City Council - Regular Meeting

Brandon, probably Jody to know and add potentially others in further refining the list of candidates. We want to make sure and get is a high profile file position or any ones regardless. So we want to get it right and go through a proper in depth process. There's gonna be time jinxing us. I don't need a lot. Okay.

All right, thank you. The next item on the agenda is a discussion led by Jared Hall, our planning director, on detached accessory dwelling units. Got 60 minutes. And if we end at 45 minutes, you've got to sing for 15. You've got an hour.

So after our last meeting, took the comments that we heard the council talk about, especially dealing with the setbacks. That was a big issue in what they would look like. And the idea of how would it look if we had setbacks that cut the expectation that people have now of the setbacks for instance you have to have a 30-foot setback or a 25-foot setback in the backyard how would that work and so we took those comments and we've got some graphics that show what this would be like and as a reminder in this discussion the goal you haven't had the goal to try and make every lot be able to have an accessory uh or a detached uh accessory dwelling unit sometimes depending on how the property is built or constructed for instance they take up their whole buildable envelope on the property it might make it difficult for someone to have A, a, a, what do we call them now? What are we? Datched. No, I thought we were calling them daddies. We were doing that. So did Jared would prefer you call them daddies?

I will openly bully anyone that refers.

I heard that in the planning commission. Fair enough.

And so the larger you get in a lot, the easier it may be. But the smaller lots, admittedly, they're difficult because someone may have maxed out already what they can build on and do. And so Jared will walk us through these graphics that we have.

Okay. Thank you, Gary. So this is just a generic graph. I don't want to use the term fake. It's a generic slide showing kind of a typical or a prototypical 11,000 square foot lot. They're usually just a little bit longer than they are wide. Sometimes they're a little wider than they are long, but you've got to be in the typical zones that would generate 11,000 square foot lots. You'll have an 85 foot frontage requirement. 100 foot frontage is not out of the norm. But again, every lot is shaped differently. So this is just for purposes of discussion about what the setbacks might be or what different approaches to setbacks might result in for us to start talking about this. What this is showing is in different parts. Separation from the primary residence at 6 feet. That's kind of the building code separation from accessories to Main main buildings, that's the 1st, 1 to be aware of this is showing 25 feet. For the rear for the setback to the from the rear property line. That is a typical are 8. Real real lot setback is 25 feet. Some, it's important to remember that this is not tied. On that on that state code, it's not tied to zoning. It's tied to lot size, but so it might be, there might be an 11,000 square foot lot in the zone, which would be a 25 foot rear. There might be an 11,000 square foot lot in the. Are 8 earned in the R6 zone that would only be a 20 foot. We're a lot setback, but we're going with. So it would be tied to that zoning. Or 25 feet or whatever that case might be. So it's showing that setback and then we talked about in that meeting in the last meeting. looking at separation from not just the property lines, but from the buildable areas of the adjacent lots. So that if somebody has a small house, we can look at this better in other graphics too. Somebody has a smaller house and they're only required, say an eight foot side yard like this and this one here, If you're 10 feet, like we're seeing on interior sides, you have to be at least 10 feet for your ADU, but you need to be 30 feet from anybody else's buildable area. So if they add on to their house, you're not closer than you would have been otherwise. That's the thinking behind that kind of a setback. And then again, just a minimum, no matter how far, of 10 feet from interior property lines. Border sides, again, that would be facing a street, so that would show you 25 feet from any street, just like a front yard setback would. So this fictional house here, 50 by 30, is a pretty typical Orem two-story house, and plunked down here at 25 feet, which is the front setback that the R8 zone would require, and well inside of its eight-foot side yards that would be required as well. So, that kind of shows you this, this area right in here about 13 by 56. In this prototype diagram would be available for someone to put an, a detached. Does that all make sense? So, what we did is take this. um configuration these types of setback applications and apply them to some of the real world um lots that we'd randomly selected for the last time we talked and laying those over those so you can see kind of what gary was talking about there it won't it wouldn't make it possible for every single lot to be used but again just looking for some of the kind of the goals was to have Setbacks that might preclude something like this happening where it's, it's further from the house here, but it's right on top of the neighbor's house. That happens to be real close to a property line there. A bigger unit, and it's pretty far from this adjacent home here. Pretty far from the existing house here. It's right on top of these folks. So trying to keep that from happening. As a goal, you want something more. into that and right here right back that back corner it fits in there but it's right on top of this other folks house so we applying it to the real world you see these kind of situations this is a cul-de-sac lot right here this greened out area you can see the house footprint right here but the buildable portion of that lot is all of that they could add on to all of those lines so that's that 30 foot setback from their buildable area um That would show if we have that kind of a setback, then it would limit that ADU location. 30 feet away from the buildable, 25 foot for the yard. And then 6 feet from the house. So you have this area in here where you could fit a small ADU perhaps. This is a lot kind of like the one we were just looking at, but it's a little shallower. So you wind up with that 25-foot rear setback showing here, six feet from the house, 30 feet again from that buildable area. You see the house right here, they could add on coming to this area. So that setback of 30 shows from the buildable area instead of from the foam itself. And then 25 feet to the street, back around the corner. You have kind of a narrow area, but again, there are some units that could fit in there. This is a good situation. Gary mentioned people and the way they site their homes. Whoever did this was thinking about an ADU in the future that they couldn't possibly have known about and traveled back. And this is the best area of all of them that we kind of randomly sampled in, given these kinds of setbacks. 30 feet from the buildables, they're built right to their line. 30 feet from the buildables, they're built really close. 20 feet off, still a nice big area in this area. It's in this middle of that lot, 11,296 square feet. So it's not a huge lot. It's right there just inside of where we would allow them under that state code. Here's the cul-de-sac lot. It's a big lot, 13,500 square feet, but it's a bigger footprint hole and taking up a bigger portion of that lot. A lot of that lot is in this area here. Some of that square footage is just kind of lost. 30 feet off that buildable setback, 25 feet from the rear. So you end up with a kind of an odd shaped area that you could use. It might be hard to sight one. This one looks like it would be easy to do. It's a little tougher. 30 feet from the buildables gives you this area and that 25 foot rear setback. They don't have a whole lot of space. They could build it. Again, some lots just will not quite. With this nook in their house, they could have maybe gotten something in here, but with that 30 foot off, keeping them off of this house here, it's a little tougher. These again are just samples. We can't show you all 5,800 square or 5,800 lots in the city and how they would work, but yeah.

Jared, this is specifically as it relates to detached exceptions. Some of these, if it doesn't work for detached, they could do like a basement ADU. Absolutely. Assuming they come into compliance with all of those specific regulations.

Jack, let me go back up to the prototype. That's the wrong word. When somebody realizes what the right word I'm looking for here is, say it and they'll remember. This house has not been built to its setbacks. So let's say they couldn't get an ADU, a detached ADU, like Bryn was saying, in the area that they want here. They just can't find them. They want to fit. They want to go bigger or something. Our internal ADUs or attached ADUs, this is a different term, they could add on. They have space to get out of their setback. So they could add on instead and do a nice ADU. Or they could, maybe they've got enough space in their basement right now, they could do it.

That dashed line in the schematic there is their buildable line for the house on that lot. So they may not be able to get the detached ADU that they want, but they certainly could add on to the house to that crosshatch area, which they can do now and put an ADU there. Internal. Internal.

Internal. Thank you. That's a good point. So all of these lots, most of the zones would allow internal ADUs. That's a good fallback. This discussion is limited to detached ADUs. Let's see, we made it to that one. Here's another one that kind of works out better for the folks that have this lot. It's straight. It's an exactly 11,000 square foot lot. There's a nice area in here where you could build a detached ADU. Or again, you could add on if you wanted to an internal. So those are kind of our examples for the spacing for setbacks to talk about. And that's what we're, again, the setbacks we're using in these diagrams, these examples are those. Maintaining a 25-foot rear and then going 30 feet from the buildable areas on the adjacent lots and six feet from the hole.

That looks very fair. I like your work there. That looks like you've addressed concerns on all sides.

It would preclude some of these kinds of things. but allow other situations maybe to work. So any discussions about that before we talk about pipe stuff?

Can you, and maybe you said this already, I missed it, but can you tell me of the 11,000 square foot lots that would qualify for this, how many of those would these setbacks restrict?

I don't know. You have to, you could survey all of the eligible 11,000 square foot lots and see and run this kind of diagram on all of them.

But we could potentially be eliminating 50% or 60% or we haven't done that yet. Okay.

I wouldn't be able to tell you that. We have to run that.

My next question is how do these setbacks compare to other cities and other places?

That's a good question. That's a good question. There are several cities that run programs that you maintain 20 or 25 feet from rear. A lot of them have 10-foot sides. That's where I came up with the 10-foot interiors in the first place. The cities that are, this is maybe a good point to get to Quinn had asked about. Where are you there?

Yes, I'm here.

Awesome. So Quinn, you had asked about other cities and getting some information from them. And Jen's question kind of goes to that. So I'm going to take a second to go through some numbers, if that's okay.

That would be really great. Thank you.

We haven't heard back from everybody we reached out to. It turns out that planners are notoriously bad at returning phone calls. I don't know if you knew this. Oh, I know. I had no idea. Turned mine waiting for a couple of cities to contact us back with some numbers, but. Just for a, I'm going to start with the 1 to talk about. The setbacks, so in Murray, for example. 10 foot rear setbacks, 10 foot side setbacks, 20 foot corner side setbacks. Salt Lake, and they have with those setbacks, they've got a total of 9 units right now. detached units.

How long have they had that?

It has been more difficult until recently, until 2019. That's as of 2019 that it went to those setbacks. The Salt Lake City, this is just permit data from 2025 and 2026. They have run 73 units and they've permitted 73 detached accessory dwelling units. Most of those are between 400 and 600 square feet and almost all of them. Yeah, that's the note. Almost all are for garage conversions. Salt Lake City is allowing garage conversions for attached accessory dwelling units right up to property lines. So that's a little different. I'm assuming that accounts for the greater numbers. It's just easier to do. Those setbacks are when you're putting them, not just garage conversions, but they're allowing them over garages as well. So that's one thing. West Jordan allows them at 15-foot rear property line setbacks and 8-foot internals, 20 feet from corner sides. They've got 12 units. Bountiful started doing this in 2008. The code now allows for 8-foot setbacks at the rear and side property lines. They have 27 units. And Salt Lake County, same as Salt Lake City, they've got 20 total units in unincorporated counties, so places like Magnet and Kearns and Immigration Canyon, I suppose. I could keep listing them because I'm a city planner, but I'm going to stop there. And unincorporated Salt Lake County, 20 units. They allow them at five feet from property lines. And one foot from property lines is a garage conversion. They don't have a lot, but, you know, it's unincorporated counties. So those are the numbers we've been able to get so far. So they're kind of all over the place on setbacks. And where you have them at lower setbacks, you do see greater numbers of units. And that kind of makes sense.

So I think my concern is, I did some research into that too, and that way you can came up with generally tracks. Murray was 10 feet from rear and side. Salt Lake was... 10 feet rear. Salt Lake City was 3 feet from side and rear. Colorado Springs was 5 feet rear, side and front. And Portland varied by location. But I think my point is, I feel like this is kind of an outlier. 25 feet is kind of an outlier for me. So I think I would feel more comfortable looking at that again and seeing if we could maybe release some of those. Because I think my ultimate concern is, what does the law say? It says that they need to be reasonably... What is it?

It can't be unreasonably difficult to locate them.

It can't be unreasonably difficult to locate them. So I think we're trying to balance two things. We're trying to balance the privacy of the neighbors with the ability of people to do with their properties what they want in a way that's not unreasonable. So I would argue that 25 feet is probably a little extreme. And the other thing I'm concerned about is the property that... The 30-foot distance between properties. Because that brings up equity issues for me. You don't actually have anything there. You could potentially put something there, but you might never. You might not if you build first. There's just all kinds of issues there. I would rather have us say, look, it needs to be 10 feet from a fence line. And then either way, you're going to be 20 feet between.

Yeah, no matter what, you'd always say about 20, in some cases you might be.

That feels more fair to me.

That would be the result of that. That's a conversation we need to have.

So those are my concerns. Will you remind me again what the Planning Commission recommended?

The current recommendation is 10 feet from interior property lines. That would include rears. Let me go back to the diagram and just do it this way. So the current recommendation would be 10 feet from all property lines that are interior. So the rear and the sides, your ADU would have to be 10 feet from those and at least 20 feet from anybody else's dwelling on their lot. So if they happen to be a side yard up against your property, Rear lot area where you want to put your, you're going to have 10 feet on your side and you have to be 20 feet from there as well. If they happen to be on 5 feet from their property. On your side, stay 20 feet.

That's the current post. Thank you and you need to remember that. That those standards came in, we put that in the staff report because state law doesn't require a setback. State law would would allow you to go right to the property line. However, internally as staff, we thought. Don't do that. Absolutely do not go below TAN on any of these. Doesn't mean you shouldn't go higher or couldn't go higher depending on balancing those equities, but we felt it important to make sure that the Planning Commission and Council knew we just don't think you should go below TAN at all.

Thank you. Well, when I attended the Planning Commission meeting where they went over this ordinance, there were some discussions that were being had. And it was interesting when I mentioned about impact on surrounding properties, several of them were like, oh, we didn't think of that. So what they designed was property specific without looking at impact on the surrounding neighbors. And when that was pointed out, I felt like in that meeting that there was some indication of we missed that.

I have two other thoughts on this. One, you and I had talked about setbacks that might be different in the rear setback for properties that about residential.

Yeah, for commercial.

Or like there's a school behind you or there's a park behind you or there's a Murdoch Trail behind you. I mean, like that's, I think having the, I mean, all the way up to the property line for me, like that's not going to impact anybody. And I think that those property owners deserve to do that.

That's a good point. Non-residential properties or unused open space properties, park space, that kind of thing.

But it does impact the neighbor next door. There may not be someone behind, but if I have a neighbor who has filled their backyard with a shoe, that impacts me and my quality of life.

Well, and that's how the side setbacks would impact that.

So the rear setback, I think, could be different, while the side setbacks could be the same. I think if you're filling your backyard with a dwelling, I'm talking about kind of a little different impact there.

Well, certainly it would still be limited by size and a number of other factors as well. I don't think that would give them license to build the whole fence line in some giant building. I think it would just be closer to that than maybe someone else who has a neighbor behind them.

But still, if I'm in my house, I mean, I have that right now, but the home's being built behind me, right? I'm in my house. I have this setback. I can see over here because my neighbor has the same setback. If my neighbor fills their backyard with a 20-foot tall building, that is then impinging on my expectation of the zoning that was in place when I moved in and built my house. We're now increasing, we're now decreasing my sight lines, increasing, and this isn't even, you can't build behind me, you know, NIMBY stuff. This is just normal expectation from an R8 housing development. That's kind of the way I'm looking at it, I guess, is there's not just the rear, but there's side impacts too that can affect the quality of life of the people living on either side of someone who fills their backyard with a attached ADU. In other words, another dwelling, really.

So I just want to make sure I understand. So what you're saying is the rear setback impacts the side neighbors, even if the side setbacks remain the same. It's the rear and back. OK. Make sure I understood. Thank you.

My other point was, and I don't know how to reconcile this in my head, but you have this house can be eight foot setbacks. So we're saying, well, your ADU can't be, I mean, 10 or 20 or whatever, 30 feet from the other property line. But I could extend my house and I could go eight feet for forever. And there's just this sort of inconsistency between them. I could build a giant house and it could be two stories. It could be as tall as I want and only eight feet. But the ADU can only be, you know, there's just a little bit of.

I hear what you're saying. So like, yeah, the house can be eight feet off, but the ADU can't. The ADU has to be, the accessory dwelling has to be further from my house. Your actual dwelling has to be.

Sure. And I, you know, maybe that's something we just sort of live with, but I think I would like to see a little bit more consistency.

I think that's because the ADU is subordinate to the home. And I'm just going to use my neighborhood as an example, very modest neighborhood. We all built our homes 35, 40 years ago, right? I have had several neighbors that have now expanded their footprint, their homes, because they can afford, they want a little more room now. So I think the fact that the reason the footprint for the home means, I don't know what the right word is, dominant, superior, whatever, is for whoever into that home, whoever builds that home, they will always have opportunity for that footprint. And it will never be impinged upon by a dwelling built next door. So it's kind of preserving their any landowners true opportunity. That's the kind of the way I feel like you're presenting it. And that's

I think a key thing to- Well, and I just wonder if we're incentivizing something we don't intend to. Are we incentivizing people to build more and closer to the fence line by keeping that rule rather than saying, okay, you can have a little bit more flexibility, but the impact isn't going to be quite as big if you build attached to you.

I need to say that one more time.

Well, so I wonder if by keeping the setback rules more strict, I wonder if we're incentivizing people to build more onto their houses and build bigger.

I would just build an attached.

So you could go up higher and farther and impact the neighbor is going to be greater than if we just let them build a smaller.

But it would still be protected. Their expectation of the zoning in place when they, like my next door neighbor, I know he's never going to go bigger, that footprint. because he has the same setbacks from the property line, those are preserved. And whoever moves in, whoever does it, that's an expectation that is always, you know, I can always have confidence in. So you want to add and put an ADU in there instead of adding a family room on the back of your house, that's your choice. As long as you stay in that same footprint, I really can't say anything about it. I mean, I can be upset or whatever, you know, But it's really not my call because you still preserved the integrity of the zoning that was in place when those homes. That's kind of my. I guess I mean, I see what you're saying, but I think. I guess I'm looking more long term for whoever ends up living in the home and the next door neighbor who lives next to the home that it's just going to stay equal and fair. into the decades forward, you know, because everyone can rely on that.

I think there's also the expectation that if I got my home in a single-family home neighborhood, I expect it to do that. And so that de-touch unit should be as unobtrusive as possible for that single-family home neighborhood. That's part of it for me.

I think you answered all the questions.

I have a question that's a little bit down the road. So that's really nice to be able to have that template to put over a lot. So if someone wants to consider doing this, they come to you or you have something online that they can say, okay, if I wanted to do this, these are my parameters.

It would be cool if we could make it a tool so they could use it on their lot. I'm not sure we could do that because I don't know the technology well enough, but we could certainly do it and see if it would work or not. Neat if there was a way for them to to use what we use to do us produce these.

Whatever the council ends up deciding, I would envision we would have something like that that graphically reflects how the ordinance works on our website. So somebody could. Look at it and get a rough idea. And again, every lot's a little different. Sometimes the house isn't as 30 feet deep. Sometimes it's 35 feet deep. Sometimes they're at 25 feet. Sometimes they're at 30. So it moves around a little bit.

Like an info sheet we would definitely have put online and things like that.

Yeah.

And we take those kind of calls a lot already. Not about detached ADUs because right now we're just saying you have to wait and see. Yeah. We do that a lot with accessory like sheds and garages. The other thing that comes up is...

I appreciate this conversation. Go ahead. I appreciate the graphic.

That's Emma. Thank you, Emma, if you're watching.

Because it helps me visualize this. I appreciate Council Member Millett, what you're saying, and the suggestions that have come to create this has helped me better understand. I have some concerns about the size of these setbacks. One of the reasons is I don't want... As a state has mandated that we allow ADUs on 11,000 square foot lots, I don't want to be construed as somebody trying to make it unreasonably difficult to locate to where we would be used as an example of being unreasonably difficult to locate. That one looked like one of those little cat tunnels. Oh, yeah. just to whatever, but I also recognize that we don't have to allow a reasonable... Every 11,000 plus square foot lot doesn't have to... All fit this either.

That's it. It's inevitable. We lost it. It's just whatever we wrote.

I need I need to think about particularly the, the ones that I understand the rear yard. I'm just thinking that 30 feet from the buildable area on each side. And I, and I get that because some of those, some of those examples you used are alarming. And I would not want that, but. This is a good discussion to try and figure out a balance.

I listened to ULCT's DADU discussion, or they had a little webinar about that. And I don't think that that setback would be construed as unreasonable by their definition. So if you haven't watched that, I would encourage you to go watch that because they really do break down what they feel like would be construed as reasonable and unreasonable in those situations. And my interpretation of that is that this would not be construed as unreasonable. And again, just because you have an 11,000 square foot lot does not mean that you are therefore have the right to have entitled to it. Yeah, there's not some right that's inherent in having that size of lot that you could then have this. There are limitations on what that looks like. And we are pressed with the responsibility of determining what that looks like to make sure that we're not infringing on other people's property rights and the neighborhood feel and all of that. And a lot of what they talked about in that was that to maintain the character of a single-family home neighborhood is okay. That's part of what they're doing. The ADUs should not change that for people.

I'll go back. I had to step away from it partway through, so I'll go back and watch the whole thing again. So thank you.

Oh, so just any other questions about the backs or. Kind of how that might work.

I would almost just like, you gave us these unit numbers. I mean, they really don't help me unless I know what percentage they are of homes like city 73, but they have so many more. Houses, right? So, and I'm just, to me, when I look at these numbers that you gave us, it's not like county's huge in geographic area. It actually just makes me think this is a great tool for some people, but this is probably not the most desirable. Probably have more interior ADU opportunities.

Probably have more interior ADUs than both.

Yeah. So, you know, I just feel like we're... The people who are going to want to do it are going to do it because they can and they're otherwise they're going to be, they're going to be more more.

They're always in every city. In most cases, there's going to be more opportunity for people to do interior ideas. I think that's. That's verifiable. It's more cost effective sometimes. I guess there are times when it wouldn't be, but it's generally been more cost effective. It's a lot. You don't have to rerun the utilities. You don't have to run more. It's expensive to trench the utility lines. So the costs skyrocket pretty quick on utilities. Undetached, but some things about that are changing. I think. But I think those numbers actually kind of bear that out. City is a big place that we're doing for a lot longer and 73 seems like a big number until you take it in that context. It's still the other thing that happens is if, if you have a really narrow lot, a small lot, you're trying to make things fit. We have these setbacks and this is true of everything, not just. detached accessory dwelling units, but you're putting up a shed, you're putting up a garage, and you want to put it further toward your property line, this doesn't even take into account the easements that are probably there. There's probably a seven or an eight or a 10-foot easement that you may have to get. If we're allowing it, even if we allow you to go in there, you have to get it vacated or get a waiver from all the utility companies. If one of those utility companies won't vacate or won't waive, you don't build in that area. Right. Don't require, so that's out there too and that might kill some projects. Otherwise that people are I'm going to add on to my garage. It's back here. It's only a foot off. Well, the garage is nonconforming because it's built in. We'll let us give a new permit to put the that's going to happen to anybody. He's been sir. Unless you're an engineer in your lifetime.

Necessary, so you say.

Jared, how, how. And quality assurance will take the total amount of possible products. We'd say we'll take a random sample of a square root of that. And then that was a representative sample that would help you figure out what was the likely outcome if applied to everything. So maybe we could Take a bigger random sample. So, if if there's a total of 5,000, 11,000, plus square foot, single family. Lots in the city, the square root of that number. Random amount of 1. Why these setbacks and then and see if it is a. Does that does that mean a majority of those wouldn't be able to do a detached or. Minority.

No restricted and I don't know that I need you to do that to me. This that that's data is great. Right? But to give you the. The charge to go do that. I, I don't know that that's the key. Determinant, maybe other council members feel differently, but I kind of hate offloading that to you guys. I don't see that as relevant data to the extent that I can use it.

I would have to teach the planners what a square root is first.

I mean, data's great, but how do you apply it, right? How does it affect... It's important, but it's one of several things that we're looking at, decision points.

It's also something that we could do if, not that I'm obsessed with deadlines, my whole life is deadlines. It's also something that we could do if something is passed and then we're concerned that it was overly restrictive or not restrictive enough or if it made it too available, you know what I mean? Yeah, but it's something we could do. I could do a T-square on this, right?

That's another great point. We have to come up with something by August or October 1st. That's what we're charged with by the state. It doesn't mean that we can't revisit this and change things later. Loosening things up is a lot easier than reeling them back in. So I think that there is some prudence in starting with maybe a tighter plan ordinance to begin with and then as we see the practical implications of it, we can decide what changes would need to happen. We have that ability.

And as an example of that, recently we worked and redefined the building envelope. that you can build heights. You know, when we had this situation where people have built the envelope was their home. And that didn't seem to be good. So we came up with a new way of looking at the envelope. And I can tell you, it was our best estimate and best guess. We didn't go through every single property and try and look at it, what they could do. But what we're doing is people come in, and if an issue comes up, we work through it. Or if we run into something that, okay, we didn't anticipate this, what we would do is come back to the council. and say, okay, this is the ordinance we passed. It was our best estimate of what happened. We now run into this situation, and property owners in this, trying to build this, did we mean to capture and stop this from happening? And if we did, great, we leave the ordinance alone. And if we didn't, then we can tweak the ordinance. And there's some simple tweaks that we could do with that. But an ordinance like this, if you're asking me and Jared, is this going to be the best ordinance ever written on this? And it will never need to be amended. Well, yeah. Well, no, it won't. Because it never is. And as we get experience applying it in the real world, we may run across some things like, yeah, we're capturing things that. Nobody really thought that was a problem. Or it may be, yeah, that's exactly what we wanted to stop from happening. This would be a big impact. So all of our ordinances, as we... have real life experience with them. We'll come back to you and update you on it. And like the building height or the building envelope one and this one, as we go on, you know, we could just schedule out six months, nine months from enactment. We would come back and give you an update on how this ordinance is actually working. So you actually know what the effect is that it's having on the community.

Thank you.

Announce members, any other questions? I'd say you've still got 20 minutes, 25 minutes.

I've got two other categories to go through.

All right.

Because we did talk about as well in the previous meeting, we talked about this. And again, we kind of... in the interest of making the deadlines work, we spitballed a lot of these suggestions. So looking at heights, we had originally said, Oh, my gosh, I can't, as I'm sitting here, remember what we had allowed before. I can't remember. I apologize. This is just, this was a diagram that Emma did for us to show really simply and relatively what 14 feet would look like next to a typical home. This is a 30-foot tall home that we could allow. And a home on an adjacent lot, this is showing that 25-foot rear setback, et cetera. So this is where it would live, an ADU, in the kind of setbacks that we're talking about here. And with respect to this actually doesn't show the 25 feet on the property. Sorry. It's different. This was for before, but. This is the kind of mass you'd be looking at. This is a flat roof at 12 feet. Looking at the kinds of things at a graded. Graded height allowance, so the minimum setbacks that we require. say something like and these are again just kind of spitball numbers a flat roof could have 12 feet of allowable height at the setback that's required the minimum and then give it a one for one increase as it gets further into the tree itself up to 16 feet for the flat roof and then pitch roofs 14 feet at the minimums and up to 18 feet to get more on the interior of the lot we've been um higher than that on the previous. The current proposal is greater than that. I wish I'd left the slide that showed that and I took it out at the last minute. I'm thinking so.

It would be shorter. Do you want to know what the current one is? It's 20 feet for pitched and 14 for flat. Okay. There you go.

And no increases, right? That's just straight.

Okay.

This would be, and these are again just numbers. Some of it is related to just ceiling heights that people like to use. 12 foot would accommodate for flat roofs. Let me just show you a picture. 12 feet would easily accommodate a flat roof. This is a converted onyx unit. It would accommodate these. They're technically flat roofs under our definition of 312. So this one is you can see the interior of this unit pretty well. It's nice. Nice high ceiling. This is a unit specifically designed for exhibitionists. There's no shades on it.

And what Jared's talking about is one of the big pushes for patch Or Ponex, they're shipping containers. Aren't you right? Shipping modules, and you bring them in, and you can buy some on Amazon now. I think that's the same structure. I'm looking at it.

It looks like it's the same structure.

It's the daytime version. Yeah. It looks taller in the dark, doesn't it?

It's intermingled.

Dark is magical. But it would accommodate those kinds of units.

Can I ask you something? And maybe I'll know if Chief, if you know this. Someone today told me that those structures are very questionably in their safety. Questionable in their safety for fire codes and things like that. That might be something in our list six months from now or a year from now to look at is I would like to get some feedback. I don't necessarily want to do that because of the deadline, but I think that would be something we might want to look into.

They would have to meet all the international residential code, international fire code.

They couldn't not be safe. Oh, really? They wouldn't be allowed. They would have to meet the fire code to be habitable.

Are there different levels of fire code? this person made it sound like i would never stay a night in one of those food for your house would be what would be required for this same code and we and we that's written in the ordinance too it has to be those codes so it might just be quality of materials

Sure. So that the 18 foot for pitched roofs, uh, that would accommodate something like the, that would let you build a tall enough wall, like a 12 foot wall inside. So you could have a loft that was usable because there are rules about how you have to be able to stand up and stuff. You'd need a pitched roof to do for flat roofs to go and allow, um, kind of loft space would be really difficult. Even 16 would be the bare minimum and that might not work either. So.

How do these heights compare to what other cities are doing?

I don't have a lot of data on the heights for cities. Most of them are like they're related to their accessory structure code, so they're going to be 18 or 20. And a couple of them have like 12-foot heights. Again, that's kind of a ramp. Most of them are 18 to 20.

Why would a flat roof minimum be different than the roof?

Because of the massing with the flat roof, I guess, I don't know. That's a good question. It may not be relevant with respect to these structures. That may not be relevant. I worry about the flat roofs, or we're worried about the height of flat roofs with the building envelope coordinates that we were just talking about. That may not be as relevant here. Do you have flat roofs on the brain? No.

I'm just a little concerned, because I also did research on what other cities are doing. And I went out and looked and measured, brought my tape measure out and said, how tall is this? 12 is like the very lowest of low you can maybe begin to agree with. And I think it's just almost too low. Maybe another couple of feet, just to give a little bit of latitude. Because by the time you get the roof insulation and all the things, it's... Yeah, you don't want the walls to be...

The gold walls now are going to be at least eight feet in a house, and they're going to be kind of a new construction. So another foot and a half of structure would get you that flat roof at 12.

Yes, and I think that would be an outlier for most of the ordinances I saw. They were significantly higher, like 20. And I'm not advocating for 20.

I got you. I think most of them are based on, they've just looked at their accessory structures in general, like garages and sheds, and said, we allow up to 18 feet or 20 feet. Just use that code.

So it doesn't stand out on the property.

Right. You're trying to, again, it's got to be, it ought to be, and the other thing is, yeah, non-polar to the primary dwellings.

I don't want mine to look like one of those fire training covers. Massive training. It's a good question.

Eat a lot.

We do. We do too.

Didn't you say then you could have like a nine foot ceilings? Another three foot for insulation.

You only need a foot and a half? Isolation so 10 foot, you could do it.

I think 1 of the other reasons that I look at it this way and said, you know. Lower for the flat worth it for the picture is because we're not allowing in this code. I didn't leave it written in here, but the code isn't allowing that. We've proposed is not allowing for 2nd stories only lofts. So, I was trying to get with 16 feet, at least a loft or a small loft for a flat roof and 18 to allow a small situation like this. but yeah you might that's what i'm thinking is there's no second story so i'm not sure why a flat roof needs to be 18 feet or something in the you know not sure why a flat roof structure needs to have people ceilings or whatever since we don't allow the second stories but it could allow better lofts to that point i'm sure that that matters really something you guys have to decide I know why it mattered for us essentially envelope hybrid houses. I just kind of transferred that thinking to this. And it may not be relevant for these. I don't know. That's a good question.

So I have a question on for the flat roof when there is the small pitch to it. Do we have that the pitch of that has to be towards the I worry about the runoff.

It's so far off the property line anyway. Potentially.

It depends on how the roof is paved. Have they paved up any of those things?

We didn't talk about orientation of the roof.

To her point, the hardscape could be a concern. If they have hardscape in the eight-foot setback, and you do the grade, I guess we need to think about that, because that could flood the neighbor.

And we do this with... We would probably review that as... I can look at what we've written in our accessory structure code. I don't think we have anything about that. But with building permits, we always look at drainage. You have to maintain your drainage on your own property regardless of whatever we wrote here. We have to deal with that. And there's lots of cases where people have to install kind of a waterway at the edge of their property because they paved right up to the sides. We would look at that kind of thing.

And I guess that would be the fix, right? To put the herb so it dissipates the water.

And with residential lots, this is a good point. And we could talk for an hour about this. We won't, but we could.

You've got ten minutes.

Ten minutes, and I'll be... And we're going to eat our dinner. I'm not making a prophecy. But with residential lots, the thinking is always drainage is really complicated on commercial lots where a lot of the lot is pavement or rooftop or whatever. On residential lots, the thinking is always that everything just it's a lot of lawn and then the driveway is all sloped to the street. So everything in the building code is saying that water has to go away from the house and then down toward the street. the more things that take up that pervious surface, then make it impervious in the backyard or the front yard, what have you, then the more that drainage is not like typical old-style thinking, you start to worry about it. So we don't have in our code a coverage requirement for impervious surface for residential properties. We could. We probably should. As lots get smaller and homes get bigger, some of these homes are gigantic, and as that box... fills up, the more of that box on new properties, how that box gets filled up, that's just more runoff and less lawn absorbing that water. And then you have less likelihood that all that drains out to the front. All of that is just to say that when you look at a property, Let's just take this house, for example, in this picture, because randomly here it is. There's plenty of lawn absorbing water, and this driveway is sloping down to that street. Everything is supposed to do that. We put an ADU in the backyard because they put a foundation here because it meets our requirements, whatever. Part of its process will be to look at that and say that's got to drain out toward the front, too. Or it's got to drain into the lawn so that it can percolate. Draining onto hard surface. That should all be sloping, theoretically, up toward the front and out to the street. And probably there are no violations of that anywhere in the city. I'm sure it's all working perfectly.

Well, we're all gun-shy, right? From that storm two years ago, I had two, three houses flooded. They flooded three feet in the walls.

It's something we should look at. And a lot of communities have impervious surface lot coverage limit that you can't go above a certain percentage. And so you have to have spaces for that type of thing. But Orem does not have such a...

But don't we, isn't our landscaping, minimum landscaping requirement kind of indirectly...

But is that only in the front yard or the back?

That's for the front yard, but in the rear yard, you know, one of the things that we haven't talked about yet, and I don't know what to do with it, is people taking up the backyard and putting in concrete for parking. Because now I can drive into the back or something like that. Our sport courts and pickleball and lots of things.

Yeah, it's something that has, it's on our radar. But I think we can, in the immediate now, I think we can deal with the drainage through the building permits, and we would. We'd like more tools in the future, though, as it goes on.

Jared, can you, when you're addressing these heights, can you help us know what process we come to to determine whether a height is good, adequate, sufficient? Because, I mean, I arbitrarily could be like, you know, 10 feet sounds great, but, like, what does that actually mean? Has a builder weighed in on this? Are there standards that weigh in on this? Like, what tells us if that's reasonable or not reasonable?

Just talking to builders about what works and looking at home plans and things, that's all I've done.

We have builders that have said 12-foot minimum is reasonable.

I have builders that have said that to me personally. Online builders have told me.

I know a lot of online people.

And our experience with building inspection and plan checking. As residential homes come in and looking at them, what are the trends for heights? Walls, you know, and it's anywhere from 8 feet to 10 feet now, the wall, so that you can have a vaulted ceiling or 10 feet. If it's not vaulted, most homes you go into now, you know, you're looking at 10-foot ceilings. That's kind of the style. which ironically from 100 years ago is actually smaller than they were 100 years ago.

There are some pretty tall walls anymore on the interior. So we're looking at 10 is kind of the baseline.

What's the third thing? We're stopping you again.

Yeah, I'm sorry. The third thing is overall size. And it's not a – I don't have any data for you other than as we look at the numbers from – so we had proposed – 850 to 850 to 1,000. And those footprints looked bigger in real life on those plans that we laid out than we had kind of envisioned them. Talking with the Planning Commission last week as well, just letting them know kind of where we were in the process. And then looking at some of the units that are out there, there are a lot of smaller units, and they seem to be pretty popular. The most popular of these contexts is the 400 model. That's 400 square feet. That's pretty popular. It's affordable. Even that one's $108,000 without ground market stuff. So they get expensive as they get bigger, especially stick building them. Just as an example, in West Jordan, there are 12 total units, and 10 of those 12 total units right now are under 1,000 square feet. Four of them are 800s, and then they go 700s down to four. I don't know that we need to go as high as that 1,000 square feet. If people feel more comfortable about getting the ordinance done, I don't think we'd be hurting anybody by reducing the sizes that we propose.

What size do you think?

It's hard to say. There are plenty of 300 square foot units. There are lots of 400 square foot units. There's probably not, as I look at, if these are the kinds of setbacks that we're going to be looking at, most of these would not need to accommodate more than 300 and 400 square feet. 650 square feet might start to feel big for an ADU. 800 is certainly plenty big. I don't think there's any need to go into the thousands.

Yeah.

If I could share an example, my first home in Orem was 800 square feet on the main floor. I had two bedrooms, a bathroom, a front room, and a narrow kitchen.

So 800 feet is a pretty good size.

I mean, it works, yeah.

So we could significantly reduce this. And I'm not seeing a whole bunch of ADUs that are larger in just the sort of limited spotty looking at it that we've done. We're not going to be hurting anything if we reduce that size. How does everybody feel about that?

I don't know that they're designed to be really big. I think for a mother-in-law or for a young married couple.

Yeah, we're not trying to house me and my six kids. I think my first house was like four. Yeah, so I'll probably start looking at bringing those sizes down. We'll do that.

So, we've got looking at one of our agenda items coming this this evening and we've got 2 more city council before this ordinance needs to be. It's up to show. And so, just so, you know, we have meeting 2 meetings in September, the 8th and the 22nd. So, are we going to work? Is this going to be another on the work session on the 10th as well?

Up to you, I can bring back. I need to. We need to corral you in on the setbacks a little. Does setbacks feel like we're, I think we're probably going to be okay on heights as a group.

I'm struggling with the size of those setbacks a bit. Not a great reduction, but a reduction from that. I understand and respect where brothers are coming from.

Okay. Just so you know. But the specificity, the 25 foot for the rear or the 30? The 30 foot. The 30 is bothering you from the sides. I'm feeling like the 25 to the rear is bothering you.

The 30 is bothering me and the 25. Oh, both.

Okay.

Council members, other feedback? Yeah, where's the rest of you?

So I'm the 30 from the side I would be concerned with. I like the 8 feet or 10 feet in, the 10 feet in sides.

If this rear lot setback that we're proposing, if we kept the 10s on the interiors, and if we dropped the 30 from the sides, but kept the 20... Sorry, this is going to sound complicated. I'll be... If we dropped the 30 feet from the buildable area, but kept at least 20 feet from anybody else's home, existing home or whatever, and then gave an exception to people that, let's say I own this home, somebody builds their ADU right here, and now when I put my addition on that I want to build by right, I can't because I'm going to be closer to their ADU than I'm supposed to be. If we wrote in an exception so they weren't penalized by that proximity, that'd be... Then you're creating legal nonconformity.

I don't think that's good planning specifically.

We'd be trying to avoid creating legal nonconforming by doing that.

No, because you're then you have an ad that's too close to a house. If they go and they build on the house was their 1st.

Well, except that the exception, it wouldn't technically be legal nonconforming because the exception would make it allow.

So it wasn't well, but yeah. We're giving them an exception.

Right. Right. That's what I'm saying is if it to protect the rights of a person to build to their line without impinging. And in most cases, it won't. Most cases, the 20 foot separation and 10 feet on the interior, keep them outside of where that buildable line is. But there are cases where it wouldn't. So that's got to be. I'll keep thinking about that.

And that's why I like the simplicity of that is if you get 10 feet on both sides, then feet. No matter what. It's simple.

Is when you have a not side by side houses, the cul-de-sacs, the rear is on that side. So you may have 10 on one, but then you're up to the rear of another person. So when that person had an expectation of the house behind them being 25 feet, they now have something 10 feet.

Also, when you have the corner house and one's oriented facing this way and then the next house is oriented facing this way and one's a side yard and one's a... I don't know. It gets complicated.

Could you do projections for that?

I'll try. I'll come up with something. Look at that. I'll keep the 20-foot separation and see if we can work some way of making sure that there'll always be at least 20 feet between somebody's house and then maybe you want another lot. That we can do without That's what we're looking at today. What we can do. This rear setback, if the 25 is too much, we can, I just need to know if we should reduce that all the way to 10 like we have it or if we need to increase it a little bit. There are some 20s out there, Jim, you've looked at some others. There's some 20s and 15s. And if there is a difference in interiors, it's usually for the rear. Like the interiors will be 10 all around and the rear will be 15 or something like that. Um, or they'll just be the same.

Yeah, the 30 was a little bit much on the rear. I don't think a lot of change, but possibly a 20 because of. the buildable, and then you'd still be a long ways away from anybody else. In the case of this one, a lot of them have on a current home already that has some kind of an awning for a little patio or something. They already have that 10 feet basically anyway, so that doesn't bother me.

If this were 25, for example, if this 25 were at 20 foot setback, it would open that area up a lot more. My feet can make a big difference.

That's all I'm saying. That's my thoughts.

Are you guys more comfortable 20 then? I would be more comfortable with 15.

We can.

Completely against that. Quinn, do you have thoughts on this, setbacks?

I do. I think this is a productive discussion. Thanks, Jared, for showing those visuals as well. When you showed the visuals, I did have concerns that we were really constraining space for the sample of lots that you had. I do think that what you showed us was the setbacks were too large. I'm also very sympathetic to Lene's desire to protect the neighbors. And I think it's just a balance. I think if we aim for 20 feet between buildings, maybe 15 to 20 feet in terms of the rear setback, I would be comfortable.

So we're going back to the 20 from a dwelling instead of using property lines? Yes.

instead of 20 from a dwelling, the property lines are still there, 20 from a dwelling instead of going 30 feet off of the buildable, the build-to line. I will point out this just to make everybody feel better as we're not, if we're not reducing a long way from 25, if we're going to 20 or to 15, This was not a lot that we had done originally. It's not a sample that we pulled originally. It didn't take a lot to find this one. And you can see the ones around it would be similar in their allowances. So the ones that we had pulled randomly before, yeah, they looked a little more restricted. But I had Emma pull two more that it wasn't hard to find two lots that made it pretty simple to do. So there's going to be lots out there. It'll stay fairly open, I think, at 20 or 15 feet for a setback. Not a big deal. But, you know, again, it's got to be something that can be acceptable to everybody.

Unintended consequences. Basically, all you're doing is you're increasing density without having it go through the city council.

It's, yeah, but ADUs do increase the density.

Disordinate, you're right. In that, disordinance would be ever increasing the density.

Yeah, so if it's something like that, how big of a limiting the ADUs then to 850 max?

We could even live with them lower than that. If the goal is to keep them unobtrusive, then maybe that's the better way.

For me, there's two things here. For me, it's the unobtrusive because I saw there are some municipalities that are talking about once they get this passed, then they... get a lot that they can subdivide and then you have a house behind a house so you you the unintended consequence is i could have double the density on both sides of me my neighbors without my having any control or any ability to to do that that and then also the um protections of the expectation of where you know unobtrusive and then my expectation of the setbacks in my neighborhood being consistent and fair to everyone, every house on the block.

And I consider reducing the size, you know, saying like 850 max, because I don't think the goal is to put more people there. It's just giving more flexibility where to put it.

Let's definitely reduce the size allowance and pull that back far enough that the setbacks feel more comfortable.

Once again, the big key is the impact on the neighbor. And this is the thing I've said. This is kind of what's in my craw, right? And you guys all know this, but You know, I don't want it close to my house. I'm going to put it in the farthest corner possible. Then my neighbor feels the impact and not me. To me, that's just not fair to do that. You know, and if we're facilitating that by creating this setback from a dwelling instead of from a property line, if we're not, you know, reverencing and maintaining the property rights of the property lines, we're setting up an opportunity impinging upon other people's property rights. Privacy.

It's a good point. And that's still the goal is to make this not violate state code requirements, but also keep those existing people around and keep the character of the neighborhood very residential. So looking at the height as a smaller allowance at the fair setback and getting bigger as you go, incentivize people to go further in. And then if we have greater setback for the rear, that'll help. And if we keep that 20-foot separation from anybody else's home. We'll take a stab at it for the next meeting.

I just don't agree with the 20-foot separation from a home. I think we should be using property lines for our metric. I don't know why we're using the property. We'll do both. Someone else's. The next journey.

Maybe this or whatever is greater.

Yeah, it's the greater of the two. The 20 feet from anybody else's home is a fail-safe in case the 10 feet on an interior or the 15 feet on a rear does not get you. 20 case somebody has an existing condition. It's different than normal. The normal situation, like Chris was saying, would be 20 feet no matter what. There are those cases where less than the 20 foot building to building separation instead of just property lines is a failsafe.

I don't think I would want the rear setback to be any less than 20.

Let me get some graphics done at 20 and 50. See what that looks like.

Nobody wants 25. Nobody wants to keep the setbacks that we have in place right now in our area. Who wants to keep the 25? I want to keep the 25.

Maybe I'd like to see 20 from the property line.

I just think of my kids playing in the backyard and there's now a house right there in the neighbor's yard. That's... It just doesn't feel great. I wouldn't like that as a parent. So I would rather it be closer to the house of the property that it's on than...

I agree with that completely. I'm just saying that I feel like a 20-foot property line is a good distance. Let me try to look at both sides of the pancake here. But I agree completely that we want to keep it as close to the home.

The impact should be on the home on which the property resides, not on the surrounding home. And the more we move that setback, the more we're pushing that on the neighbors. And if that were me living there, now I now have people living in that property, in that DADU behind my house. That feels a lot more obtrusive to me and my kids playing in the backyard, right? So that's the thing that I don't want to see happen.

Could you do a combination of 20-25 step back coordinated with how close it is to the home?

Coordinated with how close.

Yeah. So you can, you, you have to be within anything of your house. If you. If your rear setback. So in other words, I'm trying to say, can we get them to have the impact be next to their house?

Scooch them up. Yeah.

Closer.

Yeah. Instead of next.

Right in the river. For the neighbors, keep it close to you. Yeah. Yeah. Most of the internal.

Because that kind of helps me with this impact on the neighbors issue.

I mean, I look at my backyard and I think I'm probably, my backdoor neighbor is probably 20 feet. And, you know, it's...

I think you're 25.

I honestly never thought about it. But, you know, as I think of myself coming out and saying, hey, neighbor, you know, it's not that far, but it's far enough. I don't feel... And I'm sure she would say something completely different. She'd say, those Lamsons are so good.

You were 100 feet away.

Can I get that?

All right. Do you have the direction? Do you feel comfortable?

I have enough to get to the next meeting.

Okay. You want to talk about this again?

No problem. Thank you. No, thank you all very much. I appreciate it. It's very helpful.

All right. Dinner's ready. I've asked Council Member Lampson if he would offer a blessing on the table.

Our Father in heaven, we humbly bow our heads in humility and gratitude before thee this evening. We're so grateful, Heavenly Father, for the many blessings that we enjoy each and every day because of thy greatness and thy glory. We're especially grateful, Heavenly Father, to live in this community, and we're grateful to be able to serve in the various capacities that we do and pray that thou would Bless those in our community who are hurting at this time or who are going through personal struggles. We pray that that would bless them and comfort them and help us to know as neighbors how we can lift and share their burdens. We are grateful this evening to have your Father for this meal and pray that that would bless it. We pray that we would use it to strengthen nourishment, to do good. And again, we just want to express our gratitude for all of the blessings that we share. and we say these things in the name of Jesus Christ, amen. Amen.

And before we go to Mr. McGinn in his presentation, I'm going to turn the time over to Mr. Carlisle here for just a couple of minutes.

I know this is unusual and some of you have seen me here, but I want to give some gratitude. May 1st, I had wide bypass open heart surgery and chased my whole life. I was in the hospital for about eight days. I came home for three days. I started losing consciousness, getting really sick. My wife and daughter are saying, all the paramedics, watch what you watch. Long story short, two minutes later, paramedics were at my door. I lived between Mountain Blue High School and Lake Ridge Junior High. All I remember, they came downstairs, Mr. Carl, Mr. Carl, in the paramedics vehicle. Next day, I was in ICU. Evidently, what got me here so fast down to Utah Valley, Orem City Paramedics. And after about an hour, doctors say he's not going to make it. Because they got me quickly. They worked on me. I did make it. A lot of this time is because Orem City Paramedics. I don't want to hear anyone on my thing about how we shouldn't tell the police or whatever. There's a lot of that going on. So I thank you very, very much for that and some blessings and prayers. Quick thing, I'm home about two weeks later. Remember we had rain? We had rain in May. We had rain in May in front of my house. The sewer drops about this far along, you know, the manhole coverage. I call Danny at Orem City, say, hey, we got a problem here. Kids are walking around here. They're going to fall. In about three days, Danny's out, looks at it. In about four or five days, a big city crew, I mean, it's this big. They come, they raise it up. It's beautiful. Then maybe in another four or five days, become an asphalt. So I love Orem City. Appreciate you guys. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.

I'm glad at all. I'm alive. Glad to have you here back at our campus.

Thank you for your time. I appreciate it, Mayor.

All right. Our next item on the agenda is a presentation on the Community Development Code update. 10 minutes.

Hopefully it won't be anywhere near 10 minutes. As you know, Community Development is the department that we have here. However, our code Also, the community development department, development services, little rebranding from development services and rename the department community development. And I think the reason for that was to send the message that we're focusing on the community, the residents who live here, but also developers and businesses. You know, it's developing the community. It's not development services. And it makes it almost sound like we're there for developers and the residents aren't involved. So because of that rebrand, we do technically in the code say a lot of things like the development services department shall do something. And we just need to change all of that to be community development. So it's a massive change. There's well over 400 changes. Individual changes, and we'll have to take some of these to the planning commission because they're in the zoning code. So. It'll go there and we'll just be. Renaming development services and correcting it to what the name of the department is, which is community. So, don't be surprised here in the future when we come back and you go, oh, my gosh, what is this? 400 page document. That's really what it is. And so feel free to read it. But hope, but.

You're going to do red lines, right? Yeah. Okay, thank you.

I'll ask. We'll do red lines. And I have hidden in there somewhere a secret code. And if you call me with that code, you can get ice cream. And no using AI. So just be aware that this is on the horizon to come to you. Just wanted to give you a heads up. We haven't taken it anywhere to Planning Commissioner or anybody yet just to make sure you're aware and feel comfortable with that change. If you're not, we need to redo some signage because you come here and it says community development and that's what we're doing.

That makes sense.

I think it's a great rebrand for us to really send the message. We're trying to build a community, not just provide services for developers.

I agree. All right. Thank you. Our next item is a city council report from Council Member Gale. So I'll turn the time over to you.

All right. Okay, I'm just going to update you on all of my commissions, and there are a few. America 250 is kind of wrapping up, and we are celebrating with lunch with all of our volunteers on that commission next week, actually. That's been fun. The CARE Commission also has wrapped up for most of their things, but we did get some lovely thank you notes from some organizations that participated, and we're looking towards next year to maybe just further solidify how we make this happen rather than getting a little bit arbitrary with some of them. IHC Outreach, we toured along with Crystal and Mayor. We toured the new hospital edition at Orem Community Hospital. They added a new MRI machine, a new fancy MRI machine, and that was really cool. So it's great to have them as a part of our community, and they really give back a lot. And it's a great offering. So if you have an MRI, wait times are shorter, and the time it takes to get in is shorter, so go to Orem Community. The Natural Resources Advisory Commission is doing all kinds of fun things. They're having some community events and education. They're doing an event in October that looks at Utah Lake restoration and education and how there's this Utah Lake Advisory Commission and educating our residents about that. Then October 12th, we're going to have a leaf-themed greenhouse event in our new greenhouse, which is the meeting of arts and crafts with leaves. And then we're having a library seed swap in February. ready to do their garden. So that'll be fun. The tree planting initiative is called Rooted in Orem. That's the name that they decided on. And the goal is 1,000 trees over five years. And we're doing the initial distribution or sale of about 50 trees is in early September. So they've ordered them, and they're going to be distributing out of deep distance to residents who want them. It'll be fun. And other things, we're looking at doing a recycling tour of the facility and then helping with the farmer's market bike valet. So they're active and busy doing great and fun things. And Brad and Caitlin have been, so they're doing a great job. Utopia passed a budget just recently that will allow the cities to get even more money. So I think we're about $95,000 more in the fiscal year. Because they also were able to hire several employees to help keep the service. And they are currently, we just got a check from them from about. The number? What's the number? It was in June. It was $1,098,950. Does that sound right?

I'll drag and say 1.1. Yes.

Oh, 1.1. Okay. And they are adding about 640 new subscribers every month. So that's good for us and helps the whole of us be successful. So that's good. And then the Utah Valley University slash Orem Business Resource Center. We had a great meeting with Ryan and Garrett, our new person. We met with Steve, Josh Barlow, who is the new director of the Orem Business Resource Center and Seth Jensen, who is the director of the entrepreneurship at Utah Valley University, and he's now responsible for that center. I mean, who is the other? Do you remember the lady? Was she responsible for curriculum at UVU, the business program?

Oh, she's SES number two.

Yeah, we met with her. Anyway, it was a great meeting. We talked about the direction it's going. I feel like there's a lot of new energy there. I feel like Seth, especially with him being responsible for entrepreneurship at UVU, has a really vested interest in making this successful. And our staff is currently working on a new agreement with them. So we'll see as that takes shape over the next little while.

Thank you. Any questions for Jen? Appreciate you representing us. All right. Next item is just quickly reviewing our agenda for today. We have a presentation from the Public Works Advisory Commission. And the presenters are going to be Chris, Shirky, and then Mike Wimpey, who's on the advisory commission. He's the chair. Oh, he's the chair. Okay, great. Then we have a presentation by Chief Sanderson, citizen life-saving. And then we will have some time for personal appearances. And then we have a consent item on our city council meeting schedule, and it's adding... excuse me, a work session only on August 25th. So that will be our next meeting will be the 25th. It'll be work session only. And then on Thursday, August 27th, we'll be having our truth in taxation on that date. And then our scheduled item is, is a resolution appointing to the appointments to the Justice Court nominating commission. Excuse me. And we talked a little bit about that in the work session, earlier in the work session. Financial items and then city manager items. And we adjourn. It looks like we do not have a closed-door meeting this evening. Any questions, anything you want to discuss in here before? Anything with the agenda or the work session?

Yeah, one question. We've seen a few times, I think, lately that we've had people sign people up to speak during the public comment. And I mean, mostly people. And those people are present. I know in the past, we've always had kind of a, you need to be here. You need to sign up for yourself. I mean, you know, maybe they've signed for her husband or something. I feel like, you know, what we've seen happen I'm not sure if we should make that clear that that's really not the way we want. What do you think?

May I also, to address that, would it help to possibly have a member of the city staff verify who you are as you sign up? Would that help?

Yeah, well, and I don't want to be too, you know, I don't want to be too anal about it, but I just felt like we had what, four people, three people. I can't remember that you called up and they weren't here and they weren't here. And then they rushed in. Oh, you missed me. And I'm like, you know, and the other thing would be, I mean, I'd like to discuss that, but then the next thing would be is maybe in a way to make it go a little smoother as we could do what you do, have the name, say the names of who's next, but have them come sit on the front row. So we're not waiting for people to walk up again. I think next, the 27th, we're going to have, a lot of comments. So maybe if we have like seats where people can, you know,

and that's what the mic said regarding the 27th in fact today I talked to Brent about this is that I would like to have have our protocol for that public comment outlined and ready probably before just soon yeah and just because if you're not aware it's a meeting where we're required by law not just to have the comments of people present in the room but we are required to allow online comments so someone can attend virtually, which is fine. It's just that we don't have any protocol for that. One thing as I've asked Brenda to look at it is my intention is not to give everybody three minutes. So we're trying to work out what is the time that's appropriate for someone can feel comfortable sharing their thoughts, but also recognizing that there are going to be many people, I anticipate many people Wanting to give comments. So that's what I've tasked Bren to do is to come up with some ideas for that. But like you said, sitting up front or whatever it is. And also, like I said, I'm comfortable going less than three minutes. And I don't know unless any of you are really wanting to go have three minutes per person. I guess I don't know what number we'll land on, and then discussing at what point do we give out the information about how the public hearing will be run. I would appreciate having that information available so we can give it to the public days before they even show up at the meeting so they understand when they come to the meeting, this is how it's going to be run. So there's a level of expectation.

Would you anticipate something like you'll have five in-person meetings Followed by five online, followed by... Something, just whatever, that's what... Some nature word.

So Brent's getting online. Yeah, some way of doing that. So I don't want to have everybody waiting online and everybody waiting here. It's... Brent gets to do that.

We'll come up with some suggestions on how to organize it. Organize it. With the intent to have it be as efficient as possible.

still you know uh make sure we're well within the law and make we we hear from our residents yeah and regarding the during the meeting yeah i would i can reiterate at the beginning or whether or not you know just reiterate again that they have to be pressed it must be present to win or whatever Must be present. They need to sign their own paper. You sign your own paperwork. Because we are getting, in particular on certain topics, that we're getting people, like someone coming and signing up a bunch of people, and then they're not here, or show up later.

Do we say anything like that on the paper?

I think you do, don't you? They're not supposed to sign up for anything.

but no one's guarding it, so.

Well, but then you as mayor and council, knowing that, know that that gives you a little bit more standing to say, as it says on the sign-up sheet. Well, I think to your point, though, I...

In my prior life, before I was on the city council, I did have issues in my neighborhood, and I did come and speak before the city council. And it's quite nerve-wracking. And I spent the whole day preparing what I was going to say and timing it. And so I can empathize with people who have a three-minute speech plan, and then they're told they need to cut it to two. That just adds more stress. And so defining that before, I think, is a perfect idea. Because then I think it will just create a better environment and atmosphere, too. Mm-hmm.

Yeah, that's what I hope to do is to let them know that we are interested in hearing what they have to say, what people have to say, and be respectful of that. And I think setting the expectations as early as possible, that's an important way to do that. Thank you. If there's anything else, I entertain a motion to adjourn. All right, to adjourn. Second. All right. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. And we'll reconvene at 6. Right.

Oh, yeah.

Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah.

Oh, yeah.

Oh, yeah.

Oh, I wonder where the worst school is.

Yeah, that's... Every experience that I've seen.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Every experience that I've seen. Yeah. This school. Wait. I've been taught at least, you know, in Prudential. Wait, one day. I grew up in Prudential.

You want me to say I've never been here. Near bodies that are I've never been like, they are.

Well, they get there, they're cheating. And they can see something else. There's like a lot of. The students. You're wondering what. I have to give it a feel. Sorry. Show us. Yeah. But I forget. But I started an extramarital affair with me.

Oh, the state president.

To avoid using his term, he stepped down.

He switched.

He moves that he would be in a different. Oh. Oh, I talked about other issues. Like the scarlet letter. It's you with a little red dot.

That's fine.

I mean, the whole school body. There was you having hers?

No, I haven't heard.

Yeah.

It is, it is pretty well. It's always, I think the power dynamic is always growing. And then especially when it's a church school, that power dynamic is accentuated.

No, I don't know. I'd say more. I would say more. I think I would say more. What is it?

Homogenous.

Homogenous. You'll see it. You'll see it.

Because I've seen guys, like BYU, and they're really full of themselves, and then they go to like either a public university or a leading university. There's so much data out here, and I'm like, yeah, because you're interesting to me. But in this day and age, you're introduced by virtue of being a roach, a decently attractive guy who's in the church, who has a pulse. Yeah, like that. But then, like, you go and you have a personality. I'm sorry, but you know, man. We're forced to have one. And not all your life. I'm not saying you don't have a personality, but I'm saying you're likely to have it being less developed. You gotta develop checkpoints. You gotta develop police checkpoints.

You gotta find the person. You learn what a type of attractiveness is good, and then you develop a sense of it. It's like, oh, this person is attractive, but in a way that is not very dry.

What is it?

And they have a more interesting one.

Like Benedict Cumberbatch. Adrian Brody's Ugly Mom. That's correct.

I'm sure, yeah, Adrian Brody.

Yeah.

I'm bad at recognizing some of these.

Yeah.

Oh, yeah, I can still get that. He's got, like, a little weasel man face, but also he's fashionable.

He had very high cheekbone.

Okay, yeah, yeah, that's pretty nice. But it's, like, with the interesting face.

Yeah, but I always think, like, there's a certain amount of... Test, test.

Test. Last time I went to one of these, it was like, not really. He was like, he was just so, like, overwhelmed. That was like, it's okay. Test one, two, test, test.

That's it, right there.

And then the flag's right there.

It's the best.

It's pretty simple. So you just break it in front and then as soon as we're finished.

I know you. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No. Well, uh.

I think she said this.

Thank you. I'm sorry again. I know we need to put more there. Yeah, it's been a vacation. Obviously, it's not able to see. It's already doing it. It's your line. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

All right. My summer. My summer. My summer. My summer. My summer. My summer. But I just want to make sure that I read it. I can't read it. I can't read it.

Yes. Yes.

Yes.

Council Member Mecham, do we have you online?

Yes, indeed. I am here.

All right. Good evening. I'd like to welcome you to the August 11th, 2026 Orem City Council meeting, and I'll call the meeting to order. Our invocation or inspirational thought will be given by Amy Walker, and the Pledge of Allegiance will be led by Gray Walker.

Dear Heavenly Father, we are so thankful for this time of year and season that we can enjoy all of the many luxuries and bounty of our city and our nation. We are thankful to be gathered together to unite our opinions and hearts. We pray for patience and kindness to be present in our communication and in our thoughts as we strive to find unity in seeing the point of view of others. We are thankful for this great nation that we live in, grateful for the community and the camaraderie that we share with our neighbors and the great families that we enjoy here. We are so thankful for our blessings and grateful for the safety of our community. We pray that that will be with those who are enduring the wildfires and the tragedies that are happening in Utah. We pray that that will be with the firefighters and their families and the people who have suffered. We pray that they will continually watch over our nation and help us to find peace and safety and continue to strive for greatness and to choose to step forward with our best selves and to brave the humanity and the kindness that we can offer this great nation. We are grateful to thee and pray for these things. And we say these things in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen. Thank you.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you for the prayer and for leading us in the Pledge of Allegiance. All right, next item on the agenda is 7.1. It's a presentation by the Public Works Advisory Commission. So I'm going to turn the time over to our Public Works Director, Chris Shirky, and our Public Works Advisory Commission Chair, Mike Wimpey. Do you want me, if he's not here, do you want me to go on to the next item? Okay, why don't we do that? Because I think the next item we've got people here. I see them all over in the back. All right. What we'll do is then we're going to wait on that and go to our next item, which is a presentation, a citizen life saving. And our presenter is our fire chief, Mark Sanderson. And we welcome your colleagues here this evening as well.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. I just want to first start off publicly thanking Chief Swenson and the members of our A platoon for joining us tonight. A lot of the things I'm going to discuss tonight are closely related, if not very specific names of individuals in this room who have received recognition and provided life-saving care to multiple citizens throughout all three communities we serve. I would challenge you to, over the next couple of weeks, a shift. Most recently, yesterday, have had a rash of very traumatic calls. I don't want to share the details. However, I will share that based off of the level of expertise, not only in our critical care program and our critical care paramedics, but from our captain, our battalion chiefs, down to our very brand new EMTs, the level of service that they've provided yesterday to two specific patients definitely made a difference and provided an opportunity for the very best outcome for their circumstances. And so you'd have to reach out to these guys the next time you see them. We definitely have photographs because they're used for training. They're appropriate. Doesn't disclose any personal or private information, but it would give you a better taste of what these guys and gals do on a regular basis. And so I'm very appreciative for the things that they've done over the course of the week. We can just go to the next slide. I've shared with you this packet. I'm going to cover.

Oh, I got a clicker. There's the clicker. Maybe.

Maybe. Thank you. I have people to turn my clickers on for me. I wanted to just start out, many of you have had the opportunity to attend our quarterly recognition, and several of you have got other obligations. I just know that the crews appreciate your involvement, your attendance, and your continued support. So I'm just going to highlight, I'm not going to read them all, but you can see, but for the people in the back, I really, when you see your name up here, I would like you to stand up. I'm going to go through this really quickly, so you won't have to stand up very long, but I want you to at least have the ability to recognize those in the room that have made a difference on most of these calls. But this first category of operational excellence and medical calls... Multiple cardiac arrest patients. And we even heard it in a work session today that wasn't a cardiac arrest, but easily could have led to that. And based on the care that our people provide, we see really positive outcomes. Even as recently as last year, we have received recognition through Timpanogos Hospital of achieving national records with our spontaneous return of circulation across the country. And it's because how quickly we respond, it's because of the level of service that our people provide, the certifications, and the additional training that... we have within our organization that make us truly amazing, the citizens that need us. Along with these things, it's this recognition. I think it's so important that we identify the multiple citizens that actually call 911, start CPR, get help coming, because in a lot of these circumstances, If somebody outside of the fire department hadn't initiated something, then we wouldn't see the positive outcomes that we do. And so the shout out goes to our community and the citizens who will step up when the time needs to help start lifesaving efforts that we can then take over on. But you can see, I mean, most significantly, an eight-year-old cardiac arrest. We have Captain Belknap and his crew in the back with our CCPs. We were fortunate enough. Yeah, please. We were fortunate enough with this circumstance to have a bystander start CPR, which then Captain Belknap and his crew were able to step in, transport this kid to primary children's who walked out of their ICUs with no deficits. Just amazing results. That was Bailey Bird, who we've noticed with an award for that citizen heroism. Also Captain Hickman and his crew, You can see there was an MBA extrication down on Geneva road that was significant and horrific injuries to a patient that because of their expertise, their quick response, their abilities to cut the car open and extricate that patient and get him to level two trauma center, Utah Valley is alive and doing much better than most. And so I just want to thank them for that. Very impressive. I actually included this additional recognition, but I want to point out that our people don't do this for recognition. You guys know that when you attend. I beg them every meeting to please provide the things that we don't see from the office. We don't hear the calls. That's not why they do it. They do it because they love the community they serve, they love the job that they do, and they really do care and make a difference. And so highlighting these additional recognitions They're significant when we identify 20 years as an arm city employee with since the chief person chief banner all the way down to our 10 and 5 similar to what the city does on this month that our city recognition. A couple of the other categories that I think are impressive, training, instruction, and professional development. You can see, I mean, just quickly looking up there, we have, I know Lieutenant Metcalf in the back that completed a heavy rescue school, part of our SRT countywide team. It was a six-week program where he comes off of shift and is working a 40-hour week, Monday through Friday, which is not your normal firefighter schedule. Disrupts your family life and that whole schedule.

But

But based off of completion of that heavy rescue school, it brings a whole new level of experience to our own organization that will continue to grow based off of their leadership. And then. Utah Fire Officer Designation Award. This is something that UPRA awards based off of like a 60-page packet of requirements. And we have several employees who've earned that. Most recently, Scott Slater, one of our critical care paramedics. And then one other thing we just highlighted in trying to encompass all of these recognitions over the past two quarters is this leadership and mentorship and tactical support. The thing that I do appreciate and love is that it doesn't always – these are – These are recognitions for working with our own crews, working with a new employee. It's also citywide training. Grant Malquist, he's in the back. He provides all of our city department specialized CPR training for our employees. It wasn't an assignment that he, I think, was signed up for originally, but based off of his abilities to connect and his teaching and connections he makes with our employees, he keeps getting calls and he keeps doing those classes. So it's very important that he recognize the value that he brings to not only our fire department, but the city as a whole. And this is also because the crews here, Captain Hickman, Firefighter Cole Hayden Rosequist, we had an incident really quickly. A UHP officer, they've been chasing a motorcyclist all day long, multiple 1080s. They turn their lights on, takes off on the motorcycle. Well, it just so happened the highway patrolman happened to see the kid, stopped at a light, parked his car, tackled the kid before he was able to leave the light as our tiller was driving by. Those three crews saw the officer fighting with the kid, didn't look like he was winning, and bailed out of the fire engine and helped subdue the evader. And so you just don't know the impact that has with any of our officers. They do it if it was an armed officer. They do it if it was a citizen. And you just don't know. If the guy gets the officer's gun, our guys don't intervene. You have a totally different outcome. And so our fire department employees just don't do fire and EMS. I mean, they're amazing humans, amazing abilities, and they really do care about everybody within the cities. And then the last one that I just wanted to highlight from their recognition is this compassion and external recognition. I kind of touched base on that, things that Grant's done with other departments. Just looking really quickly to see. But when you read through these, I mean, we had the incident in Linden, everybody's aware of the family that lost a three-year-old daughter. As horrific as that type of call is, the benefit and the value and the compassion that our people bring to even worst-case scenarios make a huge difference. And so I want to leave you with that. I want to thank them again for all that they do in supporting our city and say thank you. Mary, if you don't mind, I'd just like to give them the opportunity to be excused unless you guys had questions or comments. Oh, no, they have to sit through the whole thing.

No, go ahead. I do, so they do, right? Yes. No, you're welcome to be excused. You're welcome to stay, whatever you would like to do. Now, council members, that doesn't apply to you or myself. Thank you. All right, next item on the agenda, we'll go back to the presentation on the Public Works Advisory Commission. And we have our Public Works Director, Chris Shirky, and Mike Wimby, who is our Public Works Advisory Commission Chair. So welcome.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. It's a pleasure to be here tonight. Next year, I vow to not follow police or fire, okay? Because that is a hard act to follow. Every year, I seem to be in this position between BJ and Mark. So anyway, we love police and fire and all the outstanding services they provide for our community. I'd like to introduce Mr. Mike Wimpey, who is our chairman of our Public Works Advisory Commission. We've been asked to provide our FY26 annual report. And I'll turn the time over to Mike.

Thank you. It's a pleasure to be here tonight. I've enjoyed my opportunity that I've had to serve on the Public Works Advisory Commission. I think it's been three years now. I just received an email from April Nielsen saying that I needed to reapply to have so much fun. So I gladly did so. Thanks, Chris. It's great to work with the Public Works Group. I think the thing that It's a pleasure to work with such professional people that care so much about the public and care about doing their jobs and doing a great job. And so we get an opportunity to meet with the public works supervisors and departments every month. I know Councilwoman Millett has participated in that in the past and now Councilwoman Milstein. And I think it's just very evident how much city staff care about their jobs and do a great job to keep us in great shape. Like Chris said, my name is Mike Wimpey. I've had the opportunity to serve on the Public Works Advisory Commission going now into a second term. My work outside of volunteering with the city is as Assistant General Manager at Central Utah Water Conservancy District. I'm lucky to have opportunity to work with city staff, both in a volunteer capacity as well as in my professional capacity on a regular basis. Other members of the commission include Gary Morley. He's a retired doctor. Jim Michaelis, who I think was the prior chair, and he's a retired UVU, was responsible for a lot of their facilities and buildings. and did a great job leading the commission. Joseph Gordon, Linguistic Project Manager at Utah Translation Analysis Center. Rob Moore, and you'll note that Rob is also from Central Utah Water Conservancy District. That didn't happen. He worked at the county in the county attorney's office, and we were so impressed with him that we were lucky enough to convince him to come work with us at Central Utah Water. He was appointed to the commission while he was still an attorney at the county. And then Brent Tobler, he works at West Tech Engineering. We had a member of the commission, Todd Hadley, that just after nine years was probably willing but no longer able to serve on the commission. And then once again, like I mentioned, Councilwoman Muehlstein is the liaison to the commission. And I'm going to turn it back over to you, Chris.

All right. Thank you, Mike. Okay. There's a brief history I'll just share with you. We did last time, but in 2014 is when we created this commission, the City Council created this commission. We had, I think, Jim Michaelis was on the original commission. Then he left for a period of time. He served a mission and then came back and we had a vacancy and he was able to come back again. So we had originally seven members on the commission, and then it was expanded in 2017 to accommodate the need to evaluate broadband and utopia and UIA and provide additional analyses. We had two experts that came and joined us since we had nine members on our advisory commission at that time, and we adjusted it back in 2021. to back to seven members. So that's where we stand today. We do have one vacancy, as Mike mentioned, and we're looking for a replacement soon on that. Basically, the duties and responsibilities of the commissioners are to get more acquainted with our infrastructure, our facilities, the services we provide, help us to determine the level of service that we should provide to the community with regards to water, sewer, stormwater, traffic, street lighting, street conditions, and so forth. And then they review studies that are made by professionals externally, professional engineers and financial consultants. And after much review and sometimes debate and analysis and so forth, we go back and forth and then we bring recommendations to the council. this last fiscal year in fy 26 last year at this time we our meeting was to help prepare for this actual presentation the one from fy 25. we only met six times in the last 10 months or so october 25 we had a tour of the orm city hall since this was pretty new and and nobody had been here previously to that. We also had our major project review that took place, and we're going to update you on those projects here shortly. In January of this year, we had our annual public commission training. Much like what others do on commissions and boards and districts and council members, they have those trainings that are required by the state regarding public meetings and so forth. In March of 26, we then also had a review of our transportation utility fund and the state of our streets and condition of our streets were evaluated and presented at that time. In April of 26, we toured the new Orem Water Reuse Facility, which the council toured, I believe, in March or February of this year. So our completed projects in the last fiscal year include number one, our water reuse facility. Number two, our 10 million gallon water tank. It's not online right now, but it's pending. And it's in tandem with the booster station and a new well that was drilled recently. We hope to have both of those completed next year. Number three, I would say substantially, meaning 99% plus, the abandonment of the Provo Bench and North Union Canal companies. The Metropolitan Water District of Orem is a member of both of those companies, and those companies, for a variety of reasons, have chosen to be abandoned and to dissolve. In number four, we have our northeast stormwater improvements. I think Sister, or sorry about that, Councilwoman Elena Millett mentioned in our work session that we had substantial stormwater damages that occurred two years ago. After that, we met with the neighborhood and the community members in that area. We developed plans with our engineering staff and public works team and other engineers to develop improvements. We put in nearly a million dollars worth of work to help prevent that from happening in the future. This one item here I wanted to bring to your attention very specifically. Jen Gale, Councilwoman Gale, has been heavily involved with mountain biking and with the youth and mountain biking efforts. She's a coach, I believe. as well. And we have been working with her and others in our Public Works Advisory Commission and the Recreation Commission on the development of our bike skills park. We have three phases of that that are now completed. This one in particular is a very challenging. I've not done it myself. I know I'd probably get hurt. I know for sure I would. Maybe when I was a teenager, I would go off some of these jumps and so forth. We have worked with Mike Wimpey and Kirk Beecher of Central Utah Water Conservancy in a very professional and team-oriented, solutions-oriented process to help us to accommodate that new bike skills facility, or phase three is what we call it, that was formerly on Central Utah Water's property on the hillside. They felt like they probably didn't need that per se to have the title to that. And we worked out an arrangement where they needed some access to our park to build a sedimentation basin below their 10M gallon water tank just adjacent to our Mount Pinocchia Park. And so we were very I appreciate Mike and Kirk and Beecher and the effort that they put forward and the motivation that they had. I think this is a prime example of how public servants in different agencies can work together to solve mutual problems for the greater good of the community. I'm just really thrilled with that project and the effort that went forward. We had others from our legal staff that were involved and then including Aaron McKnight and Steve and our city manager and also Bren Bybee and Ryan, our assistant city manager, as well as Bryce, our recreation and library director. They were involved heavily and Tyler Paye, I should mention him as well. So it was a full court press on this effort to get this done in a relatively short amount of time. It couldn't have happened without the cooperation of Central Utah. So thank you for that. We were also able to complete in the last year the Northridge Park playground and pickleball and tennis courts as well as the Windsor Park. At Windsor Park the new jazz multi-sport court which is now underway for a new a new four pickleball court facility at the recommendation of Councilwoman Millett from a couple of years ago in a council meeting that was added and that is now underway. Ongoing projects we have I'll skip number one right now. We're going to come right back to that. I'm going to go over these other ones quickly. Well, number 10 is located at four south and fourth west. That's the well that I mentioned that is being has been drilled and developed. We now we need to put a well house on top with a new pump and a new and you motor and so forth and then get that operational. That'll take place over the next 12 months. The booster station right next to it, you notice that there was a massive hole in the ground over there. That's been filled in and that's all in preparation to take that water out of the new water tank, which is a 10 million gallon water tank, put it into our system. We're diversifying the location of our water sources in the event we do have emergencies. For example, on the hillside over here, we have the Wasatch Falls. So that'll help to remedy any concerns that might arise as a result of a major seismic event. We've been also updating the Commission regarding the UDOT Geneva Road widening and Lakeview Parkway project. Most of that, if not all of that is done in Provo. And then a good portion of it is underway right now. We've also been working with the parks and recreation department on developing entryway and city park monument signs. I don't know Mike, if you would like to take a minute to address that 1st, 1, the central Utah water.

reuse feasibility study sure um central utah water about 20 years ago had the opportunity to acquire all of the former geneva still water rights and water related infrastructure and when we acquired that water we didn't have a customer for the water As we went out to the various cities and gauged interest and demand for that water, it was a little bit slow. In 2008, the crash occurred, and we were wondering if we would ever sell all that water. Well, that water is long gone. Everybody is scrambling and coming and asking, where is there more water that we can purchase to supply to our communities? We approached Chris and Reid and as we became more aware of the reuse, many of you know that reuse in the state of Utah, throughout the country, reuse is occurring and being leaned on heavily to augment existing supplies in Utah. 10, 15 years ago, it was seen that any drop of water that makes it to the Great Salt Lake is wasted. And that mentality has shifted over the last several years as we've recognized the importance, the ecological importance of the Great Salt Lake and health importance for the community. And so reuse is no longer permitted within the state without a makeup or a replacement water going to the Great Salt Lake. Fortunately, leaders here at the city over 20 years ago, 2003, I believe, submitted an application to be able to have the right to reuse the water from Orem's wastewater reclamation facility. And so as you all have toured that facility, you're aware that ORM is applying that water to city parks and golf course. However, there's more supply down there than I understand is needed for the city facilities. And so Central Utah Water approached Chris and Reed and asked about what the plans are for that water and how we might best, like Chris said, I think the biggest thing that the relationship we've had has been able to look at what is in the best interest of the public. And so we've been working closely together with city staff, looking at different options to potentially take that water and put it to the best use of our community. So... Um, and we're right in the middle of that probably don't have much to report yet, but we're, we're, we had a meeting today and we're looking at really good options, uh, to, to build, to utilize that water.

We're excited about what the potential is for that. It could be a variety of things. For example, it could be land applied for water reuse. It could be used to augment the water supply. It could be used to actually develop and put it back into our drinking water system. I know that doesn't sound very appetizing, but there are many communities in the Phoenix area that go direct potable water from the end of the wastewater treatment plant. That water has a higher degree of water quality than the drinking water that we currently consume today. So it's one of many opportunities or options that will be out there in the future. We couldn't do something like this without the partnership of someone like Central Utah Waters. We're grateful for that. We have some upcoming projects, big projects that are coming on right now. We're in the middle of working with our engineer from Hands On Loose to develop the new well number one. It's actually This well number one was drilled in 1957-58 and developed. That's our first well in the city. However, we are abandoning that and we're going to be drilling a new well at the Hillcrest Park. And that is going to be starting in this coming fall. Number two is our city center, 200 East. City Center, excuse me, 200 East Center, straight over here. It's our city center well, we call it well number five. That's been in place since the late or the mid 60s. That is in need of some major overhaul and replacement. That'll be taking place this coming year. 4th West, 16th North, we've talked about this for some time, but we're finally at this point where after we do some bonding coming up in this fall, we'll be able to start that and start drilling that well number 11 at 4th West, 16th North. In conjunction with that, there will be a Pioneer Children's Memorial at that location. And in conjunction with that, on number four, we're looking at also the Family and Children Memorial Garden at the city cemetery. Thank you. We appreciate your support, and we're excited about the work we do, and what we do providing for the community is extremely important to us. And we have great professionals in these areas of need and service that we're grateful that we lean on quite heavily, and we thank you for your support and supporting these needs too. Are there any questions?

Thank you. I know that you said it's hard to follow the fire department, but I would argue that your department and what you do is very, very important as well for our health and safety of our community, just in a different way. And appreciate that. Thank you. Council, do you have any questions or comments? Council Member Gale?

Well, first, I want to say thank you. And second, I want to just say how struck I am by the quality and professionalism of your commission. I mean, you have some really tip-top people in there with lots of experience, and I'm super impressed by that and really grateful that they are behind these things that are so important to our infrastructure and our daily life. So thank you for the work you do.

Thank you. Thank you.

Right. Anyone else? All right. Thank you so much. And I love hearing about the cooperation and the partnerships that we're having. Thank you. Thank you. All right, the next item on the agenda is time set aside for public appearances. Time's been set aside for the public to express their ideas, concerns, and comments on items not scheduled as public hearings on the agenda. Those wishing to speak are encouraged to show respect for those who serve the city. Comments should focus on issues concerning the city. and those who will be invited to speak have already i have the sign up sheet will have signed in and you'll have the opportunity to have up to three minutes to to share your thoughts so we'll go ahead and we will start let's see looks like we do have a note here that says please only sign up for yourself in order to be fair for those who want so is everybody well you wouldn't know the answer everyone Never mind. I was going to ask a question, but it doesn't make sense. All right.

Milo Ott.

Is Milo here? All right. I don't see him. I guess I could have asked that question. But never mind. All right. Is it Teo Buckingham? And then it's up. And then after Mr. Buckingham, it's Kathy Ambrose. Welcome.

Thank you, Councilperson. Good evening, city council. My name is tail Buckingham. I've lived in for 6 years. My son has lived here his whole life. He loves our neighbors. Like, I love our neighbors. Many of whom are fathers like me. It is for this reason that I am making a request to this council to issue an executive order or formal resolution barring ICE agents and those working in cooperation with them from using city-owned property for immigration enforcement activities. This includes parks, schools, libraries, and public buildings and their parking lots. These places where we gather as families and neighbors and community cannot become an operations ground for masked agents who have killed multiple people this year, who have been seen to operate with impunity. My immigrant neighbors are equally entitled to and deserving of safety and protection from these racist deportation operations, regardless of documentation status. They are mothers, fathers, aunties, uncles, cousins, lovers and friends, all of whom belong here in Family City, USA. That is all I have for public comment. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it. All right. Kathy Ambrose. And then after Ms. Ambrose, we have Allie Acey.

Thank you. And I want to thank the council for their long days during city council meetings for serving the city. For the last seven years, I've served as the executive director of Hope for Orem. It's a self-funded, zero solicitation, suicide prevention nonprofit that serves the city. Every year, we provide zero-cost mental health resources to our community. We fund higher education scholarships for graduating seniors at all three high schools. Over 15,000 to date have been donated. We provide free TPR crisis training to any entity that requests our service. We also entirely fund an annual mental wellness resource fair at no cost to Orem, the city, and surrounding communities. Despite our history with the city and the previously signed contract and months of preparation, administrative restructuring surrounding this year's ORM Fest resulted in Hope for ORM being asked not to participate. We were grouped together with commercial vendors and transactional nonprofits. That classification does not accurately reflect how Hope for Orem operates. We use zero transaction, zero onboarding model. We don't sell programs. We don't collect data. We don't pitch subscriptions or service for services. We exist solely as a public safety and community resource. and Hope for Orem belongs at Orem Fest. In previous years, Hope for Orem's footprint has been located in the municipal public safety corridor by police, fire, and public utilities. We believe that that is the most appropriate location for our suicide prevention and mental wellness resources. Placing our station directly alongside the city emergency services creates a centralized care and resource zone for residents. It keeps crisis and mental health resources logically connected with the city's first responders. It also keeps our nonprofit footprint separate from commercial traffic and related activities. I am proposing to protect our community and provide administrative clarity for city staff, we have submitted a formal proposal to the city manager. We are requesting a formal memorandum of understanding. The purpose would be to officially recognize Hope for Orem's in-kind scholarship contributions to Orem students to establish us in the permanent public safety and community resource category and protect our booth footprint from blanket commercial rollbacks in future years. I've provided copies of our proposal in an executive summary to the city recorder. And I'm asking the council to direct the city manager to schedule a brief meeting with Hope for Orem during the off season from Orem Fest. Our goal is to work together to finalize a clear framework that will avoid this issue in future years. I would like to personally invite each of you also to come to the Mental Wellness Resource Fair on Monday, August 31st at Orem Library Hall. It's completely free. It's entirely funded by Hope for Orem. It's open to everyone and it features community providers, resources, music, keynote address. I couldn't get Cosmo or Willie because they're going to be playing a game against each other, so they said no. But besides that, we would love to see this community network in action, and I will email a copy of all the documents also. Thank you.

Thank you. And just so you know, we all have copies.

Are there any questions for me?

We'll go ahead, and we've got your contact information. All right. Thank you. All right. Next, we have Allie Acey, and then after Ms. Acey, we have Ethan Stauffer. It's so nice you said Acey right. Everyone else mispronounces it, so thank you. Oh, I've got one of those last names, too.

Well, I'm up here also to talk about ICE in Orem. Right now, ICE is held very unaccountable by the American government, and so I'm hoping to ask my city to be better. I am asking that Orem City pass a formal policy directing local law enforcement not to honor ICE civil immigration detainers without a judicial warrant signed by a judge, not an administrative warrant signed by ICE alone. And this ability for ICE to basically determine itself that they can grab someone is a strict violation of the Fourth Amendment, which declares that people are protected from unreasonable searches and seizures. And I know a lot of people might say, well, they're not citizens. They don't get to have the rights or whatever. First of all, we said we say liberty and justice for all at the end of the conversation. at the end of the Declaration of Independence, but also without these laws being applied to all people, then it gives law enforcement the ability to grab people and say that they didn't think they were a citizen without being able to prove it. It is a very dangerous thing to allow groups especially groups like ice that are famously unaccountable right now help being held unaccountable right now um to be able to do whatever they want and then say oh no we didn't we didn't check um people are i have many friends who are here legally or and they're they're documented they were born here and they're scared they're going to be snatched off all the road because of their way they look i mean just because the supreme court says they can racially uh they can be um racially profiled, ICE is allowed to do that, doesn't mean it's right. I was recently visiting an old Japanese internment camp, and just because something is legal doesn't mean it's right. And I think we have a place in our legal power to prevent these harmful, inhumane treatments that are happening to our neighbors, documented or not. And I think that Orem should has the ability to be held to a higher standard and hold our federal officers to a higher standard as well. So again, pass a formal policy directing local law enforcement not to honor ICE civil immigration detainers without a judicial warrant signed by a judge, not an administrative warrant signed by ICE alone. Thank you so much. Thank you.

All right. We have Ethan Stauffer. And then after him, we have Judy Christensen.

Hello mayor and city council people I'm sure by now my face has become a tired 1 to see, but I have spent the last is my 3rd city council meeting now in a row that I will be talking about the flock cameras that are around the city. I've already talked about the privacy concerns. I think they pose as well as the ways that ice can abuse them. But today I would like to talk about some real stories of real people. Now, these stories will involve. political buzzwords that I'm sure you will have your own opinions about. I urge you to look past these buzzwords because they aren't the point of the story, whether you are in favor or against them, and to look at the actual story itself and what's actually happening. There's a woman from Texas who left her home state where abortion is illegal to get an abortion in the state of Illinois. She was tracked down using the flock system by police officers in her home state of Texas and arrested for getting this abortion, despite doing it in a state where it is legal. In Utah, abortions are legal until the 18th week. She could have come here to do this. And if she did, she would have still been tracked down and arrested by her own state police officers in her city. I'm not asking whether you think that the abortion is right or if you think that she shouldn't have done that. I am asking if you think that police officers have the right to overrule city laws and track people outside of their jurisdictions using this system that has little to no oversight. Now, the woman was released. She did not get any criminal charges, but this is a situation that shouldn't have been able to happen in the first place. She shouldn't have been arrested to begin with. She didn't break any law, and she adhered to every law in every jurisdiction that she was in. There is another man in a similar situation. He left his state where it was illegal to have recreational marijuana and bought one in a state where it is legal to buy it. He was arrested similarly by police officers who used Flock to track him down. Again, I'm not asking your opinions on the use of recreational marijuana. Whether you're in favor of that or against that is not relevant. It is whether you think that police officers should be able to use this system, this international private system with no oversight, to track down people outside of their jurisdictions and arrest them for crimes that aren't illegal where they committed them. I think that this system is highly corrupt and it is highly dangerous beyond all the other issues that I've already raised with you all. I hope that you guys are listening to my words and you guys will do what you can to terminate any flock contracts that the city has and be able to take these cameras down because I do not see any way that they truly benefit the people of Orem or the people around the nation who have to use this national database. Thank you.

Thank you. And our final personal appearance this evening is, um, Judy Christianson. Welcome.

To our honorable mayor. and Orem City Council. Like was said, I'm Judy Christensen. I've had the privilege of calling Orem home for 35 years. I've raised all five of my children here, and I'm really proud to live here. I love it. I think it's a beautiful place. I'm grateful for all of my, all the many residents, including yourselves, who help to keep and safeguard our city. I have actually wasn't planning to say this, but I do have firsthand experience with Hope for Orem. and I've seen a lot of good that it's done for kids who are in really hard situations and it's helped families as well. I am here to respectfully reiterate my request that this council pass a formal resolution prohibiting the use of municipal funds, staff time facilities for federal immigration enforcement and to ensure the safety and trust of all our residents I have friends and neighbors and close acquaintances who are here legally but are scared and I think it's very sad. I would like to have some transparency from our city knowing Um, that we, I just would like to prohibit the voluntary disclosure of of our individuals here as far as their immigration status to federal authorities and to establish a requirement that our city publicly report any interactions that they have with federal immigration. Authorities, I think that we can be kind and respectful to all of our residents and and do things with, um. with taste and with compassion. That's all I have to say. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you to all of you who have come tonight to share your thoughts.

I really appreciate it.

All right, the next item on the agenda is a consent item, and it's updating our city council meeting schedule. On council, you'll see in that proposed schedule that our next meeting, August 25th, is going to be a work session only. And then we will, on that Tuesday, we'll have that work session. And then you'll see on August 27th, that Thursday, is going to be another city council meeting. And that's going to be only truth and taxation hearings. So there's nothing else that will be on that agenda. We won't be doing personal appearances or any other types of actions. We'll be focusing on that truth and taxation hearing. on August 27th. And so the consent item is to amend the calendar, update the calendar to August 25th being a work session only. So if you're comfortable with that, I would entertain a motion to approve the consent item.

Mayor, I'll make a motion to approve the consent item.

All right. The motion, is there a second? I second. All right. I'm going to start off voting and I'm going to go this way. I'm going to vote aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Quinn? Aye. All right. Motion carries. Thank you. Next item on the agenda is our scheduled item. It's a resolution for appointments to the Justice Court Nominating Commission. Now, Mr. Earl, do you have a presentation, or are we just doing the nomination?

It depends on what information you'd like. We already discussed this in the work session, and so basically the item to be acted upon is just the appointment of two individuals to serve on the Justice Court nominating commission. And I'm happy to give more information on that, or if you're ready to move forward on a motion, that would be fine too.

Okay, I'll just, for those in the audience, just so you know, Orem has a justice court, and the justice court judge has given notice that he would like to retire at the end of the year, and since we thought somebody was going to force somebody to stay, He's going to retire at the end of the year. And there is a process that's run through the state, the court administrator's office, on how to select a new justice court judge. And there is a nominating commission that is the law spells out a group of different groups of people who are part of that nominating commission. And two of those positions on that nominating commission are ones who are approved by the city council and that's what this item is this evening is to approve those two names a couple two council members just so just have have expressed interest in representing orm city in in that process the commission will also have i think some from the bar association and someone from appointed by mountain association of governments i think the county commissioner

Yes.

County commission. So it's a variety of individuals who will be reviewing these applications to be a justice court judge here in Orem. And then the decision is made by the city manager with the ratification of the city council. So council members Millet and Kilpack have expressed interest council as ones who would like to represent the city of Orem on the justice court nominating commission. And if you're comfortable with that, I would entertain a motion to appoint them unless you have some other discussion or anything you'd like to do beforehand.

Mayor, can I make a motion? I move to approve the appointment of Councilmember Lynnae Millett and Councilmember Chris Kilpack to the Justice Court Nominating Commission.

I think you have a motion. Is there a second? I'll second that. All right. Thank you, Council Member Milstein. Okay, we'll go ahead and start the vote with you, Council Member Millett. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye. Council Member Mecham?

Aye.

All right, thank you. The motion carries unanimously. All right, next item on our agenda is financial items. There were no items in the packet. Teresa wanted me to just make a note of that for the meeting. And then we'll go to number 12. We have the city manager information items. So I'll turn the time over to our city manager, Bren Bybee.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. Just two items wanted to highlight. I don't normally mention these, but this Thursday there is a retirement party for Lane Gray. And so I just wanted to publicly not only invite you to come to that, it'll be at the library hall from 1130 to 130, but also just to publicly recognize Lane. a phenomenal 37 year career here at the city. And sometimes when, uh, an individual is getting close to retirement, they maybe are coming in for a landing, but that has never been the case for Lane. He is just always such an incredible doer. And, um, 37 years of being such a hardworking individual and dealing with very critical projects, you'd think that maybe on occasion you might come away stressed or worried or even a little bit overwhelmed. Never with Lane. He is just the consummate, humble, hungry, smart uh employee and he has great catch phrases like get her done and keep smiling and uh i just i love the guy and and so wanted to publicly recognize him and invite you to his retirement party at the end of this week There are several and, well, technically all of our employees who we will be recognizing at the end of next week on Thursday at our Building a Better Orem Employee Appreciation Party and would love your continued help and support in that event. And we'll be able to speak to the specific details of some incredible accomplishments that many of our employees have engaged in over the course of the last year. And that'll just be here at City Center Park as per usual at the stage. So with that, that's all I have. Thank you.

Right. Thank you. I had the opportunity to sign some awards today. And there's some pretty amazing things that our employees, which we knew they were all amazing, but it just it was fun to see those in person. So if there's nothing else, I would entertain a motion to adjourn.

I motion that we adjourn. Second.

Motion is second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. And we are adjourned before 7 p.m. Nice work, Mary.