Eagle Mountain City Council, 6 April 2021

Councílmember Burnhøm moved to øpprove the consent agendø, ømendíng item 14.4. conditíon #4 to, "thøt no certíJîcøtes of occapøncy shøll be grønted until the sewer ß completed," ønd removing items 14.8., 14.C., snd 14.D. from the consent agenda and placíng them as scheduled ítems. Eagle Mountain City Council Meeting - April 6,2021 Page l5 of3l Councílmember Love seconded the motion. Those voting aye: Donnø Burnham, Melissø Clørk, Jared Gray, ønd Carolyn Love. The motíon passed with u unanimous vote. SCHEDULED ITEMS 14.8. O'Reilly Auto Parts - Site Plan Planning Manager Tayler Jensen presented the item. The site plan proposes an O'Reilly Auto Parts to be located at 4266 E Pony Express Parkway, southeast of Porters Crossing Parkway and Pony Express Parkway, located adjacent to the recently approved Dollar Tree. The property backs onto homes in the Oak Hollow subdivision. Per EMMC 17.100.050(8), any commercial lot which abuts a residential use shall be effectively screened by a combination of a wall, fencing, and landscaping of acceptable design. EMMC 17.35.050(F) requires buffering or transitioning when building adjacent to residential uses, and EMMC 17.60.110(D) requires applicants to provide a headlight screen. While an existing wall exists, due to following the natural grade, additional buffering is required roughly adjacent to where the O'Reilly access aisle enters the project. Per EMMC 17.72.030(AXl), the primary entrance to the building should orient toward the street, and if not, the street-facing façade should include entrances, display windows, awnings, increased architectural elements, increased landscaping, and other pedestrian-oriented features. While the front entry does not face Pony Express Parkway, a pedestrian path is included that ties into the existing trail, and the Pony Express Parkway-facing façade includes additional features. Per 17.72.040(A), buildings shall be similar in style to adjacent buildings. The proposed building is similar in appearance to the Dollar Tree, but the color palette is much lighter than both the Dollar Tree and Eagle Vision. Mr. Jensen clarified that the colors are a lighter sand color compared to the charcoal used on other buildings; the color palette does not include white. Per 17.72.040(C), the primary roof form of a structure should help reduce the perceived scale of a building. All commercial buildings shall contain either sloping roofs with overhanging eaves or a decorative parapet and multiple roof planes and heights. Per I7.72.040(E), buildings shall incorporate a majority of the following details: reveals, canopies, awnings, pop-outs, columns, decorative trim and moldings, architectural lighting, ornamental cornices, decorative masonry pattern, decorative doors and windows, exposed timbers and trellis. All sides of a building shall include the chosen details. Per I7.72.040(G), a building's color palette should be similar to that of significant neighboring structures. Municipal Code requires 25 to 37 parking stalls, and28 stalls are provided. EMMC 17.35.050(K) requires bicycle parking with all commercial locations; bicycle parking is not provided in the applicant's plan. Signage must follow standards found in EMMC 17.80. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the request on March 9,2021 and voted 3 to 2 to recommend approval of the site plan with the following conditions: Eagle Mountain City Council Meeting - April 6,2021 Page 16 of3l 1. The applicant shall increase the height of the wall anywhere necessary to provide effective screening; 2. All parking lot lighting shall be no more than 17 feet above the pavement; 3. The dumpster enclosure shall be similar in material and colors to the building; 4. Bicycle parking shall be provided in compliance with EMMC 17.35.050 K; and 5. At least three additional design elements designated in EMMC 17.72.040(E)(1) shall be added to all four elevations. Commissioner rW'ells' dissenting vote was because she felt additional staff recommendation should have been included in the conditions of approval. Commissioner Wright's dissenting vote was due to his opinion that other Municipal Code elements identified by staff should be encouraged of the developer, such as adjusting the roof line. The staff recommendations excluded from the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval included the following conditions: 1. Elevations shall be updated to include stacked stone and materials similar in color to Dollar Tree and Eagle Vision; 2. Elevations shall be amended to include a tower or to increase the height of the parapet above the main entry and columns to give the appearance of different roof planes and heights.; and 3. The primary color of the building shall be similar to that used on Eagle Vision and Dollar Tree. Mr. Jensen clarified that Municipal Code requires a 3.S-foot headlight screen and a six-foot wall between residential and commercial uses. The wall is six feet high; however, it does not provide six feet of buffering and whether the wall complies with Municipal Code standards is open to interpretation. Councilmember Love said that headlights arc24 to 54 inches from the ground to the center of the headlight and a foot difference between the drive aisle and the top of the wall between the homes and the commercial property would not provide headlight screening for the residential properties. She said she feels the applicant should determine an adequate a solution. Applicant representative Ryan Forsythe stated that his height calculations result with the wall providing 3.5 feet of screening at the lowest point on the fence, which is farther west than the drive aisle. He said the grading plan from the residential developer indicated a grade three feet higher than the final homes. He expressed sympathy to the impacted homes, but stated he feels they have met the headlight screening requirement and the six-foot wall requirement for the property. He said that he has discussed a greenery wall as a potential solution with the impacted homeowners. He does not desire to shirk his responsibility but expressed frustration with the situation caused by the residential developer not building the development in accordance with the approved plans. Discussion ensued debating the measurement method and accuracy of the grade calculation differences between the staff report and the applicant's calculations. Eagle Mountain City Council Meeting - April 6,2021 Page l7 of31 City Attorney Jeremy Cook confirmed that applicant's grievances with the residential developer would be a civil issue. He noted that the property had been originally owned by one individual that sold the land to two different developers. Municipal Code places the responsibility on the commercial developer. It is the responsibility of the commercial developer to address his concerns with the adjacent developer. Councilmember Gray stated that the screening concerns also include the privacy of the residential property as the lack of a six-foot privacy screen is invasive and intrusive to the residents. Councilmember Clark agreed that the screening requirement is the obligation of the commercial development and that pursuing a civil complaint with the residential developer is the prerogative of the applicant. She feels the application is not ready for an approval without an adequate resolution to the screening requirement. Councilmember Burnham concuffed with the previous Councilmember's comments, especially considering the privacy concerns. The earthwork to reinstall the fence would negatively impact some properties and she agrees it is not the Council's responsibility to provide a solution. City Engineer Chris Trusty recommended a topographical survey to better assess the grade difference of the final project. He is unsure if the residential grades on the approved Oak Hollow plans conflict with the final grade as alleged. He agrees it is the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate a solution. Mr. Forsythe stated that he is also a real-estate attorney and desires to discuss options to determine an agreeable solution prior to preparing plans. He expressed concern with the screening solution retroactively impacting the June 1, 2021 deadline for the approved Dollar Tree project. He explained that retaining requirements to raise the height of the existing masoruy wall would reduce the resident's yards and impact the drainage system for the Dollar Tree project. He proposed mounting decorative, ivy walls to the top of the residents' side of the existing fence. It would beautifr their yards and increase the privacy more than installing landscaping or fencing on the commercial property. He said the homeowner seemed open to an ivy wall or landscaping on their side of the wall. Another solution would be a vinyl addition to the top of the existing wall. He beseeched the Council to consider his time constraints in their decision and the Municipal Code allowance for landscaping to be implemented as a screening material. Mayor Westmoreland expressed sympatþ and noted the City is aware that the applicant is burdened with providing a solution to a problem he was not responsible for creating. Councilmember Burnham expressed concern with the recommendation to add something to the top of the wall due to wind durability concerns. Mr. Forsythe said he would consult with an engineer to provide a durable solution such greenery or a chain link wall with privacy slats. He said he desires to work with the homeowners to determine an aesthetically appealing solution. Eagle Mountain City Council Meeting - April 6,2021 Page l8 of31 Councilmember Clark concurred with concerns regarding the strong winds in the City and the durability of the screening solution especially due to damage liability caused by wind forces breaking windows with fencing in other areas in the City. Mr. Forsythe inquired if the Council decision would impact the Dollar Tree project and requested Council feedback regarding the proposed elevations in order to remedy concerns prior to the application's return with a solution to the screening issues. Mr. Cook verified that the Dollar Tree development is required to meet the Municipal Code screening standards independent of the site plan approval. Councilmember Gray said that the Council could move the project forward but withhold the certificate of occupancy until the screening concerns are rectified in order to not delay the project while ensuring the concerns are properly addressed. Councilmember Love agreed with allowing the project to move forward but withholding the certificate of occupancy; however, she desires to review the screening solution to veri$' it adequately addresses the concerns. Councilmember Clark said she is uncomfortable in moving the application forward. She expressed her preference to provide the applicant the requested feedback regarding the elevations to be sensitive to the time constraints and increase the likelihood of an approval when the application returns with a screening solution. Mr. Forsythe clarihed his concern was with being required to raise the existing masonry fence. He expressed his willingness to provide an appropriate, durable, aesthetically-beneficial screening solution. He said he raised the parapet walls and colors and added additional lighting elements at the request of the Planning Commission and will add a bike rack. He noted the architectural similarities between the approved Dollar Tree and O'Reilly's buildings. He explained that O'Reilly has requested the use of their prototypical colors for branding pu{poses. Councilmember Burnham stated that as having an attractive building is in the applicant's best interest, she has no concerns with the proposed palette as long as the colors do not clash with the neighboring properties. She expressed her willingness to approve the project once the applicant provides an adequate screening solution. Councilmember Gray concurred with Councilmember Burnham regarding the elevations, color palette, and the applicant's rights. Due to varying opinions on preferred aesthetics, he believes the purview of the Council is to ensure the appearance of buildings do not have a negative impact on surrounding properties while respecting the property owner's rights. He disagrees with requiring new construction to exactly match existing buildings in the area. Councilmember Love concurred with the approval of the presented color palette and thanked the applicant for making the requested roof line adjustments. She asked the applicant to also include the other design elements in the Planning Commission's recommended conditions of approval. Eagle MountainCity Council Meeting - April 6,2021 Page l9 of3l Councilmember Clark commended the applicant for working with the homeowners to determine an amenable solution and requested he continue to involve the homeowners in the decision.

Councilmember Burnham moved to tøble the site planfor O'Reílly Auto Parts untíl the next meeting. Councilmember Gray seconded the motion. Those votíng øye: Donna Burnhøm, Melßsø Clørk, Jøred Grøy, and Carolyn Love.

Councilmember Burnhøm moved to øpprove the site pløn for Møceyts at Market Pløce wíth the updated pløns and elevatíons presented to the City Council ønd excluding the øpproval of the fløgpole pending a revíew of Municìpøl Code flagpole heíght støndørds. Councílmember Love seconded the motìon. Councilmembers Gray and Love requested that flagpole height standards be included as a discussion item at a future meeting. The Council authorized staff to approve the future flagpole application in accordance with the flagpole height Municipal Code standards to be determined by the City Council. Those votíng aye: Donna Burnham, Melßsa Clark, and Carolyn Love. Those voting nay: Jøred Grøy. The motion cørríed wìth ø vote of 3:1. 14.D. Request to Amend Condition of Approval - Silverlake South Preliminary Plat Mr. Kane presented the item. On October 1,2019, the City Council conditionally approved the Silverlake South Preliminary Plat containing 791 units/lots. One of the conditions of approval included that the neighborhood park shall be installed prior to the recording of a plat containing the 300th lot in this project, in addition to the 278 akeady recorded in Silverlake Plats 16 through 20. The applicant has recorded plats with 316 units at this time. The applicant has made efforts to construct the neighborhood park, but the park plan reviews by the City have been delayed by a combination of City staffing transitions, COVID-related changes and delays, and seasonal weather. The applicant anticipates the neighborhood park will be completed this summer, and has finished the final plat review and is ready to record three more plats within the project area: Plats 28 (74 units), 29 (77 units), and 30 (65 units). The applicant is requesting an amendment to the conditions of approval by either removing or amending the condition so they may move forward with recording the next three plats while they also complete work on the neighborhood park. Staff recommends that the City Council approve an amendment to the conditions of approval for the Silverlake South preliminary plat by replacing condition #8, "The neighborhood park shall be installed prior to the recording of aplat containing the 300th lot in this project, in addition to the 278 already recorded in Silverlake Plats 16 through 20," with, "The neighborhood park shall be installed by August I,2021. No building permits or recordings of plats may be granted or take place after this date unless the park has been completed." Discussion ensued clariffing the number of recorded and remaining lots in the project. Mr. Mumford stated that they had recommended a date requirement but would also be willing to consider a requirement based upon the number of approved lots, especially due to material delays caused by the pandemic. Ms. Kofoed said that recording plats is a lengtþ process that has been impacted and significantly delayed by the pandemic. Plat28 is ready to record. Councilmember Love expressed her support of date rather than a lot number requirement in order to allow the applicant the majority of the summer to work on the project due to weather impacts on construction. Mr. Kane verif,red that a bond is in place for the park. Ms. Kofoed said that the City is holding approximately 1.7 million dollars as cash bond for the park. Some of the money will be returned to the applicant due to the fulfillment of improvement obligations on the project. Councilmember Clark stated that she desires to have an assurance that the park will be built. The bond alleviates her concerns regarding an extension of the deadline due to the mitigating circumstances. She supports the date deadline option. Parks and Recreation Director Brad Hickman conf,rrmed that the applicant has been working on the park and is almost finished with the clubhouse and the landscaping which will release some of the escrow funds, but the City will still have enough of a reserve to cover the park should the developer not fuIfill the obligation. Mr. Kane stated that the recording of the three plats will place an additional approximately $600,000 into the park escrow account.

Councílmember Love moved to approve u request to amend the condition of øpprovalfor the preliminary platfor SilverLøke South to, "The neíghborhood park shøll be ínstalled by Aagust 1, 2021. No building permits or recordìngs of plats may be granted or take pløce after this date unless the park høs been completed." Councilmember Burnhøm seconded the motion. Mr. Kane explained that the application process requires several approvals over the course of several months and makes it unlikely that the applicant could record a large group of plats immediately prior to the deadline. Those voting aye: Donna ßurnham, Melßsa Clark, Jared Gray, and Carolyn Love. The motíon pøssed with u unanímous vote. 15. THE PINNACLES 15.4. PUBLIC HEARING/ORDINANCE - An Ordinance of Eagle Mountain City, Utah, Amending the Future Land Use Map of the General Plan and Rezoning Certain Lands Known as The Pinnacles. Eagle Mountain City Council Meeting - April 6,2021 Page24 of3l Items I5.A. and I5.8. were presented and discussed concurrently Mr. Kane reviewed the item as presented during work session. Mayor Westmoreland opened the public hearing at 9:40 p.m. No comments were submitted to the City Recorder's Office and no public was in attendance to make comment. As there were no commentq Mayor l(estmoreland closed the hearing. Councilmember Gray stated his appreciation for the changes and progress on this project. He asked if the plan could accommodate additional R2 units south of the park which would be permitted by Municipal Code transitioning requirements. Applicant representative Andy Flamm stated they desire to offer a variety of product and could consider additional R3 product; however, the variance in lots sizes of R2 units across from R3 units creates alignment challenges. Mr. Kane noted that the rezone sets the zone, but the lot sizes will be approved with the preliminary plat. As the rezone sets the minimum lot size, he advised amending the zoning designation accordingly to ensure the larger lots are included on the preliminary plat if desired by the Council. Mr. Flamm expressed hesitancy to make the change due to the delay of the project and the cost to redesign the zoning layout. Councilmember Gray clarified his request is to rezone the three rows of homes south of the park. Councilmember Clark expressed her appreciation to the applicant for his flexibility in the changes made due to newly implemented City requirements. She stated her support for Councilmember Gray's recommendation and suggested rezoning the proposed area with a condition of approval to allow the project to be approved and move forward without additional delays. Discussion ensued regarding the feasibility of rezoning a section of the property to R2 Mr. Flamm stated that due to aesthetical considerations and implementation challenges, altering two rows of homes, rather than three rows, would be the most viable due to the alignment of the lots. They desire to work with the Council especially in consideration of their other projects in the City. He explained that the one-acre parcel of land in the northwest corner of the project requested to be dedicated to the City will become an inaccessible island until the adjacent land is developed or the future freeway is installed. He said they would prefer to retain the land until the northern commercial portion of the project is developed. The one-acre parcel would remain contiguous to and be farmed with the 65 acres of farmland designated for future commercial development. Discussion ensued regarding the appropriate terms for the motion. Mr. Kane clarified that the dedication of the one-acre parcel would not occur until the platting process with Phase 8, the final phase of the residential portion of the development. Eagle Mountain City Council Meeting - April 6,2021 Page 25 of3l Mr. Cook stated the requirement of the land dedication and potential compensation could be determined during the plat recordation of the project. The motion could stipulate the one-acre parcel is included with the recording of Phase 8. Councilmembers Gray and Love recommended including the one-acre parcel with the development of the northern portion of the property with the City leasing the land back to the applicant. Mr. Flamm and Mr. Cook expressed their support of excluding the one-acre parcel of land from this approval and having the dedication of the parcel determined with the future commercial development of the property to the north of the residential portion of the development. Councilmembers Burnham and Love confirmed their support of changing two rows of R3 to R2 zoning.

Councilmember Gray moved to approve an ordinance of Eøgle Mountuin CíA, Utuh amendíng the Future Lønd Use Map of the Generøl Plan ønd rezoning certaín lønd known as The Pinnøcles, changíng the two rows of homesfronting the street directly south of the pørkfromthe R3 to the R2 zone and øll other changes as reflected in the coruected Jiles ín the stalf report. Councilmember Clørk seconded the motíon. Those voting øye: Donnø Burnhøm, Melissa Clark, Jøred Gray, ønd Carolyn Love. The motion pøssed wíth a unanimous vote. 15.8. PUBLIC HEARING/ORDINANCE-An Ordinance of Eagle Mountain City, Utah, Approving the Master Development Plan for The Pinnacles. Mayor Il'estmoreland opened the public hearing at I0:07 p.m. No comments were submitted to the City Recorder's Office and no public was in attendance to make comment. As there were no comments, Møyor Westmoreland closed the hearing.

Councilmember Gray moved to approve an ordínance of Eøgle Mountain Cíty, Utah approving the master development planfor The Pinnacles wíth the followíng condítions: 1. The approximøtely one-acre parcel adjacent to the MF2 zone identiJied for dedìcatíon for the future freeway rìght-of-way shall be removed from this øpproval ønd íncluded wíth the futare applícatíon for the development of the northern portÍon of the property; 2. The northern øpproxímøtely 65 acres of lønd shall be notes as "Future Development/Business Campus"for ø løter ømendment to the masler development pløn; and 3. Afuture amendment to the master development planfor the northern approxímøtely 65 øcres must be appropriøte for the cunent u Emp loyment Center/C ømp us " land us e des ígnation. Eagle Mountain City Council Meeting - April 6,2021 Page 26 of 3l Councílmember Burnham seconded the motíon. Those voting aye: Donnø Burnham, Melßsa Clark, Jøred Gray, and Cørolyn Love. The motion pøssed with a unønimous vote. 16. ORDINANCES/PUBLICHEARINGS 16.4. ORDINANCE/PUBLIC I{EARING - An Ordinance of Eagle Mountain City, Utah, Approving the Recorded Plat Amendment f-or the Eagle Mountain Business Campus. Mr. Jensen reviewed the item as presented during work session. Ms. Kofoed explained that the intent is for lot 5 to retain the current entrance sign. This area is not a proposed location for the installation of future wayfinding signs. Mr. Hickman said that the wayfinding signs will fit in the right-of-way and should not infringe upon these lots. Mr. Cook said the sale of this property was approved several years ago and the agreement has had several extensions. The contract price has been adjusted and amended throughout the process. Applicant representative Dan Ford stated an appraisal of the property was conducted a year ago and the current agreement is through June or July of 2021. Councilmember Gray requested a condition in the agreement to ensure the price of the property reflects current market value. Mr. Cook explained that the price has been slightly adjusted during the process. The agreement is a large benefit to the City to be able to attract development of the land and create a tax base for the City. Councilmember Gray stated although he approves of the project as a benefit to the City, he expressed concern with selling the land below market value as a negotiating tactic. Mr. Cook stated that due to the terms and extension of the current contract the City is bound to the agreed-upon price. Mayor Westmoreland opened the public hearing at I 0: I 7 p.m. No comments were submitted to the City Recorder's Office and no public was in attendance to make comment. As there were no commentq Mayor Westmoreland closed the hearing.

Councílmember Burnhøm moved to approve an ordìnance of Eøgle Mountaìn City, Utøh approving the recorded pløn ømendmentfor the Eagle Mountaìn Business Campus with thefollowing condítíons: 1. The purchase of the City property must beJinølized prior to recording the pløt; ønd Eagle Mountain City Council Meeting - April 6,2021 Page27 of3l 2. The City shøll be granted an eøsement through one of the lots to øccess the City-owned property. Councìlmember Clark seconded the motion. Those voting aye: Donnø Burnham, Melßsct Clørk, Jared Gray, and Carolyn Love. The motion passed with ø unanímous vote. Mr. Cook explained that should the applicant desire another extension, the price could be renegotiatedatthat time. A staff evaluation of the project determined a new appraisal was not warranted due to an insufficient change in the value of the property. Mr. Ford stated he believes the initial appraisal of the land was overvalued and the agreed-upon price is fair. Mr. Cook said he feels the deal is beneficial to all involved parties. Ms. Kofoed verified that an addendum had been approved by the Council in January 2021 to extend the agreement for six months. 16.8. ORDINANCE/PUBLIC HEARING - An Ordinance of Eagle Mountain City, Utah, Amending the Eagle Mountain Municipal Code, Chapter 15.60 Street Improvements. Streets and Storm Drain Manager Zac Hilton reviewed the item as presented during work session. If approved, fee collection will be implemented on July 6,2021. Mayor Westmoreland opened the public hearing at I0:24 p.m. No comments were submitted to the City Recorder's Office and no public was in attendance to make comment. As there were no comments, Mayor \lestmoreland closed the hearing.

Councílmember Clark moved to approve an ordínønce of Eøgle Mountøín City, Utah, amending the Eagle Mountain Municípal Code, Chøpter 15.60 Street Improvements. Councìlmember Grøy seconded the motion. Those votíng øye: Donnø Burnhøm, Melßsa Clark, Jared Grøy, ønd Cørolyn Love.

Councilmember Clark moved to øpprove a resolution of Eagle Mountøín City, Utah, ømendíng the consolidated fee schedule for street improvements. Councilmember Gray seconded the motion. Those voting øye: Donnø Eagle Mountain City Council Meeting - April 6,2021 Page 28 of3l Burnham, Melissø Clark, Jared Grøy, ønd Cørolyn Love. The motíon passed wíth a unanímous vote. 18. CITY COUNCIL/MAYOR'S BUSINESS Councilmember Burnham Councilmember Burnham requested the Council provide their input to her regarding the transit study results prior to her follow-up meeting on Thursday moming. She said she has mixed feelings about the study because the group that performed the study was unfamiliar with Eagle Mountain City. Their projections for 2030 will likely be reached by next year. She felt the recommendations were not justified as the data was based upon population numbers, which she felt were inaccurate for Eagle Mountain and Saratoga Springs and did not include Cedar Valley residents. The study will likely result in bus services from the City to the Lehi Trax Station. She recommended Councilmembers focus their review on the recommendations section of the report. Councilmember Gray Councilmember Gray stated that the previous consolidated fee schedule included renting City Hall although the City no longer rents the Council Chambers. He expressed concern the inclusion places staff in an uncomfortable position in turning down requests. He inquired why the language had not been removed. Ms. Kofoed said allowing residents to rent the Council Chambers was codified and included in the consolidated fee schedule. Several years ago, concerns arose regarding renting the space for political events. It was determined not to rent the building but to retain the language in Municipal Code. Groups that are sponsored by the City are allowed to use the facilities. She recommended removing the language to prevent confusion by staff and residents regarding the rental policies. Councilmember Burnham stated that it would be clearer to disallow the renting of the space for all groups. Ms. Kofoed said that under normal circumstances, rooms and the Council Chambers are not available due to frequent City and board usage. Councilmember Gray noted that the partnering groups are allowed to use the facilities without a fee and the removal of the rental language would not prevent use by City-sponsored groups. Ms. Kofoed confirmed that a Municipal Code amendment to remove the language regarding the rental of the Council Chambers will be placed on an agenda due to the request of multiple Councilmembers. The fee schedule could also be amended as time permits. Councilmember Love made a formal request for an amendment to determine a commercial flagpole height standard for the City. Mayor Vy'estmoreland directed staff to prepare an amendment for commercial flagpole height standards. He noted that of the 170 new residential building permits in March 2021, 148 were single-family homes and 22 were multifamily. He said that the City continues on a good trend balancing single-family and multifamily development. Mountainland Association of Governments expects the Utah Department of Transportation to move forward with the Mountain View Corridor funding this year. Once the Mountain View Corridor is approved, the City will be able to lobby for Wride Memorial Highway funding. Councilmember Clark Councilmember Clark requested the City invite a State representative and senator to a City Council work session to report on items that impact the City. She reiterated her request to meet with neighboring cities. Mayor Westmoreland said that neighboring city ofhcials are amenable to a joint meeting. He will discuss and schedule meeting dates with city and state officials. Mr. Mumford stated that the requested statistics of vested residential units within the City will hopefully be available within the next month or so; however, the data will not be as specific as desired due to flexibility in lot sizes and unit types permitted in master development plan approvals. Ms. Kofoed said staff sent a link to a document with the Council approvals from 2019 on to enable to Council to research approvals from previous meetings. She verified the City Council meeting with the Alpine School District is schedule d at 7 :30 a.m. on ApÅl 29 , 2021 . 19. CITY COUNCIL BOARD LIAISON REPORTS Councilmember Burnham Councilmember Burnham met with the Senior Citizen Advisory Council. They desire to meet in person as soon it is possible to meet safely. They have an activity scheduled for April and they provide meals to seniors with a single-meal pick-up on Wednesdays from 11:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. Two meals per person are available at the Thursday pick-up between l1:30 a.m. and 12:30 p.m. The Senior Citizen Advisory Council has a board member position open for a resident over 55 years ofage. Councilmember Love Councilmember Love met with the Cemetery Advisory Board and said more details will be forthcoming regarding the Memorial Day commemoration. Councilmember Clark Councilmember Clark said a repeater station will be installed to increase the transmission capability of the Ham radios within the City. The City has over 200 licensed Ham radio operators. She is inspired by the passion andzeal of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and is excited about their plans and efforts. Councilmember Gray Councilmember Gray stated the Youth Council is doing well and participated in the City Easter Egg Drive-Up. He encouraged youth participation in Youth Council and their activities. 20. COMMUNICATIONITEMS 20.A. Upcoming Agenda Items 2t ADJOURNMENT