support of it before because I saw the benefit, but

I want to be consistent with that yeah Mr.. Mayor if I may if I'm remembering correctly that bishops subdivision Did not include trail connections and did not include additional sidewalk and yet we offered multi we approved a multiple and more than they were allowed. I really appreciate when residents solve the problems and then come and tell us what to do. I appreciate the efforts made on the part of the residents who have collectively decided that this is what they want. And I think there is a lot of public benefit to having things within the neighborhood that allow these neighbors to not le

I think that this is a tough situation. I really appreciate the I don't know, the initiative by Neil at HOA to get this going. I spoke on the phone with Neil a couple months ago. We talked about it, and I did emphasize the public benefit need as we are making these exceptions. I know that both Council Member Lockhart and Newell were on the Planning Commission, and and talk about the importance of being consistent with our zones and the general plan and all of that, and how sometimes I do get concerned about precedents that we are setting if we do these things with an HOA benefit. The Bishop pr

Mayor, I have a question. Sure. So I am a little concerned that this is coming to us as a development agreement without first requesting a zone change or an amendment to the PRD or whatever else. And typically, we require that. And then, like the Bishop application, if I remember right, it came as a zone change. But the developer was willing to limit it to less. And that's why we did a development agreement with them. So I'm just wondering why directly to a development agreement. And I would like to ask the two council members who are supportive of a development agreement if I would like to un

Yeah, I can take the first swing at it. So I think I've been super clear how much I don't love development agreements and have often voted against them. But what I've learned in my seven-plus months on the council is there are different types of development agreements, that there's a lot more nuance there than just a blanket statement of no. When I was on the planning commission and this came through, the Planning Commission role went for the eight lots because that's the role of that's how I saw my role as the Planning Commissioner at the time and this the development agreement in this case i

Yeah, for something like this, I think it just gives us a little bit more ability to have both the city and the developer be able to come to agreement on stuff rather than opening it up where... we don't have the ability to make some of these other requirements in there. So that's why I would support it. Yes, they could have come with a different method to do it, but I'm okay with what their application is if that's how they wanted to come forward with it.

So this is a concern to me, so I kind of want to delve deeper. And so, Commissioner Lockhart, my understanding is that the citizens come and speak in favor of it you are open to a development agreement yeah i'm opening to hearing them out absolutely okay i i'm just okay this is rhetorical now so thank you for sharing your ideas and thoughts on that um i think we need to be very careful i one thing we're cautioned against is a public clamor and to me that's very different from public input and usually when My experience as a resident, many years coming to city council meetings, is we were told,

If there's no further comments, I'm happy to entertain a motion.

I'll make a motion. Go ahead. I move that we deny the concept plan approval for the Fox Trail subdivision. Now requesting nine lots in a development agreement located at 2850 West, 1500 North.

So I have a first from Councilmember Stallings. Do I have a second? Second. I have a second from Councilmember Harrison. Any questions on the motion? Councilmember Freeman, we'll start with you.

Council Member Harrison? Yes. Council Member Stallings? Okay. Item 5.4, consideration of resolution 2026-46, approving an amendment to the Gardner Plum Development Agreement requesting to transfer 124 equivalent residential units from the northern portion of the development agreement to the southern. We have someone from the Plum Group here.

Is anyone here that's here to make comment on this? We'll open this up. I remind you as you make comment that the clock is in front of you, so if you'll keep an eye on that, go ahead and give us your name as you come up.

We should not ask questions during open comment.

Any other comments? Okay, so we'll close the comment portion and bring it back to the dais. Any questions?

Yeah, Mayor, I guess I have a question for that applicant or maybe the property owner. Is that appropriate?

So you could ask the applicant, yes. Applicant, not anybody else. So if he wants to answer that question, he's...

Okay, so help me understand it. Remembering the map, the north end, there are three parcels. One went to the armory. One is the Hardman parcel, and then there's one kind of to the south of the Harmons.

And then who owns the property where these ERUs? The Hartmans. Oh, okay.

It's not a brother and a sister? Yeah. Okay.

I thought there was different family members.

That makes more sense. Yeah. Okay. I get it now.

that's that's remaining over there so let me ask you this maybe you could speak for the Harbin's I hope so a couple years ago they presented a concept plan that I thought was incredible and that concept plan was that with the current er use or

choose not to utilize all the ERUs there?

You're talking the north end, not the south end.

So you're saying that they swapped land and they acquired the south portion? Is that what happened? That was the land swap?

Okay. Thank you. All right. Well, I guess my point is, A few years ago, they presented a concept plan. This was long before you talked about moving the ERUs. And it was a really good concept plan. So why, to me, that would be a great thing to build. I know the time has expired, and you'd have to probably redo another concept plan. But that was in place at the time with the ERU. So why not still build that?

Okay, but previously what were they going to do with the remaining ERUs? I mean the 124. Does that make sense?

Mrs. Hardman, come on up. This is not normally how it functions, just so you know. But let's make sure we have the information.

Would it be appropriate for me to comment on what's been asked?

It does. Mayor, I have a question for the Hardmans, if that's okay.

Either one. We've recently been presented with some transportation options with... bringing a road to the north side of Camp Williams or onto 4200 West. And to give context, I live in Holbrook Farms. So I'm there every day. I just wanted to know, does those transportation options that have been on the table, do they change or impact your desire to move these units at all? Have you been made aware of that? Does this have impact on what you're asking today?

Okay. Yeah, I just want to make sure that all, it's so important to me that you guys know about what's recently been presented and that you're actively engaged in the discussions.

Just to clarify, though, this is a little premature. We're studying something, and don't, panic about eminent domain. I'm sorry that fear has been put in your heart.

It's something we're looking at, but don't.

So let's bring it back to the item at hand of 5.4 and focus on the item that we're working on.

Mayor, if I may, I have a question and a comment for the applicants. So for the southern portion, you have that parcel immediately west of Willow Point. If this gets approved, what do you plan to put there? If it does not get approved, what's the plan? I'm just curious, because I think this is probably the biggest consideration for this.

And if it's not approved, what would be the plan for that?

So you're talking about the eastern portion. Yeah. You don't think that would be viable for retail? No.

I guess a question for staff. Maybe this is more for Brad, but are there any, I guess, city restrictions on planning to keep retail from there based on the canal? And I guess they only have the single access from Hardman, right? Is there any city codes or anything that would prohibit that?

Okay. And so the hotel plan would be if it's approved. If it's not approved, it would be more.

we would do a hundred unit hotel okay and then to my it's my comment I guess Kim can you help me share the screen oh yeah if you wouldn't mind so yeah I've been digging into this quite a bit and just some of the history so for the record I love the hotel idea right I think you know this council we really like you know retail and commercial in Lehigh and I think You guys know the history very well for Holbrook as well as your developments and all the changes over time over the last decade or so. So this is the first map, the old map, right, Kim? So just one thing that... that I've been thinking

That was the use. Yeah, and so, I mean, we're very fortunate now. We have the Maverick and the Smiths and some of that retail coming in on the far eastern edge of that. But for me, again, I love the hotel. I would be very supportive... of moving whatever ERUs you need for a hotel and any other sort of retail-like development there. Just because, you know, I listened to the planning commission meeting and the gentleman from Willow Point. I mean, they're crammed in there. The parking's an issue. And they just got their first grocery store that's anywhere close in the Lehigh boundaries. So I thin

Sorry to interrupt. I believe I heard in the planning commission meeting that you could cap that canal. So there is potential that you could.

Because I think that the eastern parcel is at, I think, third acre, right, as it is?

Yeah, I was going to say, again, I can't speak for everybody else, but whatever ERUs you'd need for the hotel, I think that would be worthwhile. It's just that eastern portion, just making it Less dense, which it sounds like you guys have already decided to make it less dense than originally proposed, and help solve some of the traffic issues for the neighbors. Just because I know we have 420 units there that weren't planned originally, and so adding over 100 more, it's somewhat painful in my opinion.

so i bottom line the hotel i'm a solid yes on it's just that eastern portion that i think we need to work on it and i i mean you you're given we look at the development agreement and the amendments and each time it says no more than this you can't transfer and then you amend it and you can transfer so you've used up the original erus down here for a residential and then you got more and then you I'm saying you. I don't know who did it.

In areas that I think might have been better for commercial, but then there's residential there. So I appreciate what the Harmons are doing for sure. Like I said, it's a beautiful plan up north, but past councils have given up prime commercial locations here zoned for commercial for more residential we're running out of that commercial space so i'm really hesitant to give it up again for more high density and especially in a place that's hurting because of the impact of high density there so and i guess you've worked something out with parking i'd like to know about it more but I guess my posi

You know what? That's been the plan. And you've pulled density down again and again and eaten up our commercial area. And right now we're in the point in the city where we need to protect that for the future. We need that self-tax revenue. So it's kind of a hard pill to swallow to just move it down. If you're bringing something, if you bring, like I said, so we had another, it was a development agreement, kind of similar. They wanted high-density housing or whatever, and then they wanted a hotel. We put that in a development agreement where They committed to providing those things. So I'm not

But you can come with a concept plan. And we can put things in a development agreement.

But you got, I guess in the last one, you got to move 100 ERUs. That was the one. That took up our commercial space. And what did the city get from that?

I just would like more than just you can move the units.

Developing that. That's what the rights are. That's what it was zoned. And again, it's how long have you had it? 2015 or whenever it originated. But again, you knew. You agreed at one point that this was the plan, and then let's change it, and let's change it. One time. The original, and then a change, and then change again. This is the second change that you're asking for.

You knew it was there. You used up your residential ERUs in different places, and now you want it again. So please understand the city's perspective. I'm looking out for our residents and our taxpayers, the neighbors that live there, and the impact that will be on them. So just giving you an agreement where you get to move more ERUs, to me, without guarantees that you would, put in a hotel or any other hotel, I kind of .

I've got a lot of emails that don't want high-density So I don't know you you live in Holbrook farms.

How has the industrial the property when you said great to walk the property? I actually called councilmember Harrison while I was walking the trail next to the canal I Do have some questions though. So speaking on that I if from what i understand along the canal you're going to put some um how your proposal is to put some housing there drive under product it looks i'm really concerned from like a safety perspective i hear that you said it's cost prohibitive to cover the canal uh excuse me but are there safety measures we can take to make sure that kids aren't falling into that canal it seems

Or where I was at on the trail, I could have fallen into it.

If you don't get the transfers of ERUs, this parcel is entitled to commercial or residential. How many residential units could you build on this parcel with the ERUs you have today?

But it would compromise the hotel because you need those ERUs for the hotel.

But you have rights to the residential there? Excuse me, the east parcel is what I'm speaking of?

So homes could go there either way? Yeah. When we spoke yesterday, I felt like I was respectfully firm on my... how unsatisfied I was with the parking situation created by the development. If you've had conversations since ours, can you enlighten me on some of the solutions that you may have developed since then?

And I just want to hear you say it one more time. The stairs from the garage into the home will be sized appropriately so two cars can fit into these garages.

I don't know if I can stomach the full transfer, but that area, in conversations I've had with the HOA president and along with others involved, that area is in desperate need of parking solutions. And so I'm listening. I'm listening for how this could be an opportunity to begin with the end in mind. and solve multiple areas problems. And I think it's great that you've been involved in those problems to be a part of the solution for them as well. But I'm not fully sold on the 130 that we had talked about. To make that possible, what is the minimum amount that you would need?

Okay, that would be the intent, to become one community? Uh-huh. Okay. Thank you for your thoughts.

Can I ask? Go ahead. So what I'm hearing is, let me see if I'm getting it right. So you would like to build a hotel, but won't build the hotel unless you have the density for the housing. Is that what I hear? It's a contract, it's a thing, it's... Well, it would just be really...

So you would, the grocer would come if there was a hotel? Is that what I understand?

And by tilt-up, you mean kind of the warehouse type?

Yeah. No, I love this concept plan for the northern property. I talked to Lisa Hardman today and I really appreciate her perspective and how she looks at how, where the ERUs are best used. And so I really appreciate that. I would welcome blocking the property in the south. I would love to do that to better understand it. I don't, you know, transferring the ERUs to me is, it's part of a bigger picture and I would like to have a little bit more clarity on that in writing if that's a possibility. I'm going to say that I'm new because I'm new as of January and so I don't know, you know, staff can

Okay, so it could include, so if we amend this development agreement, it could include more than just the transfer of the ERUs. It could be more specific and... the commercial space or, you know, where the ERUs are?

Okay. And I am with all the council members who have spoken here, especially with Council Member Harrison. He said, like, I would love to see the more commercial retail because that has been something that we've seen. It's continually kind of turned over to residential historically, and we are kind of lacking in Lehigh. And Saratoga is loving it on that side, right?

It's true, but the west side, right, where do they go to shop?

And just to add to that, to Rachel's point, is in that area there's like the little swim bear place, right? I mean, there's, you know, not putting in a dominoes, I get that, right? It's kind of an awkward piece of land, but there may be other uses that are kind of similar to that area.

It's kind of the history. Yeah, you speak of the hard ones, and I have great respect for them. And just speaking to Lisa today, I could tell there's a lot of altruistic feelings there and just some great, you know, humanitarians going on. So that's not, like, that's not a question at all. It's just about what is, how can we, these amazing and great ideas and opportunities for the South, how can we solidify these and possibly put these in a development agreement so that we're, you know, it's just a little bit more secure, I guess, for

Well, that's what I support. If you watch this council, we want to hold people to what they propose. Yeah. So that's the direction I wanted to go. I didn't want to vote just on a density or ERU transfer.

So I spent 15 years living in this area. I have a lot of friends in the area that have had a really hard time seeing the commercial along 2100 go away. One of the first items I heard on Planning Commission several years ago was changing commercial on there to heavy commercial. And I was one who voted against it. And it's been hard to see our commercial along there being picked away at. The ERU caps that were determined, they weren't arbitrary. There were studies that were done. We don't have studies to show this. I had a really hard time taking from one area And lessening the impact of one are

Any other questions? Okay, with that, no questions as you will think about a motion as you put a motion together, but I am ready to accept when you're ready.

I don't know where the rest of the council is at on this, because I think we're open to continued conversation. But feeling uncomfortable about just transferring 124 units. So I don't know what the best approach would be at this point.

Would it make sense to... table and discuss with the applicant on maybe some of the more specifics around exact units, east or west side of the canal. I mean, is that useful? I know you said you wanted bullet points. Would you want bullet points kind of after the fact if we table it and meet with you and kind of come to some general consensus?

I don't think we're ready for that. I don't...

I think that I'm just questioning what's happening on the south. I mean, who knows? That's decades. I agree.

So the dollars are for a study. And if you want to wait until we decide on a road, that's going to be a long time. And like you said, you're paying a tax bill right now. Okay.

I'm just saying you might have to wait a while if you want to discuss the road.

the Hardman's yes oh absolutely okay in the work session so so would it so we don't have a work session in September currently planned but we could do a pre-council type of work session possibly where we could do ones and twos with the council members so you can kind of consolidate the information but I would I'd be happy to put a motion out to table

Yeah, and I think we have a track record of doing the ones and twos and creating a lot of confusion for an applicant. So maybe we should do a pre-counsel or work session so that they don't go through six months of that.

I'd prefer it in a work session. Then we can have a discussion with the full council, and there's value in that.

And just timing, because I know, like, the sooner the better, right? Especially for you guys.

So I think timing-wise would, Mayor, maybe this is you, but I'm just kind of throwing it out there. Like, should we do it before the next council meeting the same day?

So, yeah, your next available would be September 8th.

Right, so Labor Day is on a Monday, so it would be the following Tuesday, which I believe is the 8th maybe, is that right? Yes. So that's the next time we would meet is September 8th, so that's three weeks away. But there's, we could look at that. But there would be some time affected to that, so there's, and we'll give you some time to obviously work through that, but I think we could probably get it on that schedule. Yeah.

Okay. Can I ask you, what do you think that you're hearing from the council? What is the consensus that you think that you're hearing from us? For some clarity. So I know you think that you...

Well, and just maybe just commercial and not... Well, that's what I'm saying.

I think the benefit has to be there for council, like the hotel, the commercial, the retail, to be able to move that. Otherwise, I think we're having a hard time seeing the benefit. You know, like... We just denied one lot. We just denied one third acre lot. So there's got to be a strong... We're not increasing the density of the city, though.

It's increasing the density and the impact of that area, which is what the concern was, is that because we're bringing in a third-acre lot, that it's going to cause traffic issues in this same relative area. So there has to be a pretty big selling point. It's not going to be heavy commercial light warehouses and stuff like that. It's going to be what's going to benefit this area to justify having the additional residents.

I mean, that's what I was kind of thinking I'm hearing. I just didn't know if you were hearing that. And you think of there's going to be a freeway there, and do you want to have more homes along that, or is it better to have a transition area where there's commercial that's kind of protecting that?

parking I think I made myself very clear over two meetings now I would just add to prepare for that whenever the work session probably on the 8th if you can provide us with any information you've talked about parking solutions or whatever we can prepare for that meeting and that might save us some time and

And even the number of ERUs you would estimate for the hotel? 31. 31. Oh, that's right.

either way I got a head start from okay yeah I would prefer the through staff and then Kim if you'll pass those along that'd be great guy you won't be our point of contact thank you Kim happy to give a motion I'm happy to take one all right sir mayor I move that we table resolution 2026 dash 46 approving an amendment to the Gardner-Plum development agreement requesting to transfer 124 equivalent residential units from the northern portion of the development agreement to the southern with the intent of adding more specifics to this development agreement.

So I have a first from Councilmember Harrison. Do I have a second? Second. Second from Councilmember Newell. Any questions? Any questions on that? No. Great, we'll start with you, Council Member Lockhart.

Council Member Harrison. Yes. Council Member Stallings.

Great. Item 5.5, consideration of resolution 2026-45, appointing two members to serve on the Utah County Justice Court Nominating Commission for the Lehigh City Justice Court vacancy. Jason, oh, Cam, you've got this one. Hi, Cameron.

I guess just the timeline. How long do we expect? Because I think we're aiming for like an October

Well, thank you to Judge Cummings and Jody for your patience with us tonight. I don't have any questions.

There's no questions. I'm happy to entertain a motion.

Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve Resolution 2026-45, appointing two members to serve on the Utah County Justice Court Nominating Commission for the Lehigh City Justice Court vacancy.

I have a first from Councilmember Newell. Do I have a second?

May I second that? The judge has stood to get your attention, I think.

Judge, would you like to comment? I have a motion, just so you know.

Mr. Mayor, I've been in every meeting. I've never missed a vote. Did I miss a vote where we asked staff to study the Justice Court?

I don't think there was a vote. There was just questions that were

I know that I asked questions when we talked about the downtown area plan about why we have a justice court so that if we were to build a multimillion dollar building, I could go to the residents and explain why. And I think I clarified multiple times in that meeting that I was in no way, shape, or form advocating to stop the justice court. So I guess I'm confused how it's been translated to the staff and to our judge that any member of this council has advocated for that because I'm unaware of that ask of staff.

But I want to be very clear that I did not ask that question in that context and in that way.

I did ask some questions about the building, which is where I think the confusion is coming. So that's why I'd like to clarify.

So I have a question, Cameron. Is that... At that point, when it was brought up, do we need a municipal court? Is that what started this discussion or research into?

And I actually agree with that. But I'm just wondering when this process started. Because at that meeting, that was the first time I had heard it brought up. I didn't even know it was possible that we can dissolve our municipal court. So I'm just wondering when did you research?

I would say again to that, at this point in time, there's no information that any of that's even drawn up. So the information is being gathered so at council you have a choice to make. Staff's doing due diligence on the backside so you have options. So you didn't know it's dissolvable, but you will. We're, and I will wear that also, Jason, we are doing due diligence to make sure in the right steps that's why Cameron's already met with the state court departments in moving forward so we do this in the right way and in the right steps in the right timing that's why tonight again tonight this isn

which would impact the court. And we need to find a new location for that. And even we talked about months ago about housing, trying to house the court in the city center. It's not city center, but city hall. And look at that. And then look at options. And if we're having to spend millions of dollars on potentially building a new core. It's good to, I guess, just to look at options. But, I mean, I don't count someone in Burger Locker asked a question. Like, what if we didn't? But I ask questions all the time. And I don't sound as polished as her sometimes, so it works out. And I don't... I gue

So again, that's why the resolution is why it is tonight, because without this, Judge Cummings is resigning October 8th. Period, end of story. So the next step in this resolution is we have to have an approved resolution from our council to hire two to put on a committee to move this progress forward. Nothing else has been decided. Are all options on the table? The answer is yeah. Are we looking at everything? Yes. But the next step in this process has to be we have to have two nominated to the commission to start the process.

Yeah, and I support this resolution. I really don't. I didn't even have any questions or hesitations about it. I didn't even need a discussion. I do think that when we ask questions as council people, even not in an open meeting, it sometimes triggers the domino effects or like, is that direction? No, that's a question. So it might have triggered a little panic.

I think some of this is coincidental because we have been talking about the Civic Center plan and the buildings and everything else, but I think Judge Cummings had a very good point. Combining it with this discussion, we want the best applicants possible, so I tend to completely understand that as well.

Sorry, I do have a question. The judge made a valid point, though. This will affect the recruitment or search, I guess. So if we pass this resolution, it's fine. I support who we're appointing to this committee. And you said whoever doesn't have to post it immediately. Are you expecting to hold onto it until we make a decision?

gotten a lot of conflicting information. So I'd really like solid numbers. I've heard different things from different people.

So going back, we do have a motion to approve by Councilmember Newell. Do I have a second? I thought I seconded it. I will second it.

Any questions to the motion? Great. We'll start with you, Councilmember Newell? Councilmember Harrison? Yes. Councilmember Stallings?

OK. I'm happy to take a motion to adjourn.

Motion to adjourn. Second. Now you all want to second my motion.