Entity: Orem
Body: City Council
Notice Title: | Orem City Council Meeting |
Notice Tags: | Zoning, Elections |
Meeting Location: | 56 North State Street Orem City Council Chambers Orem 84057 |
Event Date & Time: |
September 20, 2011 September 20, 2011 04:00 PM - September 16, 2011 01:58 PM |
Description/Agenda: | CITY OF OREM CITY COUNCIL MEETING 56 North State Street, Orem, Utah September 20, 2011 This meeting may be held electronically to allow a Councilmember to participate. 4:00 P.M. WORK SESSION – PUBLIC SAFETY TRAINING ROOM 1. DISCUSSION – Bee Keeping AGENDA REVIEW 2. The City Council will review the items on the agenda. CITY COUNCIL - NEW BUSINESS 3. This is an opportunity for members of the City Council to raise issues of information or concern. 6:00 P.M. REGULAR SESSION - COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION/INSPIRATIONAL THOUGHT: By Invitation PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: By Invitation APPROVAL OF MINUTES 4. MINUTES of Joint Orem City/Vineyard Town Council Meeting - June 23, 2011 5. MINUTES of City Council Meeting – August 23, 2011 6. MINUTES of Joint Orem/Provo City Council Meeting - August 24, 2011 MAYOR’S REPORT/ITEMS REFERRED BY COUNCIL 7. UPCOMING EVENTS 8. UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS 9. APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Historic Preservation Advisory Commission –2 vacancies Library Advisory Commission – 1 vacancy Orem Arts Council - 2 vacancies Recreation Advisory Commission - 1 vacancy 10. RECOGNITION OF NEW NEIGHBORHOODS IN ACTION OFFICERS 11. OATH OF OFFICE – Orem Youth Council - Judge Reed Parkin 12. REPORT – Orem Municipal Justice Court 13. REPORT – Library Advisory Commission 14. REPORT – Orem Arts Council 15. REPORT – Historic Preservation Advisory Commission 16. AWARD – CAFR – Brandon Nelson CITY MANAGER’S APPOINTMENTS 17. APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS PERSONAL APPEARANCES 18. Time has been set aside for the public to express their ideas, concerns, and comments on items not on the Agenda. (Please limit your comments to 3 minutes.) CONSENT ITEMS 19. RESOLUTION-Requesting a Recertification of the Orem Municipal Justice Court by the Utah Judicial Council RECOMMENDATION: The City Manager recommends the City Council, by resolution, request a recertification of the Orem Municipal Justice court from the Utah Judicial Council. POTENTIALLY AFFECTED AREA: Citywide BACKGROUND: Every four years the City's Justice Court is required to apply for a recertification from the State Judicial Council. By requesting this recertification, the City certifies the following conditions are and will continue to be met: 1) Provide a dedicated court room that complies with State standards for furnishings, equipment, phones, computer access and staffing for the administration of justice; 2) The Justice Court will be open as prescribed by law (5-days per week with the Judge being available on the bench at regularly scheduled times); 3) Provide adequate full-time staffing for the Court; 4) Provide and pay for required annual training of all court personnel; 5) Provide required trained security; 6) Promptly remit required fees to the State; 7) Provide sufficient prosecutors and funding for public defenders and 8) Effective July 1, 2012, record all proceedings with a digital recording and maintain the audio recordings for one year. Both the City Attorney and the Justice Court Judge have affirmed that the above described requirements are being met by the Orem Municipal Justice Court. 20. RESOLUTION—Designating Jeremy R. Cook, Esq., as Trustee for Purposes of Foreclosure on a Portion of the Northgate Special Improvement District REQUEST: The City Attorney requests the City Council, by resolution, designate Jeremy R. Cook, Esq., as Trustee for purposes of foreclosure on a portion of the Northgate Special Improvement District. POTENTIALLY AFFECTED AREA: Citywide BACKGROUND: On January 25, 2006, the City of Orem created the City of Orem, Utah, Northgate Village Special Improvement District covering property located generally at 800 North 900 West, Orem, Utah. The City Council adopted an Assessment Ordinance on October 26, 2010, that levied an assessment against five separate parcels in the District containing a total of 10.886 acres. The first annual assessment payment for each of the five lots was to be paid on or before May 1, 2011. Payment for one of the five lots in the District has been received, but no payment has been received for the other four lots. The City, as governed by the SID bond documents, has declared the balance of the unpaid assessments in default. The City now needs to begin the process of foreclosing on the lots for which the assessments have not been paid. The next step in this process is the formal appointment of Jeremy R. Cook, Esq. to act as the Trustee for purposes of foreclosure. SCHEDULED ITEMS 21. RESOLUTION - Authorizing the City Manager to amend the Development Agreement (A-2010-0006) by Modifying the Concept Plan and Elevations for Property Located Generally at 825 East 800 North POTENTIALLY AFFECTED AREA: Canyon View Neighborhood BACKGROUND: The applicant is seeking to amend the Development Agreement that controls development on the lot located generally at 825 East 800 North. On August 9, 2011, after hearing the request, the City Council continued this item to allow the developer and residential neighbors to work together to determine if a compromise could be reached. The first meeting was held on August 11th with three developers and ten neighbors attending the meeting. After much discussion, assignments were made and the meeting was continued to August 29th. On August 29th there were two developers and twelve neighbors present. After considerable discussion, assignments were made and the meeting was continued to September 1st. On September 1st, three developers and seven neighbors were present. One of the developers was a landscape architect. Both sides worked hard and invested a considerable amount to the outcome. At the conclusion of the third meeting, the neighbors and developers have reached an agreement. The development agreement includes the following requirements: 1. A revised landscaping plan prepared by the landscape architect shall control the landscaping for the site. The landscaping plan increases the number of trees and shrubs from what is required by the ordinance. It also includes a fountain feature located near 840 North. 2. A covered entry or portico will be located on the east side of the building that covers the sidewalk area but not the parking stalls. This architectural feature shall be shown on the building elevations. 3. The northwest and southwest corners of the building shall be beveled as shown on the proposed elevations. 4. A maximum of 3,000 square feet is allowed on the second story as measured by the inside of the exterior wall. 5. A maximum of 6,500 square feet to be allowed on the main floor as measured by the outside of the exterior wall. 6. The building shall be designed and built in substantial compliance with the proposed building elevations. 7. The site shall be built in substantial compliance with the proposed site plan. These revisions have been included in the revised development agreement. Special thanks go to all those who took the time to participate in this community process. 6:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING 22. ORDINANCE - Amending Sections 14-3-2 and 14-3-3 of the Orem City Code Pertaining to Signs on Public and Charter School Property Used to Advertise School Sponsors REQUEST: Jon Snyder, on behalf of Mountain View High School, requests the City Council, by ordinance, amend Sections 14-3-2 and 14-3-3 of the Orem City Code pertaining to commercial advertising signs on public and charter school property. POTENTIALLY AFFECTED AREA: Citywide BACKGROUND: The applicant requests the City amend the Orem City Code to permit a school sponsor sign to be placed on property owned by any public or charter school. The purpose of this request is to raise funds for the school where the sign is located or for school groups such as the football team or basketball team. This type of sign is used to advertise the businesses that contribute to the school. Because of the size, the sign would be classified as a pole sign. As it would be used to advertise off-premise commercial advertising, it would also be classified as a billboard sign. Pole Signs. The city is divided into sign zones which permit various sizes of pole signs. A pole sign is higher than six square feet and/or larger than thirty-six square feet of sign area. Most of the schools that would be governed by the proposed ordinance are not located in a sign zone. The Orem City Code must be amended to permit this type of sign in a residential zone Sign Zone A is located along the majority of State Street and permits a maximum size pole sign of 300 square feet and 35 feet high. To use the maximum available, the property would need at least 251 feet of street frontage. Sign Zone B is located at the north and south end of State street as well as the industrial areas west of I-15. This zone permits a maximum of 225 square feet and 24 feet high with at least 201 feet of street frontage. Sign Zone C has locations along University Parkway and 800 North. Sign Zone C is somewhat different in that the distance from the right-of-way line equals the maximum height of the sign. The square footage is increased as it moves away from the right-of-way, but has a maximum of 200 square feet. Billboard Signs. Currently billboard signs are not permitted in any zone in the city. All lawfully existing billboard signs are nonconforming uses. The City Attorney is concerned that allowing billboard signs on school property could undermine the justifications for which billboards were banned by the City back in 2004-preservation of aesthetics and promoting traffic safety. Under First Amendment law, a ban on billboards must be justified by a substantial governmental interest. The interest in preserving aesthetics and encouraging traffic safety qualify as substantial governmental interests. However, to allow new billboards to be constructed on school property (or anywhere else) could diminish the credibility of the reasons the City relied on back in 2004 to enact a general billboard ban and could potentially undermine the validity of that ban. The proposed amendments are as follows: 14-3-2 School Sponsor Sign A school sponsor sign provides off-premise advertising for businesses that contribute materials or financially to the school. 14-3-3 School Sponsor Sign: 1. A school sponsor sign requires a permit from the city. 2. A school sponsor sign is allowed on premises owned by the Alpine School District and charter schools. 3. The school sponsor sign shall have a maximum height of twenty (20) feet and a maximum square footage of two-hundred eighty (280) square feet. 4. The school sponsorship sign shall only be used to advertise sponsors that contribute to the school on the property where the sign is located. 5. School sponsor signs may be illuminated. 6. School sponsor signs are permitted in any zone. Advantages: • Provides an additional funding source for schools and for school programs in tough economic times • Encourages local businesses to partner with local schools in the education of the children Disadvantages: • Adds commercial advertising in a residential zone • Would permit billboard signs, which currently are not permitted • Creates the real possibility that billboards would then be allowed in other parts of the city Proliferates signage in the city and adds to the sign clutter 6:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING 23. ORDINANCE - Amending Section 22-14-19 of the Orem City Code by Enacting Subsection (J) to Permit Fences in the Front Setback Along Carterville Road REQUEST: Dallin Bruun requests the City Council, by ordinance, amend Section 22-14-19 of the Orem City Code to permit fences in the front setback along Carterville Road. POTENTIALLY AFFECTED AREA: Citywide BACKGROUND: The applicant owns a home at 1123 South Carterville Road. In the process of remodeling the home, he constructed a six-foot high stone/masonry fence within the front setback. The front setback is thirty feet in the R20 zone and the fence is fifteen feet from the edge of asphalt. The Orem City Code requires that any fence located in the front yard setback shall be no higher than three feet for a solid fence or four feet for a non-sight obscuring fence. The fence was constructed without a permit. After the City informed the applicant of the violation, he met with the Planning Division Manager who decided berming the fence on the street side of the fence will give the appearance of a fence that meets the ordinance. The other option at that time was to remove the fence and relocate it to meet the ordinance. The applicant chose to berm the fence but later removed the berming and installed lighting and landscaping next to the fence. He was again informed the fence did not meet the Orem City Code and was not in agreement with the approved permit. The next option was to amend the Orem City Code for fences specifically along Carterville Road. Other fences exist along Carterville Road that are within the front yard setback. The applicant stated he was doing what a neighbor a few blocks away had done. A drive-by survey of Carterville Road shows several fences that do not meet the ordinance as they are too high within the front setback. The proposed fifteen-foot setback will not bring all fences into compliance. Carterville Road is classified as “rural” by City Engineers with an asphalt width range from twenty-four to thirty-four feet. A rural road does not have curb, gutter, or sidewalk. In the narrow locations, there is no curb, gutter, or sidewalk whereas the wider locations have a combination curb, gutter, and sidewalk. The applicant’s property is located where the asphalt width is twenty-four feet. It is also at these narrow locations where the fences have been installed within the front yard setback. Of the nearly ninety lots with frontage on Carterville Road, eight have combination curb, gutter, and sidewalk. The majority are located where the asphalt is narrow and in areas where the street will most likely never be widened. The proposed text is as follows: 22-14-20(J) Fences adjacent to Carterville Road Fences may be located in the front yard setback of dwellings along Carterville Road. However, the fences shall be no closer than fifteen (15) feet from the edge of asphalt and shall not encroach into the clear vision triangle of driveways or streets. The maximum height of a fence regulated under this article shall be seven (7) feet. Advantages: • Allows existing masonry fences to remain • Provides privacy to lots along Carterville Road, which is narrow and has no curb, gutter, or sidewalk • May act as a speeding deterrent to have a fence structure closer the road Disadvantages: • Not permitted anywhere else in the city • Can create a compound affect • The fifteen-foot requirement will not bring all fences into compliance; however, a zero setback would 24. RESOLUTION - Conditional Use Permit – Guest House Located Generally at 1129 East 1290 South REQUEST: Michael Birchall requests the City Council, by resolution, approve a conditional use permit for a guest house located generally at 1129 East 1290 South in the PD-18 zone. POTENTIALLY AFFECTED AREA: Hillcrest Neighborhood BACKGROUND: Section 22-11-30(K) of the Orem City Code permits guest houses with a conditional use permit. The PD-18 zone is The Berkshires development located generally at 1290 South 1100 East. As a PD zone, there are zoning regulations which are unique to this development and not applicable anywhere else in the city. The use of a guest house is one of those uses permitted in the PD-18 zone. The requirements for a guest house are as follows: K. Guest House. A guest house is a particular type of accessory building and shall be placed on the same lot as the primary structure. One guest house per lot may be permitted, and each of the following shall apply: 1. The guest house shall be of the same architectural design and materials as the main residential dwelling. 2. The guest house shall be no larger than twenty-five percent (25%) of the above grade finished floor area of primary dwellings, nor larger than four thousand (4,000) square feet. 3. The guest house shall not be sold or rented separately from the main residence. 4. A property owner shall obtain a conditional use permit for a guest house prior to its erection. The proposed guest house meets the above listed requirements as it will be 1,400 square feet whereas the main dwelling is 10,000+ square feet. Several guest houses have been approved in the PD-18 zone. 25. ORDINANCE—Approving an Amendment to Assessment Ordinance No. 0-01-0036 (Canyon River Special Improvement District No. 2001-1) to Amend the Assessment List and Reaffirm the Levying of Assessments Against Certain Properties in the Canyon River Special Improvement District REQUEST: The City Attorney requests that the City Council, by ordinance, amend Assessment Ordinance No. 0-01-0036 by amending the Assessment List and reaffirming the levying of assessments against certain properties in the Canyon River Special Improvement District. POTENTIALLY AFFECTED AREA: CITYWIDE BACKGROUND: The City Council adopted an Assessment Ordinance for the Canyon River Special Improvement District No. 2001-1 on September 25, 2001. The original assessment ordinance levied assessments against several parcels in the Canyon River Special Improvement District, one of which was known as Lot 4, Plat A, Canyon River Subdivision. Lot 4, Plat A, contained approximately 17.229 acres. Several years ago the owner of Lot 4 stopped paying the annual assessments for Lot 4. The City commenced foreclosure proceedings on Lot 4 and the owner filed bankruptcy on the eve of the foreclosure sale. The City, the owner (debtor), and other creditors have spent the last couple of years going through bankruptcy proceedings with regard to Lot 4. Through numerous legal maneuverings in and out of bankruptcy court, the City has been blocked from proceeding with the foreclosure sale of Lot 4. On March 11, 2011, the owner of Lot 4 filed a new subdivision plat known as Canyon River Subdivision Plat B which subdivided Lot 4 into five new lots. One of the creditors of the owner, America First Credit Union, has a mortgage lien on the area covered by lots 1-4 of Plat B. In early August, 2011, all of the parties claiming an interest in Lot 4, including the owner, the bankruptcy trustee, the City, and America First Credit Union executed a settlement agreement that resolves all of the issues disputed in the bankruptcy as well as other issues that threatened to evolve into additional litigation in State court. Among the issues resolved is the payment of all arrearages in the Canyon River Special Improvement District to the City. Specifically, the settlement agreement calls for America First to pay the City the full assessments for the area of Lots 1-4 of Plat B. The agreement also requires the owner of Lot 5, Plat B, to pay all delinquent assessment payments to the City and to pay all future assessment payments for Lot 5, Plat B, in a timely manner. This is a good resolution for the City because after payment by America First, the assessments will have been paid in full for Lots 1-4 of Plat B. In order for this proposed settlement agreement to work, the City needs to amend the original assessment ordinance to allocate the assessment that was originally levied against Lot 4, Plat A, on a pro rata basis among the five new lots created by Canyon River Subdivision Plat B. The total assessment amount will be the same (less all amounts that have already been paid), the assessment will just be divided among the five new lots according to the square footage contained in each lot. 26. CANVASS AND CERTIFICATION - 2011 Primary Municipal Election Results RECOMMENDATION: The City Recorder recommends that the City Council complete the canvass and, by motion, certify the 2011 Primary Municipal Election results. POTENTIALLY AFFECTED AREA: Citywide BACKGROUND: Pursuant to State law, it is necessary for the City Council, as the Board of Canvassers, to canvass the election no later than seven days after the completion of the ballot—September 20, 2011. After the canvassing has been completed, it will be necessary for the Council, by motion, to officially certify the results of the Canvass. COMMUNICATION ITEMS 27. BUDGET REPORT – Month Ending August 2011 CITY MANAGER INFORMATION ITEMS 28. This is an opportunity for the City Manager to provide information to the City Council. These items are for information and do not require action by the City Council. ADJOURNMENT |
Notice of Special Accommodations: | THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO PARTICIPATE IN ALL CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS. If you need a special accommodation to participate in the City Council Meetings and Study Sessions, please call the City Recorder’s Office at least 3 working days prior to the meeting. (Voice 229-7074) (TDD # 229-7037) |
Notice of Electronic or telephone participation: | This meeting may be held electronically to allow a Councilmember to participate. |
Other information: | |
Contact Information: |
|
Posted on: | September 16, 2011 02:00 PM |
Last edited on: | September 16, 2011 02:00 PM |