Motion as recorded
Outcome not recorded
No roll call was recorded for this motion.
The motion as the minutes record it
Coancílmember Burnhøm moved to øpprove the consent øgendø wíth the ømendments to item 94. per the email from City Attorney Jeremy Cook. Councílmember Curtß seconded the motíon. Those voting aye: Donnø Burnhøm, Melßsa CIørk, Colby Curtís, ønd Curolyn Love. The motíon pøssed with ø unanimous vote. SCHIIDT]LED ITEMS T4, RI]SOI,UTION Eagle Mountain City Council Meeting - September 15,2020 Page l0 of 16 14.4. RESOLUI'ION - A Resolution of Eagle fulounl.ain Clily, Utah, Amending ancl Adopting the 2020 Eagle Mountain Cily Parks, Traiis & Open Spar:e Master Plan. Mayor Westmoreland introduced the item and explained the purpose of the plan is to serve as a guiding document based upon the City's goals and vision for the future. The plan does not serve as a land use document nor is it codified, rather, it assists with protecting and preserving the unique attributes and the resiliency of Eagle Mountain's current and future residents. Parks and Recreation Director Brad Hickman requested feedback to ensure the document accurately represents the desired vision for the City and facilitates the implementation of that vision. Mr" Hickman stated Ms. Cameron's concems expressed during the previous meeting had been resolved with edits to the document. The width of the wildlife corridor was amended to correctly reflect the recommended 330-foot/1lO-yard width, the name of the Eagle Mountain Nature and Wildlife Alliance had been corrected, and notation regarding the Kestrel Project had also been added. Councilmember Clark recommended including language from the 2009 plan regarding gardens, crops, and orchards into the current document and advocated for the exclusion of or appropriate precautions when planting nut trees due to food allergy concerns. Councilmember Curtis clarified his concerns regarding dedicated bike facilities were due to the cost of the requisite infrastructure investment and scope of implementation and felt that the funds should be allocated to other amenities utilized by a larger percentage of the community. Mayor Westmoreland stated obtaining funding for City projects is one of his greatest focuses and concerns. He shared that the City was awarded the number one Mountainland Association of Government (MAG) funded projeet for the first time in the City's history which is meaningful as it requires and demonstrates support and respect for the City from other municipalities. Assistant City Administrator/Community Development Director Steve Mumford explained that air quality improvement is one of the criteria on the MAG qualification list. Bike lanes improve the overall project score, which increases the likelihood of obtaining funding. MAG has federal funds specifically allocated for trails or other non-vehicular uses including bike facility projects. Discussion ensued regarding bike facility fuirding concerns including impact fee allocation and other internal and external revenue options. City Administrator Paul Jerome stated that for an item to be impact fee eligible, it must be included in the impact fee facility plan (IFFP) and projects must be able to be completed during the six-year funding eligibility window. The probable cost of specific projects is calculated prior to being added to the IFFP to ensure funding. He stated that MAG has funding available specifically for trails and bike lanes. Should the City determine to install bike facilities, the funds will be obtained for the specific project rather than reallocated from funds intended for parks and other amenities. Eagle Mountain City Council Meeting - September 15,2020 Pagellof16 City Engineer Chris T'rusty concurred that the funding f'crr bike transportation would be obtained from different revenue sources than park amenities, and the intended use of impact fees must be specified in the IIIFP. The inclusion of bike lanes had been a beneficial f'actor of consideration when the City received MAG funding for the Pony Express Parkway expansion project. Councilmember Burnham stated she is in favor of retaining bike facilities in the plan's verbiage Councilmember Curtis stated he understands the mechanism of obtaining MAG funding and inquired regarcling the City's intent and scope of implementation regarding allocating City funds, that can be used for other amenities, for bike facilities" Mr" Mumford stated the City has a Bike and Pedestrian Master Pl¿ur that includes detailed plans for City bike trails, systems, and lanes. IIe said the intent of the bike verbiage in the parks and open space plan is to offer options and park and trail and connectivity" The park and open space plan excludes the level of investment intended for bike facilities and the trail maps exclude bike lanes. Staff plans to update the Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan and funding concems can best be addressed with that plan. Mayor Westmoreland explained the park and open spaoe plan identifies options for the City; however, the plan does not prescribe the decisions the City will make regarding the options provided. Mr. Jerome stated impact fees have not always been available for transportation expansion and General Funds have been used for projects deemed necessaþ. The Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan will offer options to decreases the strain on the City roads, but bike lanes are not considered a necessity. The funding of recommended projects will be determined according to the prerogative of the elected officials. He noted that bike lanes also provide a safe emergency lane for motorists. Councilmember Clark expressed her support of allowing other modes of transportation, including horseback and multipurpose lanes, without removing money from other amenities. Councilmember Love stated her favor to retain the language regarding bike lanes as the Cif Council has the prerogative to determine the amount of money to invest in bike facilities. Mayor Westmoreland stated the park plan provides options to address parking concerns. Mr. Hickman concürred with the importance of securing areas to provide adequate parking and to address concerns regarding trailhead eonnections to bike trails throughout the City. Councilmember Curtis stated that his objections tei transit stops are related to funding and the urbanization of the City" He clarified that should the City adopt transit, he would be in favor of park transit stops; however, in orcler to support transit, cities require high density. FIis vision for the City does not encourage mass transit, although he concurs that the Cify should prepare for the future possibility of transit, including right-oÊway considerations. Discussion ensued regarcling mass transit. Ëagle Mountain City Council Meeting - September 15,2020 Page 12 of 16 Mayor Westmoreland stated the document is meant to provide options fbr potential implementations, not absolutes. He advocated for preparing for as many eventualities and scenarios as possible including undesirable outcomes and emergencies. Councilmember Burnham stated as residents had indicated bikes as a utilized method of transportation within the City to access park facilities, the option may not need to be prioritized, but non-vehicular, active methods should be included or encouraged considerations. Mayor Westmoreland advocated against aggressively promoting either active transportation or recreation. Councilmember Clark requested veri$ing the survey data regarding park access as she believed that vehicular transportation had not been included as an option. Mr. Hickman clarified that vehicular transportation was not included as a mode option in the survey but could have been addecl as a write-in option. Councilmember Curtis expressed concern that as vehicular transportation was only included in the document once and active transportation was included 38 times, he felt the document advocated against vehicle use in an attempt to prescribe behavior. Councilmember Love suggested excluding a specific purpose of either transportation or recreation for bike facilities. Councilmember Burnham stated that as it is a parks plan, active transportation will be included more frequently than vehicular uses. Mayor Westmoreland concurred with Councilmember Bumham's assessment regarding the exclusion of vehicular transportation considerations in the document. Mr. Hickman stated the transportation and recreation references can be removed to reduce interpretation if desired by the City Council; however, the implications will be retained in the document. I-[e requested feedback from the City Council regarding suggested verbiage amendments" noresiliency" Councilmember Clark advocatecl to replace the word "sustainability" in the 'rvith guiding principles and goals" Councilmembers Love and Clark recommended replacing oosustainable" with "fiscally responsible" in the resilient approaches. Councilmember Burnham advocated against the recommended removal of "design spaces for people to live, work, and play that accommodate spaces for wildlife to thrive" and "light, water, and air pollution" from the Vision Statement, Guiding Principles, and Goals. Councilmember Curtis explained his recommendation to remove the verbiage is because "live, worko play" is a neo urbanism tagline and expressed concern that the inclusion of the phrase promotes neo urbanism ideals and philosophies. Councilmember Burnham advocated for retaining the verbiage as it is a common phrase not exclusive to neo urbanism. Councilmember Clark stated appreciation for Councilmember Curtis' concerns and creating awareness ofthe philosophies but expressed support ofthe phrase as it represents and encourages the City brand and vision. Councilmember Burnham clarified that the intent was to remove the politically problematic language "light, water, and air pollution" to amend the goal to be, "use data to monitor and course correct adverse impacts." The other Councilmembers concurred with the suggestion. Discussion ensued regarding the suggested verbiage amendments and comments regarding potential funding mechanisms. Mr. Hickman noted that several Councilmember comments in the draft document indicated concerns regarding potential developer incentives. Councilmember Burnham recommended not defining developer incentives in order to provide flexibility and to prevent developers from expecting increased density. Councilmember Curtis concurred and clarified his comments were due to increased density concerns. Discussion ensued regarding concerns relating to granting increased density in trade for amenities. Councilmember Clark requested the removal of the recommended policy to "provide a program that allows the City to trade higher density with developers for community or regional parkland contributions" to allow the City Council to address each case individually. Mayor Westmoreland stated that the implementing of a plan rather than evaluating on a case to case basis allows the creation of standards and criteria. Discussion ensued regarding the inclusion or exclusion of a density progr¿ìm in the parks and open space plan and concerns regarding the impact to lancl use Municipal Code policies and standards. The Ciff Council determined to revisit the suggestion to amend the verbiage from "provide" to "consider" or to remove the verbiage regarding the program to trade higher density at a future meeting. Mayor V/estmoreland stated he understood Ms. Cameron's comments to be indicative ofher desire for open space and wildlife preservation to be a part of the City's identity and central to City branding. He concurred with her recommendations as he is also passionate about preserving and promoting the City's unique, natural aspects. Eagle Mountain City Council Meeting - September 15,202rJ Page 14 of l6 Councilmember Curtis expressed concern regarding promoting the idea of a recreation center due to the requisite tax increases and advocated for informing the public of the tax impact of a recreation center. Mayor Westmoreland stated the plan indicates the possibility, not a promise of a recreation center, and that before the pandemic the City had explored recreation center costs and ramifications. He said the City intends to provide the information to the residents regarding recreation center options; however, the timetable for the availability of the data is ayear or two in the future. Councilmember Curtis advocated focusing on an outdoor pond rather than a pool facility due to the lower cost and an outdoor pond's alignment with City branding. Mr. Mumford stated the survey results indicated a prefbrence for a recreational pond of 59 percent, a swimming pool of 51, and a recreation center of 48 percent. Councilmember Clark agreed that a recreational pond supports the City's outdoor identity and goal of financial responsibility. She requested to revisit a conseryation easement at the next meeting. Councilmember Curtis requested clarification regarding the legal implications and perpetual protection of a conservation easement. Mr. Cook stated thataconservation easement and other options are available to protect open space from future development.