City Council - Regular Meeting

All right, welcome to the Pro-Missile Council regular meeting. It is September 8th, 2026, and it is 7.36 p.m. We'll do a roll call starting with the mayor.

Gary Garrett.

Becky Bogdan. Catrice McKay.

Craig Christensen. Jeff Whitlock.

Rachel Whipple.

Travis Hoban.

All right, the opening prayer will be given today by Spencer Bridge, and then we'll have the Pledge of Allegiance by Counselor Hoban. And Spencer, you can just come up to the mic right here.

Our dear Heavenly Father, we're thankful we can be gathered here to participate in this important process. We pray that the Spirit can be with us all here in this meeting and we say these things in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

Amen.

Join me in the pledge.

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.

All right. First, we have a ceremony celebration celebrating the Provo City Library's 21st anniversary at Academy Square. We're presented by Carla Gordon, our Provo City Library Director.

Tonight I'd like to take a moment to recognize and celebrate the 25th anniversary of the Provo City Library at Academy Square. 25 years ago today, the Provo City Library at Academy Square opens its doors to the public for the first time. This opening came after several years of intense work on a building that many thought was beyond saving. The significant community effort that made the restoration of the Brigham Young Academy building possible has been called a miracle, and those familiar with the campaign and fundraising understand why. It took an entire community to make this library and this landmark what it is today. For the past 25 years, this building has been much more than a place to find books. It has been a gathering place, a learning center, a resource for families, students, seniors, and lifelong learners, and a welcoming space for people throughout our community. Over that time, the way people use libraries has changed considerably. Our library has changed with it, providing access not only to books and research materials, but also to technology, educational programs, children's activities, community events, and countless other resources that help connect and strengthen our city. This anniversary is also an opportunity to recognize the people who have made those 25 years possible. Our librarians and library staff, past and present, the volunteers, community partners and supporters, and of course the residents who continue to make the library an important part of civic life. A strong library reflects a community that values knowledge, opportunity, curiosity, and connection. We are fortunate to have such an institution here, and I hope we will continue to support and celebrate it for many years to come. Thank you to everyone who helped make the Provo City Library at Academy Square a reality, and to everyone who contributes to its continued success. Thank you.

Thank you, Carla.

Congratulations.

All right, as indicated on the screen, a required public hearing will be held for certain agenda items prior to council action. After each such item has been presented, time to comment provided for all those who wish to speak. For items that do not require public hearing, public comment will still be taken following presentation of the item, but will be limited to 10 minutes. At this time, up to 15 minutes have been set aside for an open public comment period, which is intended to allow comments on matters that do not appear on the agenda, but are limited to topics regarding municipal business or within municipal council purview. Persons who speak during this time to an item that is on the agenda will not normally be afforded a second opportunity to speak during the comment period specific to that item. During any public comment period, each speaker will generally be limited to two minutes. Due to noticing requirements, no formal action will be taken in this meeting on matters that do not appear on the agenda. Those with comments are invited to approach the podium. Those participating on Zoom will need to use the raise hand feature to indicate they wish to comment. The chair may choose to alternate between in-person and online commenters. Please begin your comments by saying your name and your city of residence, and you'll have two minutes to speak. So any public comment is welcome to come up now.

It's good to see somebody older than myself, Gary. I'm Mark Callen, Protective Reserve of American Fork Canyon. I want to thank the city for trying to slow the process down and get a little bit more into details. I'm here tonight as a result of a news broadcast last night at KSL. When I was a younger man, I was about nine years old. I went up to Lava Hot Springs and I thought, I'm going to do something bold. I'm going to dive off to the highest dive. I wore glasses back then. I couldn't see when I was going to hit the water and I couldn't see that I almost hit the... bottom of the pool that about broke my neck. So let's don't confuse bold with brazen. It was a stupid move on my part. I've learned a little bit in my age. I'm here to propose something tonight on behalf of the citizens. And if I may approach, Gary, could I have you pass just a copy of these out? Is that our chair? Okay. Okay. When I initiated preservation of American Fork Canyon, that was bold. When we initiated preservation of Brentwell Falls, that was bold. I would ask the council to appoint someone to allow us as citizens to do something which is bold. We've raised $50,000 to put the mouth of Pearl Canyon into a conservation easement. Wendy from Utah Open Lands, you can see her note in there, we're taking pledges. And we're ready to move forward to do something that's bold. There's never been a time I've been up American Fork Canyon or past Brittleville Falls that I do regret any time I've spent there. We've just seen the library. The photo of the library and being preserved. Every time I drive by that academy, I'm grateful for those that had leadership and said no to something which was bold, which would have been to bulldoze. So thank you. Please give consideration. I'd like to have equal time to the council and staff.

Any other public comment?

My name is David Horn. I'm a resident of Provo. I've been here off and on for 30 years, raising my family. Back to the Brideville Falls, that's something I'm very disappointed. I'm disappointed that the rename of Keeve, or whatever you call that thing, succumbing to pressure. What I'm really upset about right now is the council's decision that they made on dark Provo lighting. You realize there's a conflict in your statement. You say, darken the skies, safety will go up. That's a conflict. The end of my street, we do not have a street light. It is a dark zone. No houses right there in that corner have any lights on at night. It is a dark zone. I raised my kids in that neighborhood. In front of my first house in that neighborhood, in front of my house right now, I have a street light that lights up the street so much that even the trim lights on my house don't show as much as well as the neighbor across the street and the neighbors next door to me. I don't know where or who started the idea of darkening the skies and restricting home ownerships of the utility or the light fixtures that they have on their homes. It's ridiculous. And going further with trim lights, which I have and restricting the amount of light that I can use and when I can use it for my expression. of my First Amendment rights to celebrate sports, birthdays, weddings, activities, graduations at any time of the year is a government overreach and will follow with lawsuits for the one decision you already made. And if you even continue this discussion, the news outlets, KSL and everything, Catrice knows, she goes,

Thank you, David.

And to ABC News. Thank you.

And just so you're aware, we did today talk and we plan to take, to not have any restrictions on the lights around your house.

Any more public comment?

Shouldn't even have been a subject.

Hi, I'm Naomi Flinders. I live in Provo. And I was coming to encourage everyone to look at the No Ice in Utah County website that has been put together and to ask you to publicly direct all local police departments in writing to cease collaboration with ICE in any form, including participation in joint operations, information sharing, or notification of release dates. I've been devastated with... the choices of Utah County. There was a huge turnout with people saying we wanted a place that's safe for everyone. And I feel like those were ignored. But I think that each individual city can still make choices that make their city a safer haven. I don't know. I'm just tired of seeing the horrors that the state can implement onto people's lives. So I hope that you guys look through the website at some things that you could personally do.

Thank you. Thank you. Any more public comment? All right. We have someone on Zoom. If you can talk right now, your number ends in 877.

Hey, guys. My name is Jacob Lowe. I've been a Provo resident for five years, coming on six. My wife was raised here as well. And I love it, love living here. There are a couple prohibitions on city parks, specifically, and all of which I agree on, including this one, that it is unlawful to shoot or otherwise propel arrows. You might know me as the LARP arrows guy, but I assumed that this law was written because we don't want sharp arrows flying through our sandwiches while we're picnicking. And I am on board with that. But I don't think the intent was to criminalize eight-year-olds who want to use their Nerf bows they got for Christmas or even foam mock arrows used by LARP groups. And many cities explicitly protect the use of toy projectile launchers within city limits, like even Pleasant Grove. states that prohibitions on discharging bows and arrows, and I quote Municipal Code Section 541, shall not be construed to prohibit the use of play pistols, guns, bows and arrows, or other similar children's toys. And I'm just requesting that a similar ordinance or amendment be made that explicitly protects play toys on city parks. I think it's a great way to get outside. I think removing that kind of restriction opens play options and maybe even educational opportunities for youth, etc., etc. Anyway, thank you for your time. It's just what I wanted to say.

Thank you. Any more public comment? All right. We have an applied motion on a resolution concerning to board and commission's appointments presented by Mayor Marshall Judkins. Doesn't sound like it.

This one's working. OK. Hi, councillors. So I am recommending the following appointments to provost city boards and commissions, as indicated, as I will say them in a minute, and submit them for the council's advice and consent. and our respective department directors interviewed and evaluated these applicants and I fully support their recommendations. Accordingly, I am pleased to submit the following appointments together with the department directors for your consideration. For the Arts Council, Darcy Roy. She has great enthusiasm for the Arts Council. She has arranged for community meetings and other events to help this board just as a citizen. She is very excited and wants to help expand the arts in Provo. Her application with further, oh, I'm not supposed to say that, but she is going to be, I'm asking that she be appointed for a three-year term to expire on June 30th of 2029.

Do we have them come up if they're here or no?

I don't know how this works.

We've never done that before, but they certainly are welcome to.

I just wanted to make sure I was doing it right. Thank you for your patience. Okay, Caitlin Raines is an active member in the arts community. She has a strong dedication to the community and her We are asking for her to be appointed to a three year term also to expire on June 30 of 2029. In addition to Casey Lance, who is a longtime citizen of Provo, and he has expressed a strong interest in the arts and is that desire to be involved. And so it has to be a three year term also. To the library board would be Joseph Smith, and he has lived in Pogo for 13 years and has extensive technology leadership experience and brings expertise in technology, strategy, innovation, and organizational leadership. We recommend that he be appointed to a three-year term that will expire June 30th of 2029. And for the planning commission, David Conger, who has a professional background in information technologies and data operations. He has also some past civic experience. And we ask that he also be recommended to be appointed to a three-year term that will expire on June 30th of 2029. So thank you, Mayor. Thank you.

All right. Any council discussion? All right. We'll take a vote on the implied motion. Councillor Garrett?

Yes.

Councillor McKay? Yes. Councillor Christensen? Yes. Councillor Whitlock?

Yes.

Councillor Bogdan. Yes. Councillor Hoban.

Yes.

And Councillor Whipple. Yes. That passes 7-0. Next, an implied motion on a resolution supporting a submittal of the 2026 Outdoor Recreation Legacy Partnership grant application to secure grant funding to aid in providing park improvements for the Epic Regional Sports Park. This will be presented by our Parks and Rec Director, Brad Rainey.

Good evening, Councillor McKay, members of the council. Thank you for the time. There's a grant opportunity that came open in August to get significant funding for master planned improvements at the Epic Sports Park. Specifically, the project that we'd be looking at is five additional fields, two of which would be synthetic turf with lights on it. The total project is estimated at $16 million. The grant is a 50-50 grant and could contribute up to $8 million. um opportunities don't come that often for funding like this and at this point we're just seeking um essentially a letter of support from the council in the form of a resolution to apply and see if there's interest from the grantor in this project happy to answer any questions thanks brad any questions for brad all right thank you we'll open this item up for public comment anyone who wishes to give public comment on this item

All right, seeing none, we'll move to council discussion. Any council discussion on this item? Councilor Christensen.

Well, I think it's helpful just to mention that this is a vote of confidence in the Epic Sports Park. That was designed as a significant business development opportunity. It's performed remarkably well. And I think enhancing that, especially when we can get matching grants, just makes a lot of sense. Grateful that you guys are being very proactive about that.

All right, we will take a vote on the implied motion. Councillor McKay, yes. Councillor Christensen, yes. Councillor Whitlock, yes. Councillor Bogdan, yes. Councillor Hoban, yes. Councillor Whipple, yes. Councillor Garrett, yes. So that passes 7-0. Next, an implied emotion on a resolution appropriating $330,000 to pay for Fort Utah Park. Improvements for the fiscal year ending June 30th, 27. This will be presented again by the Parks and Rec Director, Brad Rainey.

So bids for this project were open shortly after the fiscal year budget was approved. They came in a little bit higher than we had budgeted. We were able to work with the contractor to be able to self-perform some of the work out there to help save money. This appropriation is from fund balance in the Parks Capital Improvement Fund that would allow us to make sure that we get the playground installed. So contracts are already executed and underway to begin the project. If you go out to Fort Utah, there's equipment out there moving. So we just want to make sure that we can get the playground in there as advertised, and this will allow us to do that.

Awesome. Thanks, Brad. So just for the public's record, nothing has changed on the scope of the project, but bids come in differently and they're not allowed to appropriate money in any amount without us giving the okay. So normally this would have been done in the budget and they had money in their own department to do it, but they do need the okay of the council for transparency. Any questions from the council for Brad Whitlock?

And just for context, for us in the public, what was the original appropriated amount and how much is... So basically, this is adding $330,000 to what amount?

It's a tough one off the top. Okay. Sorry. I know it's overall about a $5 million project. Okay.

So it's a very small, we're talking like a 5% or less.

It's a small percentage and we've worked really hard to get it down. So it's just this. So sorry to have it off the top of my head.

No, no, it's okay. I think that is the main point is just that this was a very, very small cost overrun. And so I think it's very reasonable.

All right. Any other questions for Brad? Okay. Thanks, Brad. We'll open this item up for public comment. Any public comment on this item? All right, seeing no public comment, we'll do council discussion. Any discussion on this item? All right, we'll do a vote on the implied motion. Councillor Christensen. Yes. Councillor Whitlock. Yes. Councillor Bogdan. Yes. Councillor Hoban. Yes. Councillor Whipple. Yes. Yes. Councillor Garrett? Yes. Councillor McKay? Yes. That passes 7-0. Next, an implied motion on ordinance submitting the zone map classification of real property generally located at 1113 and 191 North Geneva Road from the general commercial zone to the mixed-use zone. This is in the Fort Utah neighborhood and will be presented by Megan VandeGraaff, our city planner.

Thank you. So we talked about this a little bit in the work meeting today. This is the site that we're looking at on Geneva Road, a little bit north of Center Street. It's a little bit over an acre. The applicant came to the council last year with a concept for 26 townhomes, eight of which were live work units. That application was denied. as the neighborhood wanted to see a little bit more traditional retail use. This is the current zoning, which is general commercial. And it is the future land use map. The general plan shows it as part of a commercial mixed use area, which covers kind of that entire intersection. This is the revised concept plan. We have four commercial kind of flex office spaces along Geneva Road, which include garage space on the ground floor, and then 18 townhomes behind that. I have some renderings and some floor plans, but I'm happy to answer any questions.

Any questions for Megan? Councillor Christensen.

And any current comments from the neighborhood in terms of their reaction to this?

The applicant presented this at the neighborhood meeting last week. We had some general questions about the project, but no real feedback one way or another.

Councillor Whitlock.

And just for all context, could you kind of summarize the outcome of the planning commission meeting in regards to this issue?

Yes, so we had the rezone and the concept plan go to Planning Commission. The concept plan was approved 4-2, and the rezone was approved 6-0. They felt like the mixed use met the general plan, but the concept plan... a couple commissioners felt like they still wanted to see more retail uses rather than this flex office concept.

Can you explain a little more about what flex office concept means?

Yeah, and the applicant might be able to provide even more context. They've done some similar projects, it sounds like. But what this would look like is each, so it'd be two stories. The ground floor would have a 500 square foot garage space. And then the rest of it would just kind of be open office space could be used for retail. I believe they've seen different types of uses go in these types of spaces, but it just kind of depends. They've seen, you know, personal services, lots of contractor type offices, and then the second floor would also just be flex space or it could just be a mezzanine, depending on what they end up doing. All right.

Thanks, Megan. We'll open this item up for public comment.

Is there any?

Oh, yes. Let's have the developer come. Do you have a presentation for us? Okay, great. Thank you. Just need to know your name and your city of residence.

Yes, Jared Morgan, Riverton, Utah, unfortunately. No, I love Riverton. We're just grateful to be back here. It's been a real learning curve for us the last eight months as we've been trying to figure out how to incorporate retail commercial into this segment of Provo. We've done a pretty deep dive from a market standpoint and we've landed on a product type that I think will fit very well into this area. We're doing a similar product type in Lehigh and these, I best describe them just to further answer your question, best describe them as commercial retail with the ability to adapt and attract a wide range of uses, both from, you know, professional office uses to, you know, my wife and I just went to one of these, it was a pop-up shop with an interior designer that rents, you know, 1500 square feet of the same product in Bluffdale. We've leased it to architects and engineers and I just really like the versatility of it. I like how fronting Geneva, we've come up with something that will look and feel like a storefront retail commercial. And so, you know, we've been a little nervous about this concept, but I think we've landed on something that checks the box from all the feedback we received in December. And so we feel comfortable with the zone at this point. We feel comfortable with the uses. And yeah, we're excited to attract some commercial users to the area. So are there any additional questions?

Counselor Whitlock.

So I just want to make sure that I got my head around this properly. So what we're looking at right now is a rendering of the townhomes. Correct. So these are not going to be commercial. They're 100% residential.

Correct. Yeah. Do you have an elevation of the commercial? Okay. Great. Yeah. So this actually is a little bit different. The garage space will be on the backside of the units. So just imagine that garage not fronting Geneva. So this is a product type that we're doing in Lehigh, very similar. But it's going to be a much different storefront type visual on Geneva Road.

Right. So from this rendering, we're looking at it from Geneva Road. And these garages will be on the back. And so what will be facing Geneva Road?

More of a storefront type look. So just eliminate the garage, and it'll be the canopy with the... Yeah, with the storefront.

Like as in windows? Yeah, yeah.

Because I think one of the concerns, as you know, when you did this for the first time, was this intersection is something where the Westside residents dramatically want dining retail options. And for a long time, the expectation of the residents was that the property on that corner was going to be – a grocery store and now it's a bunch of apartments. And so there's, there's less and less space now to get that, that type of product in for the residents in this area. When I see this, I don't see retail and shopping. I see flex warehouse space, but tell me why I'm wrong.

Yeah. I mean, I can only speak to my experience. Like, you know, we, we have, we have retail type users on, in some of our, like we have a, know a salon and one we have you know um this is a different zone but a med spa type so it you know we we could easily easily have a retailer or clothing you know we could we could accommodate all of that with this product type i i was i was concerned about really boxing ourselves in and having vacancy for a long time so this just allows us to um have a much broader reach on users. It's going to look and feel commercial retail, and I'm honestly hoping that the market allows it to be that.

Thank you.

Councillor Garrett.

Hello, Jared, and thank you for your interest in Provo and interest in bringing economic development to our city. So eight months ago, a year ago, when this was first brought to the neighborhood, they inquired about the possibility of less housing, more retail. You reduced it from, was it 26 units? To the current plan, which is 18. Correct. And then the retail. So more to Councillor Whitlock's comments. If this in fact is, you view this as a retail plan, environment, how do you see the second floor being used? What have you seen in other developments? How do they use, if it's a clothing store or why a second floor?

Yeah. So these units are, again, very versatile. You can have just the mezzanine with an open kind of storefront. The interior designer that we toured last week, she opted to do a mezzanine and then she went you know, floor to ceiling storefront with all of her merchandise inside. So it allows for that or it allows for an entire second floor, which I've seen a lot of office space occupy that second floor. And then they have the more common area where patrons will come into the bottom floor. So if they go full second floor, in my experience, it's been more office type of use.

Okay, so in your commercial retail, you're including office space as well. Correct. In the rear part of the development, the 18 units, I noticed in several parts of the proposal, you indicated a willingness to consider up to 50% for sale, owner-occupied for sale, as opposed to for lease. And now the final... proposal has come to us with, am I correct, six proposed units for sale and 12 for lease? Is that where we landed?

Yeah, and that's where we landed. We're open... If the council is asking us to consider more, we're open to that. We have the six on the left side of the screen. Those face west. So the front elevations will be to the west. We intend to sell those units. Our price point's kind of hitting that missing metal price point. And then the middle 12 we have slated to lease out. However, we're open to it. We wanted to give ourselves enough flexibility for sale for a lease product, both on the townhomes and the commercial. So the commercial building will be condominiumized into individual suites that users could purchase or lease. So that concept is flowing through the entire site plan.

Great. Thank you, Jared.

All right. Thank you so much, Jared.

Becky has a question.

Becky Bogdan has a question for you.

OK. You guys have a wall, an incredible cinderblock wall.

Yeah.

I have heard from the neighbors to the north and to the west that that is a very beloved, cherished wall. Is it going to stay?

That's an interesting comment.

I thought so too, but it is very loved.

That's news to me. The HOA has told me they despise the wall.

And the HOA president told me he loves the wall.

Hmm. Um, that's interesting. I'm, I really dislike the wall. Um, but, uh, um, if, if it's, if it's being asked to stay, I mean, it's a very large cinder block wall. I'm sure you've seen it.

I was invited out there too. Well, I invited myself out there cause I had to see this thing. It is, it's gotta be like 20 feet tall.

At least. Yeah, I took a picture of it from the HOA side. And I mean, in the neighborhood meeting last week, view preservation was brought up. And that's important to us to obtain and retain views for our residents. And so that would be fairly difficult to maintain any views to the north and or, you know, northeast for that matter. So, you know, we had a conversation about the tree line we've looked at. We've done all the measurements. I think we'll be able to salvage several trees that are existing on the site. But it has been our intent to demolish everything and get it to a developable pad. I'm very concerned about, from a structural standpoint, the wall. There's several concerns.

I asked about the structural standpoint. And they say it's very, very firm and provides a lot of shade. And I don't know about the noise barrier. They said they don't hear anything back there. But it's the shade that they like. It's the privacy. And it is a massive wall. And it's loved.

Yeah. I mean, I guess my comment towards that would be we need to rely on structural engineers to give us guidance and direction on that. And if it is the absolute desire from the surrounding community to retain the wall, then we can explore that if it's salvageable. But that's not something that... I've wanted to retain on site. And that is a different message from what I've like I've heard from others in the community. So, Thank you.

Alright, well now open this item up for public comment.

David Horne, Provo, Utah. Thank you for showing those pictures because it's hard to realize what the development project is without seeing those pictures. And looking at that concept plan, I find it hard to have enough parking if it goes retail. There's probably not even adequate parking if it was all residential. So I think it either needs to go one way or the other.

and not a hybrid thank you esteemed council members and madam mayor since you're here um my name is Salvatore Calora I'm one of the homeowners on the northern property property to the north of this that we're talking about talk about the wall Well, I wasn't there. I wasn't home. I must have been at work when you were talking to people. And the developer insinuated in the planning commission meeting that he talked to a bunch of people, but I was never talked to. I've never been approached about this or talked to. So I don't know where that's coming from. This land should remain commercial. The council has an opportunity here to make a very good decision. that will actually serve the community. Recently, a warehouse was approved in the Riverside that I don't think is serving anybody. Apartment complex was approved across the street from where we live that I don't think is serving anybody. You have the opportunity to preserve what could be a commercial and retail area instead of creating, as has been said, a residential island that doesn't make any sense. I'm a little worried that the council is becoming unreliable on zoning. As far as I'm concerned, zoning changes our privilege and not a right that everybody just has. And that's why it has to come before this body, because it is a special privilege. The tandem parking and the flex office space, to me, seem to be expedient to check the boxes and do the absolute bare minimum to meet zoning requirements, when in reality, I think the tandem parking is going to be very impractical, especially in poor weather. And I think the flex space, again, will probably end up being private offices that have no service To the Community, we have children, we don't have protect our own protected backyards I think that's why the wall is liked it creates a lot of shade and creates an alcove. I can't speak to what other people may have told you about that, but I know that I was never approached about this project, I hope the Council make a very good decision.

Thank you and well timed. All right, any more public comment? All right, we'll move to council discussion. Any council discussion on this item? Councilor Bogdan.

Okay, Gordon. I asked Gordon to be here specifically for this. The one complaint I hear a lot is that traffic. I mean, I hear the gentleman that just spoke because I put it out there on Facebook land and I got pumped out about the desire for commercial because they're The Smith's property was turned into a bunch of apartments, the place that was supposed to be the downtown center, and there's hardly any commercial. The Family Dollar is very loved. The eating places are very loved, but... The desire for commercial, especially in the central part of town, is very loved. But Gordon, the traffic. Can you address the traffic? Because the traffic is probably the number one thing that I hear. Other than the need for commercial and the loved wall. I'm assuming that you love the wall too. See, the wall's loved.

So I think we're specifically talking about the traffic on Center Street from Geneva Road up to the freeway. And that area, the traffic is bad. It's failing. This development will be required by UDOT in its final plan, as well as the city to do a traffic study. That will be part of its... DUE DILIGENCE, SOMETHING THAT THE CITY REQUIRED.

THE 17 HOMES AND OFFICE CANNOT BE SOMETHING THAT BE MAJOR.

Recording in progress. Recording stopped. Recording in progress.

Well, we have to do approvals for, right?

And then they'll sign up for it. that the developer has to play, and it's just a striping of fate. A petitioner of...

I think there was... Well, I have to go back and look, but that's what I think as well.

So everybody can... The last step is... access to the site.

And our access plans are really kind of restricted and off. So what can we do for the shop relief if we need to leave the site?

So, our plans work. Has been on and we're ready to see. Because. The portion of the. doesn't show up in the near future could be as long as 20 years some of those improvements unless something changes at the state so this is something we just put up is The places where they're spent now, traffic's worse than this. And so we get we're. Right now, I didn't. Maybe that's so. Um.

Right. And so there's belief in sight. Right.

We were hoping that lay people could be the ones to meet. That makes me very happy.

There are reports growing in the sports program.

All those things result in the impact. Really great.

Great. Thanks, Gordon.

All right.

All right.

Any more discussion? Council? Councilor Whittemore?

I thought, well, you can delete your traffic once you do, you know, roads that want to be driven or going to the street. And the way you second is by having I mean, I really appreciate the developers' thoughts and answers. on the HVAC and countertops. Maybe some printing sign business don't see it.

I read in the past that some of the benefits with property are dissolved. I feel badly that those questions have been successful. I hate to see when we talk with residents, retail opportunities for them. So I hate to see us further reduce and restrict zoning that would eliminate opportunities for increased retail in West Provo.

All right, any more discussion? All right, we'll move to a vote. Councilor Whitlock.

No.

Councilor Bogdan. No. Councilor Hoban.

No.

Councilor Whipple. No. Councilor Garrett. No. Councilor McKay. No. Councilor Christensen. No. So that does not pass 7-0. Next, implied motion on ordinance submitting the zone map classification of real property generally located at 2000 North Canyon Road from the one-family residential R16 zone to the low-density residential LDR zone. This is the Pleasant View neighborhood presented by Dustin Wright.

Thank you, Council. So this property here came about a year ago to be rezoned from R18 to R16 and the applicant is requesting a new rezone on this property to the low density residential zone. They brought a concept plan to Planning Commission that was not approved and that was to develop the site with twin homes and townhomes as opposed to the single-family homes that are currently permitted there under the existing zoning. The general plan calls for residential in this location, so that aligns there. The surrounding zoning, as you can see, there's residential neighborhoods to the east and west, and there's also higher density residential to the north and south. This property sits down below the residential neighborhood to the east. And it's kind of an overview of what's being requested on this property. And I'd be happy to answer any questions that you have.

Any questions for Dustin? Councillor Christensen.

And could you just give us a sense of the neighborhood response to this?

Christopher McConkey- Hello, the response that i've heard is that they're happy with the zoning that's in place now for the 19 single family residential units.

Christopher McConkey- And if you could just share a few more details around the planning Commission and their rationale for affording a recommend and no recommendation.

Yeah, so as far as the concept plan goes, there were some issues that it wasn't able to meet some of the requirements in the low-density residential zone, particularly providing amenity space. Also, the road width, as that changed earlier this year, that's going to also affect their concept plan and have to make some adjustments there. And then with the rezone, I think, yeah, just kind of aligning some of that discussion with what's currently there and what's allowed with those 19 units. And I think receiving some of the feedback from the neighborhood is what I recall from that.

Okay. Thanks, Dustin. Any public comment on this item? Oh, sorry. I keep doing that. I apologize. We need to switch, Kevin. We need to put, thank you. Developer, Mr. Reynolds.

Thank you. Councilors, as I mentioned, I'm Rob Reynolds. Been working with this project for a lot longer than I would have built the first project by the time we've gone through this. But as he mentioned a little of the history, we first approached it with a luxury student housing type project on this acreage because of where it sits next to student housing on the one side and future medium density and condos on the other. with, as mentioned, the three homes that face it to the east that are elevated like 50 feet, roughly. We went from there to a multifamily of roughly 100 units that I thought was also a plausible, significant thing, but that was likewise not approved. searching for something that I thought we could make plausible sense of. We went to single family, the 19 lots that was given a green light. During this process as looking and bidding out things and the costs of construction, walls, so on and so forth, I came to a question that I will pose to each of you tonight is how many of you would be willing or have a desire to purchase a home in this location at approximately $1.5 million that faces student housing all the way along the south, faces medium density to the north and condos to the north, and a sloped hillside to the back? That's the question that I pose to realtors and other things is how many people would be willing to write that kind of a check? And the response was not favorable. Secondly, I guess what we're seeing is a very popular, strong need is for younger families or the like to have their own home. And in their own home, I'm referring to a twin home. Matter of fact, my youngest son is just buying one currently as a twin home for he and his wife to be able to start off and have their own home and garage. And so I guess my second question is, what would this council have any negative issues associated with nicer townhome units, which would all be sold and owned by the applicants or owned by the occupants, as far as that way goes, to this type of project? If you look at what's around it, we're still going to be less dense than anything to the south. less dense than going to the north, separated by elevation to the east. I guess I've been struggling. I did not think that we'd have issues associated with a nicer twin home unit project. But other than that, there's not a lot for us that I would desire to say. Any questions for this channel?

We got a direct response to summarize your situation.

in our work, but if you're able to add or want to add additional details, that'd be great. Just to kind of re-project the change from the existing permitted by-right use that you have to this higher use.

Some of it is point. And the higher the price gets, the less people would be desirable to be. 15 student housing next to the stadium where families would like it more. We couldn't do too much. And initially it was 19 homes. What I'm doing against the 19 homes, I said it would go to 38 just by building the house. And when you look at the higher numbers, it required a secondary fire access that came along with the works, which we reduced. That's the value that I generally have proposed.

And what changed being, I think it was the reason, I think it was a Bible project. So just people to understand that.

The cost of construction, they're going to extra hire the loan. I plan on the, like where we're halfway down the road, people don't want to come back to retain the tools of the buildings. And so those costs of construction, I have an office building as well, and I'm struggling with an office building in perspective with this kind of a lock. Hospitals, there's been struggles, not only because rates have come down every time I've taken an improvement for somebody, but more of a double. So it's a double-edged sword. I've kind of experienced more into that circle as my son up. Therefore, I plan to share with the office of the product and the product that I would be supplying with the sale because of the cost for me to get that.

One more. What are the property input costs that have gone up? make sure to kind of break it out like labor materials, if you can expand on that.

Well, I'll go from new telegrams and concrete to lumber, labor and lumber and up and down. I don't know if there's any projects I haven't gone up in the last nine months. And a little bit of fuel, all the side work and the like, which the city's doing is fuel escalators, which was originally planned, from two or three bucks to almost six. It's almost doubled. Also, a full cost from groceries to building.

Thank you.

I'm just curious, as you've done your analysis, I believe this is in the SOA zone where the have you contemplated the doctor's kitchen? Basically, it would give you two units. You'd have a high-end floor. Someone could rent out the downstairs for a couple of thousand that could do that. Any thought to that?

What was brought before was a secondary place that was in the prime residence. And with the loft being 6,000 feet, there was sufficient room to have a secondary home on the site. Internally, if somebody were to rent their basement, there is some plausibility to that. I don't know how much that will offset once the due purchase price, I don't know. But I have an analysis on internal use of .

Thank you. Just curious.

Thank you. We'll open it up for public comment.

Council Chair, can I ask a question to Gordon Hayes, our public work instructor. You've, I assume, where this was proposed and pronounced, it's in public service, 38 units of service. In this area, we had some issues with the sewer capacity.

Is that what you're asking? Uh-huh. Okay. Thank you.

Hopefully, we have some connections we have left. You know, we could have closed at like 100 or 1,000.

No. So in this section, we're in several units. It's reduced down, I think, at the far end. We're down to like 30 or 40 units. Further?

Yeah. So this one's 700. What does that mean? 200? 200?

I think it's over 300 units.

Oh, just over 300.

I think you're good, Gord. Thank you.

Now we will hear your name and your residence.

I'm taking the opportunity now because I'm waiting for three weeks again. I'm just surprised and not in favor of the project, actually. I think the city council has the opportunity to veto the commission. If they go back to the records, they'll know that it's been lost for six years since I moved back to Louisville. I'm across my own street. The city council reviewed the previous council. members approved a reno of a micro piece property to put higher density residents when it's legitimately no access off the university avenue it comes off a 3900 north The aerial shot doesn't just on my way to pass that property because that the original proposal, which I was right, which is a lot more units than this will prove. And so I was just looking forward to it. But if you look from Provo Canyon Road up, this is separated. It's off Canyon Road. It's not as pretty as the Norwood. And the residential up on this way up top. So seeing the new design on the EL tonight, I think you have a great opportunity to actually put the right residential in here. I'm a favor of this. I hope that you will do the same.

Hello, I am a resident. Um, I am. Uh, and I think if ever there were a place for density housing, it would be the place the. a developer talking about how it's kind of hidden. I have no idea, like he said, who in their right mind would want a single family home in that case specifically. And hearing all of the work that he's put in to figuring out the dynamics that could fit on the platform, he's done a lot of work. I agree with It's product I've heard a lot of back and forth from this count Council, and then the plan Commissioner about where to not do this, this is definitely one that would fit for thinking.

Just out of curiosity, are you from this world of slick?

Oh, we're pro. I live here most of my life. I live in the West. I have lots of opinions.

I'm in the South now, so yes.

I was asked the most recent one was in April. As the developer pointed out to you, he has been with multiple ideas. He left out the At least what was presented to the neighbors at one point was eight units. So this just kind of keeps growing. The neighbors are concerned that it could possibly be a place for something larger. Once we're concerned that might come to, again, suggested was a hundred units. As it was presented to the neighbors, moved into the 30 without a plan or development agreement this could become 48 units what was presented to the planning commission had 24 foot roads which we've now decided isn't something we can do anymore so he needs to redo this Again, the LVR, he would be able to have six units. So you could get 48 units if that's what we're due to do. The biggest concern was traffic and parking for the neighbors who currently deal with the flow of the high density housing that is near to them. So unless the city is going to put into cover, something would require the developer or the owner to park the site so the existing neighbors don't have to deal with that. I've spoken to a couple of councilors personally about because it is legal for three unrelated people to live in Again, without a concept plan, we have three bedrooms, The 2.25 currently required would not allow that third person to even have a parking space. So we're concerned about that. I know of units nearby that have no parking in front of the garage. And I don't know where that lands in the code, but they have to park in the garage. And they only have two spaces. So again, we have no concept plan to see anything of what we might end up with. There were no chairs brought forward on any planning things. I know it's mentioned in the works, but that's not completely clear. And the lawyer is not quite done. So, and other comments about removal of the hillside by the city, not the county commission on this.

Thanks, Sharon. Any more public comments?

Paul, just one question. the flipping burgers on Thursday. I'll take Gary. So the creation and retaining board was approved last year, and the council rezoned the property, the R16 from 19 home subdivision that was informed by the plan admissions concept plan approved concept plan. Two years ago, when the council made the grave, the hill, that proved that it showed people and two to one gradual hope. And after the developer pursued the mountain river, far beyond what was mentioned and seen by this council. Last year, the neighborhood warned that we might end up with a grave. but no homes. Provided they assure residents that no grading and subdivisions are filed and approved. Instead, the city bypassed that safeguard by performing the grading itself. The result is a massive retaining wall and a project that is not 90%, but barely 60% complete. Just look at the city approval. and for that, and with none of the bonds yet performed. Now we're having him to request . This request is not accompanied by an approved plan. The commission denied the plan. The denied included no family land . The layout resembled high density student housing. It proposed 20 foot and 24 foot private roads, contradicting the 30 foot minimum.

Thanks, Paul.

All right, we'll put out this item for calculation.

All right. Oh, Council.

I have a question that I think this may be. So, can you explain that? That's what was mentioned in the comment about the concept plan. There's not an active concept plan that proved its own. What happened?

Yes, we got rezoned the next week with the project plan for the plant commission.

The scenario was presented to be a plan of the rezoning by the plant commission, which is

Yeah, if the property is rebuilt, unless they prefer it or whatever, then yeah, the planning commission will do it. And it's just how that goes.

And can you just remind us the occupancy and kind of methods for a bed and proffer?

I think you guys will recall, I think that Mitch would be a first product for need of a bed and proffer. Thank you. Do you want to add anything to our session?

There is a couple of questions that I have. One is, how do you tune in to covered workings in your organization? at least two in the driveway and the third off the side of the driveway. The question as far as looking at handling the scenario, I think the like in the CTR has more options.

Okay.

Any more discussion?

Kelly, questions? I think the will and desire of the neighborhood matters. That's why we have the neighborhood programs. People come to speak for the neighborhood programs. People come to speak for the neighborhood programs. It's not. There's a neighborhood of different densities. I had a lot of issues that we discussed. I did a couple weeks ago when we talked to Tuscany. That's a historic project, not a historic project. So we can see it this way. It shows center street. The reservoir. You need retail. Retail. This property. No, does not. I agree. I know. When you look. But you get past. These. This isn't. I'm isolated. Neighborhood has been very. I feel. Listen to the neighborhood.

Councilor Bogdan?

Craig, I want to point out walls in certain places are loved. So this may be a very ugly wall, but people that are going to live there, I'm pretty sure are going to appreciate that ugly wall.

Councilor Whitlock?

Yeah, I think... We're pretty, like, other Christians that have been in here. I do. If you from this project, I think. Matches the surrounding. Well, I sister, the town halls, and then there's more dense departments to. The South. I think that I have a few concerns, however. One is the process is that the city may have a reasonable certain things to happen under a certain set of between the city, the developer, and the neighborhood. And while I really, I mean, I believe the developer about the cost increase, but I understand, I think, That's a very tricky thing. It is also difficult for our process and trust community for us, after just eight months, to kind of go back and make an agreement. There was a lot of changes to the program and we're going to change that. So that's one concern I have. I also just have a concern about because it feels like if we were to grant the reason without a concept plan and we're not really saying yes to what was presented, My third point is the owner occupancy commitment seems to be, and first of all, it seems to be sort of verbal. As far as my understanding, no development commitment to kind of hold that as kind of counter to the council. That's my perspective. Now, I would be open to, I'd be the minority on this. I'd be open to continuing this item to address those concerns, but that's my perspective.

Counselor, I think we absolutely need to have a clear concept plan or before we do any kind of a zone change.

I do understand that what already been approved is.

isn't going to work right homes that expensive will not be desirable in that location and that seems to not really be anybody's fault but it is a fact and reality that we found a real concept plan and everything that could bring that price point down. And if it doesn't mean adding a few more units, I would be open to that, but we've got to get, you know, the street what's right. We've got to make sure it fits on the property. Um, and that we get into a reasonable price point for this particular area. Um, I do, uh, acknowledge what counselor said about the existing density. Um, this is kind of a transitional area, right? Where you've got really high density, we've got kind of a medium, and then we've got the single family homes with the, the retaining wall and everything that makes a very clear break between this project and the single family home neighborhood, right? You just go off a cliff. So I think that does create a physical separation that protects that single family character of, of the area to the East. And again, So I see that we could have a transitional density that is compatible with this area. So I do want to see homes for... built here. And frankly, I would be fine if those were homes occupied by students or by a more traditional family because both groups need to live in places and this would be a good place for either group to live. And so I don't want to be super restrictive on that. But I do think that if our price point is well over a million dollars, that's going to create a failed project where either you're kind of building as you go and they're not selling. So you end up with a construction site for years in the hopes maybe that the prices would go down or the market would change. I don't think that does the neighborhood any good. So those are my thoughts on the project as it stands right now.

Councillor Whitlock.

I was curious about a comment that the developer made about saying he did look at a slight change in density, but keeping them single-family homes. But there was a secondary requirement. I didn't fully track what that was that made that not possible. Because, yeah, I do think that if we say no, like I said, I believe the developer on the cost and just the fundamental economic viability. What that does leave is heavily disturbed land vacant for who knows how long, which is a problem. So I'm wondering if there's some kind of compromise solution we could find between the neighborhood and the developer.

Counselor Garrett.

The Pleasant View neighborhood has engaged in this process over many months, possibly years. It's maybe been a couple of years since this was first undertaken. And I feel that as I've observed those discussions and meetings and reviews and analyses, I've seen a compromise reached on the part of the neighborhood and the developer I'm comfortable where we are now and would hesitate to support a continuance because I feel like where we are now is where the neighborhood is comfortable. The Pleasant View neighborhood has expressed support for this current plan and I'd like to see that continue.

I agree with you, Gary. Councillor Bogdan.

I would agree with Gary. I think, and I probably shouldn't speak for the neighborhood, but I think this was kind of a compromise for higher density. Sharon's like, yeah. And Paul's hiding in the back, so I can't see him. And Paul, I would have been disappointed if you wouldn't have come up. I feel like this is their compromise. And I... I don't see how it's going to be productive to go any further into a compromise. So, yeah. But, yeah. Okay. Thanks.

All right. Are you ready to vote? All right. We're going to vote on the implied motion. Counselor Bogdan. Yes. No. No. Councillor Hoban.

No.

Councillor Whipple. No. Councillor Garrett.

No.

Councillor McKay. No. Councillor Christensen.

No.

Councillor Whitlock.

No.

So that does not pass. 7-0. We have continued an ordinance to repeal and replace Provo City Code Title 14, and we also are continuing development services requests on ordinance text amendments to Provo City Code 1434-290 to add Provo River Design corridor standards. So those will come back to us at a future date. If there's no objection, we will now adjourn the Provo Municipal Council by unanimous consent.