Public Hearing For New RDA

Anita Weston, Reporter

Rich Civic Times

GARDEN CITY, Utah. July 13, 2016. The Garden City Redevelopment Agency held their quarterly meeting on Wednesday, July 13, 2016, at 5 p.m.  The meeting was held at the Garden City Lakeview Center.

The minutes of the public hearing of the Redevelopment Agency meeting held on June 9, 2016, were approved.   The minutes of the Redevelopment Agency quarterly meeting held June 9 were also approved.

A discussion was held regarding the creation of a new RDA area.  The Professional Services Agreement between Garden City and RS Contract Management has been drafted and is ready for signatures. 

Randy Sant of RS Contract Management noted that his company is moving forward in creating the project area.  Copies of the Professional Services Agreement between Garden City and RS Contract Management had been sent to the City for their approval.  Garden City will pay $15,000 to Sant to get this new area created and approved.  The City needs to make a contract with the owner of the new RDA area making sure that the owner of that property will pay half of the cost, and the City will be responsible for the remaining half.

After the agreement is signed, a resolution needs to be signed.  The town of Garden City Redevelopment Agency is designating the water’s Edge Development  to be the new Community Development Project Area.   RS Contract Management will be authorized and will direct all necessary actions to complete getting this project completed and accepted.

Garden City Mayor, John Spuhler felt that Legacy PUD should be added to the RDA area.  He asked Sant to add that information to the documents.  Sant indicated that he needed all kinds of budget information from Legacy before he could incorporate that project into the RDA.  He noted that the two areas needed to be joined either by a road or some other way and that it would slow down the process.

Mayor Spuhler noted that going twice to the tax division would not be wise.  To ask for the RDA once would probably all that would be approved.  Sant agreed with Mayor Spuhler and noted that he would get on the matter and include Legacy.  He, however, needs several items prior to being able to finish up the required documents and get the requested RDA approved.

Sant went on to explain that after the resolution is signed, it will take two or three weeks to get the budget ready and the redevelopment plan in place.  A public hearing must be held after the budget and plans are ready.  Originally, he felt that the public hearing could be held in September, but by adding the additional property, he didn’t know how much this would change the time line.

Usually there is a two-year time limit from the signing of the agreement before the RDA begins.  The RDA will be in place for 15 years.  

The Council made a motion, and it passed asking Sant to move forward with the creation of the above noted RDA Area.

Legacy Beach Plat Goes Back To Developers

Anita Weston, Reporter

Rich Civic Times

GARDEN CITY, Utah. July 13, 2016. The final plat discussion/approval of Legacy Beach, located at 552 South to 620 South Bear Lake Blvd. was next on the agenda.  This property will become a gated private Planned Unit Development upon completion.  However, the Planning Commission was unable to pass the plans that were presented last week at that meeting.  The members of the Commission recommended that the individuals involved take care of all of the items listed by the City Attorney and City Engineer before any approval could be given.  They felt there were enough items in question that they could not approve this project at that time.  However, if all of the items were resolved before City Council Meeting, the City Council could go ahead and give the final approval.

Zan Murray, the City’s Engineer, did not feel comfortable with the plat in its present form.  He noted that two pieces of property within the subdivision have not yet been transferred into the development.  The dumpster area is not shown on the current plat.  Not all of the parcels are addressed properly.  One property is very small and doesn’t tie any parking with the small proposed cottage. 

Currently it is not clear what property is owned by the individual home owners and what is green space required by the development.  It appears that each owner will have a small lot in front of their home, but this is not made clear on the plat.  Also, it is not clear if the driveways are owned by the homeowner or if they are part of the common areas. 

No one in the City has yet received a copy of the CC&R’s that are required for the project.  They need to be made available to the City so that they can be read, recorded, and checked to make sure they follow City requirements.  There are some locations that don’t appear to have an easy access to the dwellings in that area. 

Murray also noted that he had not had access to any of the construction drawings.  He was concerned with the storm pond, the common areas, the private and/or public roads and utilities.  Currently, it is not possible to know if the City and/or the County can go into the subdivision to maintain the sewer system, the sanitation system, and the water system. 

Don White, the Legacy representative, noted that waiting until August would be a real burden for the subdivision.  That doesn’t allow much time to make any progress on the PUD.  He also indicated that most of the items the City needs have been completed.  He didn’t know why they had not been given to the City.  The City Engineer noted that he will be leaving on vacation in the next week or so.  He will put himself out to work with the PUD if they get the necessary information to him on Friday.  He will set aside time to work with the developers in his office on Monday.  He will then put in the required time to go over everything and make sure the list of items has been checked and hopefully completed before he leaves.  If they can do that, he will work with them.  That means they can hold a special City Council Meeting and move forward.  If everything isn’t complete, however, the PUD will have to wait until the meeting in August for final approval.

Murray noted that the PUD could go ahead and put in the pillars along the roadside for the fence that will be built.  He also noted that they could dig the hole for the clubhouse, but they were not to pour any cement or go any further than that until final approval is given.

Dedication Ceremony At Garden City Heritage Park

Long Time Legislator Upset In Primary

Bobbie Bicknell Coray, Reporter
Rich Civic Times

County clerk offices across District 53 have finished their canvasses, and Logan Wilde still leads his opponent by 8 votes. All of the votes have been canvassed and approved, now the County Clerks certify the official results and send them to the State Elections Office.

The Salt Lake Tribune quoted Wilde as saying " each candidate had strong support in different regions. "Summit was his [Brown's] strongest area. Morgan came out really strongly to support me, as did Duchesne and Daggett counties."

Different issues were important in different areas, Wilde said. "In Morgan, it was definitely education" as Wilde campaigned for more local control.

"You get out in Daggett, Duchesne and Rich counties, and it is public lands," where Wilde vowed to stop federal overreach."

His Republican opponent was Mel Brown who has served 24 years in the Utah Legislature.

According to state law, if the difference in votes between the two candidates falls under .25% of the total votes cast in the race then the losing candidate can request a recount which would be conducted by the Lt. Governor's Office. Estimating the total vote count to be five thousand ballots cast, .25% of 5,000 works out to be 12 votes.

On November 8, he will face Democrat Cole R. Capner of Summit County who ran unopposed in the primary.

Musings Of A Muddled Male

What is Truth?

By Bob Stevens, The Muddled Male

       I began this on the last day of June, a month considered by many to be the month for brides.  If June is the brides’ month, then May might be considered the groom’s last month.  Now I don’t mean to imply that getting married for men is like dying.  I just mean that the month before the nuptials is the last time he will be allowed to be right in spite of the fact that he will soon learn that he is usually wrong.

       There is something you need to know about the difference between men and women.  During the telling of a story women demand total accuracy of facts, right down to the most minuscule of jots and tittles.  Men, on the other hand, feel comfortable exaggerating just a little if it makes the story better.  Nanny, my matriarchal grandmother used to say, “Bob, never spoil a story for the sake of the truth.”  Ann, my wife, will claim that I am a staunch adherent to Nanny’s wise counsel.

       Let me give you an example of the different ways Ann and I might approach the truth.  I was once regaling a group with a really funny story about driving when I said, “I must have been doing 200 miles-per-hour.”  Before I could begin the punch line she said, “Actually he was doing less than fifty because we were on a sharp curve at the time and besides, he rarely drives over 40 anyway because he is a doddering old man who drives most of the time with his left turn signal on.”  Then she said, “Go on with your story dear, you had just started to tell us the funny part about what happened when you were driving fast.”

       Well, by now everyone was focused on “doddering old man with his left turn signal on,” and began to wander away.  So I gave up and decided that from that point forward I would always tell the complete and total truth.

       In keeping with my new goal to only tell the complete and total truth, I am admitting that I made some of that up.  I leave it to you to determine which part.

I first wrote this story in 2008 and decided to submit it to our editor for this weeks Muddled Male Column.  When I read it to Ann, my wife, to get her editorial approval, as I usually do to stay out of trouble, she said, “It is 2016 and in February you turned 81.  The part about the doddering old man driving with his left turn signal on is now completely true.”  So you see, I am wrong again.

       Bob Stevens

       muddledmale@gmail.com

(The editor:  It is not Ann it is the Unmuddled Mathematician, he who must be accurate!)

Garden City P&Z Meetig

Randall Knight, Reporter
Rich Civic Times

GARDEN CITY, Utah.  July 6, 2016.  The Planning and Zoning public hearing meeting began at 5:10 PM and had 4 residents in attendance.    The board members present were: Lance Bourne (Chair), Jim DeGroot, Joey Stocking, Dewayne Gifford, Susan House and Tom Stevens.

Public comments were requested in regard to the final plat for Legacy Beach located at approximately 552 S Bear Lake Blvd.  There is a concern on how to resolve the labeling method for the location of a dedicated public 8 ft wide beach access path for 100 years.  Nate Parry stated the project will not be done in phases.

Julie Weston requested information in regard to her parents plan to live in a house located at 205 S. Bear Lake Blvd and have a food trailer in front of the house.  The food truck would serve Chinese and Japanese cuisine.  If the plan was possible she would requested some extensions on some of the timelines identified in the Transient Business policy.  The request was denied based on the current parking ordinance policy.  

The Public Notice meeting began at 5:45 and no additional residents were present.  After roll call and approval of minutes the discussions began in regard to the agenda.

Nate Parry requested final approval of his Legacy Beach project.  There is a long list of minor issues that need to be resolved.  Lance proposed hard dates be assigned to each task before approval would be given.  One of the main issues was with the state requiring a higher berm than what was accepted earlier in the year.  The purpose of the berm is to prevent 100 year storm runoff levels draining into the lake.  Another issue is for an 8 ft public beach access walkway on the south side of the project with a privacy fence per HOA guidelines.  The board approved the plan based on hard completion dates being assigned by the next City Council meeting.

Mark Smoot and Don White requested input on their plan for a future mixed use development located on both sides of 200 N so he can begin making final plans.  They pointed out the plan would also include a development of commercial storage parking down 200 North toward 300 West.  The board said they do not a see an issue with their proposed plan.

Clair Webb requested information about the future plans for roads near 1800 S. Bear Lake Blvd, off Hodges Canyon, and a C-3 zone off Hwy 89 near the beginning of Bridgerland.  He wanted to know about any height limits for zip line towers, climbing walls, water slides, rope lifts and if both entrance/exit requirements are required for commercial property.  He also wanted to know if he bought a 60 acre parcel if he could develop only 5 acres.  The board stated there are no height limits for towers and commercial property is not required to have both ingress/egress lanes.  They also stated he could develop only part of the acreage.

The board discussed the issues with the Transient Business policy.  Lance stated his concern with the $250/10 days not being business friendly in his opinion.  Joey stated the policy also does not allow the business to be open on Raspberry Days, requires a $2M liability insurance, and a $1500 bond.  Lance requested each member to think about the policy requirements and to bring their ideas to next month’s meeting in an attempt to make the policy more acceptable to small business.
 

Bear Lake is the focus of a Cache town hall meeting this week

According to an article in CacheValleyDaily.com there is a Cache County Legislative town hall meeting on Thursday, July 14th at 6:30pm in the council chambers of the Historic Cache County Courthouse, and the primary focus will be discussing Bear Lake.