Recap! City Council 1.28.2020

Tonight's meeting was packed full of lots of discussion!  Thank you all to who were able to come out!  We had 13 public comments most of which centered on concerns with Riverside RV Park.   

•UDOT Presentation: He discussed future possible plans for the 89/84 corridor.  This was just a study only.  Currently there are not funds available for this project.  However, the mayor reported that she has been in contact with legislators to try and get funding for this project within this year.  This interchange has a lot of challenges.  This {pretty cool} website will show you a rendering of some plans, both long term and short term.  The most popular/viable/easiest to fund method for the long term is the Center Bypass and the SPUI for short term.  A SPUI is similar to the I84 on ramp in Riverdale.  

•Riverside RV Park CUP and Development Agreement:  There was much discussion on this. A lot of questions asked by the public were posed and answered.  The boundary concerns are enough that the CUP was tabled until Feb 11th, where it is hoped an official decision from the proper entity will be made.  The development agreement will also be reviewed on the 11th pending the boundary concern has been properly addressed.  

•Parks Priority Projects:  The parks committee has been reviewing and gathering information based on results from a 2018 survey sent out to the citizens about potential parks projects.  After reviewing many different projects, the committee has determined what they feel are the top priority projects.  These funds - minus the wetlands restoration - will be used with impact fees that the city has acquired for the specific use of upgrades to parks.  You can see a list of the priority projects, as well as other possible future projects below.

•Snow Plow Policy:  Public Works Department Head Mark Larsen was present to go over the new snow plow policy.  He said the policy is more a set of guidelines for the fact that every storm is different.  Depending on how long the storm will last and how heavy it will be may alter the policy slightly.  For example, it wouldn't be worth it to plow a small storm on non-priority roads if it will melt the next day because of the hardship on the plow blades.  Similarly, if a storm continues throughout the day, they may spend priority time on the main roads only to save on resources of drivers and spread out to other roads once the storm quits.   Keeping items off the roads (garbage cans, vehicles) really helps out the drivers a lot.  Of course, as a reminder, no one should be parking on the street per city code from November to March. 

•New Business: There was an inquiry on how to better get information out to the public concerning public notices and expanding from the current 300' of neighbors surrounding it.  Also there was a reminder to bring the red striping policy that was discussed in the public safety meeting to come before the council.  City Reporter Lisa Smith said every public notice must be posted on the Utah Public Notice website.  She recommended can sign up and get an email notification anytime a public notice is submitted for our city.    

Reports

•Mayor Jo: Met with Senator Stuart Adams and Brian Bean and neighbors about HB0253 and short term rentals.  They are looking into amending the bill to better protect surrounding residents.  She also reported there was a lot of committee meetings this past week and that a committee meeting to discuss the shared water line with Uintah will be on the 11th next month.

•Councilmember Halverson: The Public Safety Committee met with the fire department and discussed goals and an emergency preparedness plan, hazard mitigation and paramedic changes for the city. 

•Council Member Alberts (Can I just say me? Weird to speak in 3rd person right?):  We have a new committee - the public relations committee which will include myself and Council Member Petty.  We met last week and discussed goals and ideas to better involved and inform the public.  Staff was directed to look into options for live streaming meetings.  Also, the Mixed Use Committee met which Taylor Walton was chosen as chair but I will report on it at council meetings.  We discussed our mixed use overlay and what the goals and ideals for this specific use of a zone.

•Council Member Petty: Parks and Rec met with the train club this last week and had a great and positive meeting.  An amended agreement will the train club will be forth coming soon. 

•City Manager Dave Larsen:  The street lights on Old Fort Road are up and running.  Since the city owns and operates these lights (rather than Rocky Mountain Power) we can turn them on and off as needed to save money, so if you see some lights are out it is for that reason. 

Thank you for tuning in! If you have any questions I am happy to answer them.  

#getinvolved #stayinvolved

Priority Parks Project List

Recap! Joint City Council & Planning Commission Meeting (General Plan discussion)

Once again, a huge thanks to Jeff Judkins for coming and doing a live stream of this meeting.  I know that being away for hours at a time every week is a sacrifice to your family - make sure to send out a thank you to him for doing so!

Tonight's meeting was a long one with lots to discuss.  You can hear the audio of it here and here and see the packet here.  The packet will include the maps we were looking at during the discussion as well and an updated section of the commentary of the general plan about the parks and rec that was also discussed can be found here.  

Lots of discussion happened at this meeting.  The minutes will be up probably next week and I would encourage all to look at it or check out the audio to get the full details of everything.

Up first was digging right into our new mixed use overlay.  There was a question about why do an overlay over a zone.  The answer to that was that an overlay allows for denial, a zone does not.  The developer will be bound to anything within the overlay which is mostly based on form-based code.  (Form-based code is more of using specific and determined styles, exteriors, heights etc. for a developer to design around to create the desired look of a development -- think Park City)).  

The overlay can only be applied to Commercial Highway zones that are over 5 acres of land -- and will only be applied through a rezone request to the PC and CC.  This limits the amount of this overlay to really take place in two parcels in our community - the property off South Weber Drive near Highmark and the property at the corner of 475 E and Old Fort Road.   Included in the code are specific setbacks and heights of buildings, outdoor signage, percentage of open space, landscaping requirements among other things.  Also included in the code was the requirement of a development agreement. 

Most of the concerns the discussion surrounded was the "no limit on the number of dwelling units' in a single building" and the height restrictions on buildings.   The restrictions on height depend on how far the unit sits from a public right of way (street or sidewalk).  The further away from the ROW, the higher the building could be, with a max of 50'.  Since these two properties are very different, there was a discussion on what could work on one property would not work as well on another. 

After much deliberation, it was decided that a committee of 2 Planning Commission officials as well as 2 city council members would meet with staff to reword the code to better satisfy our concerns.  Rob Osborne and Taylor Walton from the PC and myself and Wayne Winsor from the council were chosen to work with staff.  

The next item was to discuss the General Plan which started with reviewing all the maps included with the general plan.  Included in the packet are the new ideas for the roads north of SWD that was formally South Bench Drive as well as the 1900 connection to Layton.  Other maps that had some discussion was the sensitive lands map which formally included the OU's from contamination from HAFB.   After a discussion of why it was a removed and the question of if it was needed, staff was directed to include the OU's on the sensitive lands map.  

The last item of business was concerning the new section of our Parks and Rec on the text of the general plan.  It removed the requirement that was a suggestion from the Nat'l Parks & Rec Association that for every 1,000 people 25 acres of recreational lands was set aside, 10 of which would be developed parks.  The new text focuses on not creating more and new parks, but on maintaining current parks.  The concern that we aren't financially able to update and add to current parks was discussed.  The cons to this would be that we would not set aside another large developable park in our general plan (although retentions basins will continue to be required and could be used for park space) but the pros would be that it allows us to update and add to our current parks and will overall cost the city less to maintain.

Just a reminder that this draft of the general plan will go back out to the public for further review and most likely another survey.  After that feedback is given, the council and planning commission will again review it and make changes if necessary.

Phew!  As I said, there was so much to this meeting and a lot of deliberation.  Being a recap, it contains just the bare minimum of information and if you would like to better understand the situation I would suggest listening to the audio.  I hope that this is helpful for everyone!

Thanks again for all you staying involved and informed!!

#getinvolved #stayinvolved

Recap! City Council 1.4.2020

We had our first city council meeting this evening for the year in 2020.  Thank you all who were able to come out and of course to Jeff Judkins for streaming via Facebook live!  

•We did not have any public comment for this meeting.  There was an audit presentation done by Keddington & Christensen of our budget.   You can find more information about that in the packet.  They reported a clean report.  There were some recommendations/findings but they did not affect the numbers of the budget.  You can see those on page 54 of the audit report.  It had to due with making sure meeting minutes are posted within the correct timeframe and deposits not matching up.  On page 54 you will also find the city's response to those findings.  

•There was a presentation schedule for a development of the property next to Highmark Charter school, however the presenter was not in attendance.  City Manager David Larsen will be reaching out to them.  

•City Councilor Halverson was chosen as the mayor pro tem.  He will stand in for the mayor if she is unable to attend meetings.   There was also a new appointment to our Planning Commission.  After serving for 5 years, Debbi Pitts time on the commission came to an end.  A public announcement was made and 6 applicants applied for the position to the Planning Commission.  Mayor Jo, City Planner Barry Burton and Planning Commission Chair Rob Osborne interviewed each applicant and relayed all the applicants were very impressive and did great in their interviews.  The mayor made a  recommendation that Gary Boatright Jr. be appointed to the position.  The mayor related that Gary is very level headed and has land use experience while serving on the Riverdale City Planning Commission.  The council asked some further questions about Gary and what he hopes to bring to the table and other information about him.  You can hear that on the audio if you would like to learn more about him.  I look forward to seeing him in action and thank Debbi Pitts for her service these past five years.  

•The West Side Reservoir is up and running! There was a leak that was discovered and due to quick actions of staff with Jones & Associates they were able to find it and fix it in a timely manner.   That added expense, as well as another expense for a needed upgrade to the city's server were approved.  

•Our snow plow policy has been revised and updated.  A new map will be available online soon, but you can also see it in the packet as well (last page).  The biggest change here will be to cul-de-sacs, where a pass through with one in and one out will be done instead of clearing the entire "bulb" area.  This is to save on time and resources as cul-de-sacs require the most amount of time and usually have the most problems.

•New Business:  Councilman Winsor was added as a voting member, along with Dave Larsen and Mayor Jo for the ULCT.   Concerns about parking and traffic on the east side of South Weber Elementary was brought up as well and the best course to address that.  It was also discussed how to best bring up any new legislation that will affect our city directly and to be involved in that.  

•Reports:  There has been some vandalism around the fisherman's access and the city is keeping it's eye out on it.  A meeting with Staker Parson's took place and they look forward to meeting quarterly.  They have showed interest in possibly making some type of donation of some sort for a possible pickle ball court in Canyon Meadows park.  If you would *not* like to have your property sprayed for misquitos, you can contact mosquito abatement for an exception on your property that will stay in place for 3 years.  Also the mosquito abatement has job openings which could extend to teenagers if anyone is interested.  There are some grants specific for outdoor children's activities that the parks and rec committee will be discussing soon.  There was some questions on the flag that was for an Eagle Scout project that we are still waiting on more info for as well as an update on the civic building (next to the fire department) and what the future for it holds.  More information should be coming forth soon.  

•The US census is coming up and it is imperative that all in the city participate.  Each person counted brings in thousands of dollars for the city! There will be more info coming soon and it is quite a process that we hope all will participate in.  

And that's a wrap for this meeting.  As always, please contact your city officials if you have any questions or concerns.  I am so excited about this upcoming year and working with the great people of South Weber!

#getinvolved #stayinvolved

Tuesday January 14th Agenda and Packet

Tuesday's agenda and packet are up! The development presentation is for the property between the charter school and the storage sheds. You can find the new snowplow policy in the last 3 pages of the packet. The packet also includes the audit report and more info on the server update and reservoir repairs as well as anything else on the agenda. Lots to discuss and talk about at our first meeting of the year. I am excited to get started! 

Link to packet: http://southwebercity.com/file/2016/11/0-CC-2020-01-14-Packet.pdf

East Gate & Falcon Hill Development

2 recent developments underway has caught the attention of many South Weber residents, but it's not located within the city.  So why do many citizens feel it is imperative others know about it?

Falcon Hill

In early 2012, news broke of a new development on the west side of Hill Air Force Base, the beginning of what officials say "will be a bustling retail center for years to come."   The Falcon Hill Project is a 550 acre private development, built under an Air Force Enhanced Use Land Lease (EUL - military land lease of under-utilized lands to a developer for 50 years).  It will feature over 2 million square feet of commercial space in its first phase, with additional phases planned for the future.  This development will bring additional jobs, infrastructure, new buildings, roads and utilities to the Base.  Buildings that are owned by different tenants and are located outside of the gate are open to the public.  

Falcon Hill, located on the west side of the base and running adjacent to I-15 will be the largest EUL in the United States.  The project is an Aerospace Research Park both inside and outside the fence of the Base, including 10,000 square feet of retail building outside the gate.  When our county commissioners visited our city on August 27th of this year, Commissioner Lorene Kamalu described a new facility involved in the missile defense program that will bring 2500 new hires with another possible 2500 hired later.  Other reports state the public retail centers off-base will bring upwards of 10,000 jobs to the area.  

In March of 2017, ground was broken for a 21,000 square foot Utah Science Technology and Research Innovation Center (USTAR) within Falcon Hill in what is hoped to kick start high-tech companies at "Silicone Hills" - Layton City's own version of the bustling tech industry in Utah County dubbed Silicone Slopes.  Chief Operating Officer at Woodbury Corp Taylor Woodbury stated "Our goal for this new USTAR building is to be the cornerstone of the Silicone Hill movement that will help create a thriving tech community in Northern Utah."  The new facility will offer space for 15-20 start-up companies.  As the companies mature, they will move on and be replaced by other start up companies.

East Gate

East Gate, another development within HAFB, is business and research park similar to Falcon Hill adjacent to the East side of the Base.  Surrounded by 2 18 hole golf courses,  East Gate is an economic development area that focuses on aerospace research, and defense.  Included within East Gate is a business park with a 100,000 square foot high-tech industrial building for its tenant, Janicki Industries which "manufactures sophisticated aircraft parts for the military and has 66 acres on which future industrial development is planned." 

 There is also the Runway at East Gate, a 90 acre project area and runway access marketing to private businesses which will run complimentary to Falcon Hill.  While Falcon Hill will focus on research and development, East Gate will focus on manufacturing and distribution.  The Utah Air National Guard may also be relocating to The Runway as they have outgrown their current space at Salt Lake City International Airport.  

With all this growth, new residential areas will also be sprouting up, like Vistas at East Gate, a Century Home's Community which touts of a "new subdivision in the desirable east side of Layton, tucked amongst existing development in the area that continues to see substantial growth" 

Why does it matter?

Many may be wondering why South Weber residents would be concerned about these developments.  They aren't happening in our city after all.  These residents are worried about the close proximity East Gate is to us, especially to 1900 East.

If you observe our annexation map, you will see the areas that are in blue-properties we are willing to provide services for should the property owner choose to develop - butt right up against this East Gate development.  


This is in part why annexation had such a engaging conversation at our general plan.  Currently zoned at business commerce, the probability of developers wanting this property is high, especially in the coming years.  In order to develop it, they will need access to a road and utilities, most likely offered by South Weber since it sits well below in elevation to Layton City.  While this business commerce means potential to add commercial for our city, it also will mean increased traffic to our roads - a residential road nonetheless.

When a development of this magnitude and scale comes in, bringing with it thousands of jobs and industry, the surrounding areas are bound to see significant growth as well.  Some residents feel that if the 1900 E connection to Layton is materialized, it will not only mean more traffic to a road many feel is not safe or wanted, it will also create a new traffic pattern for the thousands of people now making their way throughout the base and the surrounding cities.  The East Gate Development lies just above us on the edge of Layton's border to South Weber.  Many feel that traffic congestion, compounded by the upcoming construction on Highway 89, will mean more cars will be using our road as an alternate route.  Others worry that because HAFB is such a powerful entity in our state, if 1900 is opened, it will only be a matter of time before it is expanded and enlarged to serve as another very needed entrance to the Base.  

Many will have different opinions on whether or not this is good or not for our community.  Please make sure to let our elected officials know your thoughts and comments by emailing them and filling out our next survey of our general plan.  Your voice matters.

#GetInvolved #StayInvolved

News Worthy Moments

This latest election did something that political experts said would never happen.

A write in candidate not only got voted in, but received the top votes!  And people are noticing.  In fact, we've been in the news quite a bit since our humble beginnings.  

The first major event residents put together was the Park-n-Protest.  Concerns about a new development called The Lofts at Deer Run brought this forward.  This development of 74 units on under 3 acres of ground had only one parking spot per unit.  Residents, realizing this meant that additional cars would defer to parking on 2700 E, had concerns.  South Weber residents have proven they don't sit idly by.  And so we didn't just complain about our concerns.  We demonstrated it.  

The goal was to put 74 cars on the road to show the dangers that would come with on-street parking on 2700 E.  It was very clear even just a handful of cars was a cause for concern.  The road is narrow and the line of site is limited.   But we didn't just put 74 cars on the street.  We put over 130!

Channel 2 News heard about our event.  You can read their news story here, or watch it below:




Residents Paul Sturm and Corinne Johnson pose for a photograph with the Standard Examiner.  News of the Lofts Development came about when Paul noticed some people and activity on the lot and asked what was happening.  What started as 2 concerned citizens turned into a Facebook group of more than 1,000 followers and the formation of a non-profit organization called The South Weber Preservation & Conservation Advocates (SWPCA).

The Standard Examiner also came out to show our story.  You can read their story here.

But it didn't stop there.  A petition went around and received over 1,000 signatures from people who have concerns about the Lofts Project.  In addition to that, because of what was demonstrated at the Park-n-Protest, we were able to meet with the city's public safety committee to address parking concerns.  We were able to talk about 2700 E as well as other areas in the city where on-street parking could become a safety hazard.  It was decided that a recommendation to red stripe the curb on 2700 E and other areas of the city will be done in order to keep our residents and streets safe.  You can read more about that on this blog post here. 

The next big event residents wanted to put on, sponsored by the SWPCA, was to inform citizens about a proposed road called South Bench Drive.  South Bench Drive was confusing for many people, and it was hard to understand it fully.  And so a virtual viewing tour was put together and held at our Family Activity Center.  We had over 150 people attend, many of which had never heard about this road.  The goal here was simply to inform the residents so they could get their comments, concerns and questions back to our city officials.   You can view the South Bench Drive Virtual Tour, including drone footage of our beautiful city and interviews with residents, below.  

Our next big win was when we got final numbers in for the survey results.  In the past it was considered wonderful if the city received 25 comments, this time, we got 489!

The city officials were listening - it was hard to ignore!  Changes were happening as more and more residents got involved.  Our meetings were full, sometimes needing to be changed to other locations in order to fit us all.  Our city officials were getting more emails than they were able to keep up with at times (but they did keep up with them!).  Conversations and discussions were taking place, questions were being answered and concerns were being addressed. 

 Election time got its own set of attention.   The standard examiner, learning of my write-in candidacy and that my mother was also running for office in her city (with the same concerns about over development) decided to do a story about us.   You can read more about that story here.

Election Night was a bit crazy when the Davis County Auditor and Clerk's website went down during the final countdown.  That paired with other websites recording different numbers, many South Weberites were left sitting on the edge of their seat wondering what happened.  In the morning it was determined to be a close race.  KUTV seeing the success a write-in candidate had, and that there were still votes to be counted came and did a story.




Thursday we all waited while the final ballots were counted.  Finally about 3:00 pm, results were posted.  Not only did a write-in candidate get elected, I took first place! 

#SWmorethan1000!

There was much celebration this day!! My phone was immediately blowing up with messages from people who I have worked side by side with over the last few months.  We studied the topics, we read the minutes and listened to the audio.  We asked questions, we attended every single meeting and had many additional meetings in between.  We walked the streets of South Weber to make sure every household knew what was going on and helped get them informed.   It brings tears to my eyes just thinking about it.  We worked so hard.  And life has taught me that sometimes hard work doesn't pay off the way you hope it will.  But this time it did.  One person summarized it perfectly, "I knew it would feel good, but I didn't realize it would feel this good!"

The governor's office heard about my win.  I was asked by State Senator Todd Weiler to have an interview on 860 AM talk radio.  You can hear that interview below.  



Right off the bat he says 

"Let me tell you I kind of am a nerd on Utah politics.  I don't think this has ever happened before.  In fact, I consider myself pretty knowledgeable, if you would've called me a couple months ago and said I'm thinking of running a write-in campaign what would your advice to me be, I would've said 'don't do it. You will lose.  Write-in candidates always lose."   

I don't write this post to boast about what happened.  I write it because if you look at everything I posted above, we were against unsurmountable odds.  'There is nothing that can be done' and 'it will never work' was something we heard a lot.  But we kept working and we kept trying.  We have been told that we would never make a difference.  Well, we did.  And we will keep making that difference.  

South Weber - please understand that as much thanks as I give to you (which is an infinite amount) I give you that much plea to keep at it.  Don't get complacent, don't get comfortable.  

Get Involved,  Stay Involved. 

I love you South Weber! You are my people!

Understanding Our Annexation Map: Why It Matters

Annexation is part of our general plan myself and many other residents didn't understand.  However, this part of our plan is important and will be coming up for discussion to some degree on for combined meeting on the 12th with the Planning Commission, City Council and Staff.  

Our Annexation Map - What is it?

You will see our annexation map included with our other general plan maps.  

The areas that are in blue are parcels that are currently in unincorporated lands, not belonging to any surrounding cities.  Should the owners decide to bring in any type of development they will need access to utilities and services. This is when annexation comes into play.  The property owner will approach the city(ies) who have their property part of their annexation plan.  It is common for neighboring cities to have the same properties on their annexation plans.  For example, many of the lands that are in blue on the south side of our city are also included in Layton City's annexation plans.  If the city chooses to annex, it is *not* buying that property.  It simply agrees to provided services (water, sewer, storm drainage, road maintenance, emergency, etc.) to that land and in exchange that whatever revenue that development brings in - be it residential or commerical - will go to that city. 

Property Owners & Annexation

Annexation will not happen unless the property owner requests it.  There are some rare cases the city can request to annex property, but none of the parcels in our situation fall under those special circumstances.     Annexation is a case by case basis, requiring formal request from the property owner, a review by the city,  and time for open public comment (possibly including open houses) before a final decision is made.  A city is not required to approve a request for annexation.  A city will review the impact said development will have.  This includes any revenue from the development (taxes) as well as the costs it will put on the city (services and utilities).    In the case that 2 cities have a property on their annexation plans, the property owner has final say of which city who chooses to annex with.

Why This Matters

The properties that are in our annexation plans will be coming into discussion at the next meeting concerning our general plan because roads and access to these properties will need to have a plan, particularly for the property that lies at the south side of our city near Layton.  The property that lies at the top of our slopes is currently in unincorporated territory.  There are several different owners to these parcels.  

The concern is that if these property owners choose to annex into South Weber, we will need to be able to provide them services and utilities, and a road for access will be required.  While South Bench Drive is looking to be a dead issue, 1900 E would still make the most sense to connect.  While some may argue we don't need or want to connect to Layton, others will argue that the amount of potential revenue that could come to South Weber should we annex these properties could be significant.  Planning for future growth is a discussion that needs to happen.  

Some of these properties will likely fall to South Weber on the basis of gravity.  Layton will not want to annex because they lie below their city.  It will cost Layton a great deal of money to pump sewage up hill for example.  Should there ever be a problem and flooding occurs, Layton will be liable for whatever flows down into South Weber.  Some have concerns that if we do not connect 1900 E we will lose the opportunity to annex.  This means that we will have no control over what development occurs because Layton will get to decide.  

These concerns, along with others I am sure will be part of the discussion of our general plan.  If you have thoughts or comments, please make sure to email them to our city officials.  We will not have the opportunity for public comment at this meeting, but we will be able to give more feedback when the general plan is opened back up to the public.   If you aren't able to make it to the meeting I will do a recap that evening.  

If you would like to learn more about annexation, I found this article helpful.

Below is the agenda for this meeting on the 12th.  It will be at Highmark at 6:00 pm.

Election Results! #SWmorethan1000!!

Was this a crazy election or what??  Between the website going down and the counting that took two days, talk about keeping us all holding our breaths!  Results are finally in and I just...guys! I'm speechless!  Thank you ALL so very much!!!  This is nothing short of AMAZING! Thank you!!

I am so honored to be able to serve the citizens of South Weber and represent YOU!  While we have all been working SO hard these last few months, I truly hope that you continue to stay involved.  I promise to do my very best to keep you informed and educated on all the issues that are coming before the city and I hope that you will promise me that you will be reaching out to us and lettings us know your thoughts and concerns.    #GetInvolvedStayInvolved

Contamination from HAFB, Our Plumes & Development: How does it impact us?

I attended the Hill Air Force Base RAB (restoration advisory board) meeting on Thursday October 24th.   This is a comprising of many different board members including city council members from neighboring cities, representatives from the EPA and UDEQ,  community representatives, and other entities.  Here is the agenda for this meeting.  

The contamination in our city is something I have been trying to understand better.  I am no expert in it.  I am still learning and I don't have all the answers.  However,  I have been asking a lot of people a lot of questions, and I can say I have a better idea of what is going on than I did a few months ago.  I am hoping sharing what I learned can help you better understand as well, and together we can all be better informed and thus better involved.  These are just the answers I have received from some of my questions.  

Okay so for starters: Where did the contamination come from?  Most of the contaminants happened before the 70's when the base would dispose of chemicals by burying it in the lands.  Most of these dumping sites were on the slopes of the base's boundaries, and over time that contamination spread.  There are several "plumes" around the base's boundaries; Layton, Clearfield, Sunset, South Weber and Riverdale are all just some of the community's that have plumes.  South Weber has three, though one, OU4 is technically located mostly in Riverdale.  You can see these plumes on our sensitive land maps in yellow.  OU2 sits above 475 E and OU1 is located near where the proposed Knoll's development will be.   

How do they determine the size of a plume?

This has been a huge question of mine.  I've been told many things when I ask this question.  I learned from this RAB meeting that HAFB has wells all over these communities.  These wells monitor the ground water and look for contaminants, specifically TCE and recently newly founded Benzine.  TCE is a potential carcinogen.  The Base was charged with cleaning up the contaminant from groundwater following Hill's designation as a Superfund site in 1987.  It remains on the U.S. EPA's National Priority List.  They use these wells to determine the boundary of the plumes.  Some wells have had clean reports for a significant amount of time so the boundary is re-adjusted.  When this happens, the plume is considered to be "shrinking."  Other plumes haven't moved at all due to complexities in the soil making mitigation difficult to happen.   No contaminants have ever been found in our drinking water. 

How does mitigation/clean up happen?

The contaminants are similar to radon.  They are dispersed when they hit oxygen.  That means when they come to the surface, they are able to be broken up and distributed to the atmosphere in a way that is not hurtful to humans or animals.  However, if it never hits oxygen, it will stay there for a great deal of time before it is naturally broken down.   The efforts of contractors, hired by the base to do the cleanup/mitigation, have yielded varying results as they have used different methods of cleanup.   The latest contractors used a method of vegetable oil and what they called "bugs", microbes that are injected down into the plumes.  These bugs consume the contamination and break it down.  At some of these sites, this process worked very well.  At others, not so much.  This was thought to be from the amount of clay making it difficult for the bugs to "travel" through the soil and consume the contaminants.

Are their homes threatened by the contamination?

While other areas like Layton and Clearfield have 500-600 homes that they feel would need a vapor system to address these contaminants leaking into their homes (similar to how radon happens), according to HAFB South Weber doesn't have very many homes that have been built in the plumes boundaries.  The first time this will happen is with the Knoll's property, which is a cause for concern and why HAFB recommended those homes have a vapor intrusion system installed.  According to the Base, if you have a home they recommend to have air testing done, you should have been contacted by the Base via door to door visits or through a mailer.   However, if you are concerned about it, the Base will come do an air sample in your home.  

What's Next?

 The Base is getting ready to renew a new 8 year contract with contractors to continue to work on cleanup on these plumes.  These new methods may be different than what the current contractors have been doing, or they could continue with the new ways.  The RAB meets 4 times a year and is a public meeting.  Currently Blair Halverson is our city council member who is a member of the RAB.  If you would like to be more involved, he is who you should talk too.  Because of the nature of the election, things may change after new seats are taken up in January so stay tuned to the city's website to see if the council members for the RAB changes.

The news actually did a short segment of this meeting.  I will attach it here for you to view.  If you have any questions, feel free to ask me.  I can't promise you I will know the answer, but I will do my best to find out for you.  One thing I have learned about this contamination is there are polar opposite views, it can be a very controversial conversation.  Sometimes it is hard to know where the truth actually lies.  However, the more I study, the better of an idea I think I am getting of it.  Additionally, HAFB has come and done presentations to our city a few times.

For more information on groundwater monitoring and air sampling:
https://www.hill.af.mil/IAP/fbclid/IwAR1HD7pozrKZQI0OOPuqwRiU_YcxcybNcbZZU7hym4_KwuRskBPz0a5EsJw/

HAFB Presentation to city council February 12th, 2019:

 http://southwebercity.com/file/2016/11/02-12-19-CC-Meeting-Minutes.pdf  

Fox 13 News segment: 

https://fox13now.com/2019/10/24/push-to-sample-air-in-homes-above-chemical-plume/?utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A%20Trending%20Content&utm_content=5db290c94c15b8000148caba&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR2g4YqXkpTj65nv3KSKMx_NvdegxVwH-q1T68IixzIvHEmuCVr3sbENePE

Recap! Planning Commission Special Meeting

10.23.18 Special Planning Commission Meeting

This meeting was for the short term rental that has received many complaints as well as getting three strikes after receiving their permit in August.

City Code Enforcer Chris Tremea did an awesome job documenting to the short term rental's representation as well as the planning commission the ongoing problems and complaints this rental unit has consistently had.  He made it very clear he wanted this business to succeed, but it was clear the owner was not showing any results and at times was downright deceitful.  Sergeant Pope was also there and documented all the visits the Davis County Sheriff's has made to this property, the most notable being on October 12th where 10 officers and a canine were called to the property and 21 citations were issued, many for underage drinking.  There was public comment documenting more concerns and another short term rental owner who is playing by the rules and hope this one property won't be generalized to all short term rentals.

A motion was made to revoke the license for this short term property and carried.  What this means is if the property owner continues to rent it out it will fall under civil dispute.  Staff was also directed to contact the websites the property is listed on and inform those companies that this property license has been revoked and no further rentals should take place. 

There were about 30 people who came tonight and I am very happy to see the residents supporting each other.  Chris Tremea and Sargent Pope both expressed their thanks to the community for their patience and their continual involvement.  Commissioner Wes Johnson and Tim Grubb thanked those who came to the meeting last night, Rob Osborne thanked the citizens who came out to support his meeting tonight.  It has been a nightmare for those neighboring residents.  Thank you to the Planning Commission for all their work and time!

Recap! Planning Commission & City Council Joint Meeting: General Plan

Planning Commission/City Council Joint Meeting Recap!

This was the first meeting for our general plan.  After receiving all the citizens input after 2 open houses and online and written surveys, these two entities joined together to discuss the changes that will need to be made.

Having this meeting at Highmark was really nice.  We were able to hear much better than at the FAC and able to see.  The bleachers were a little hard after 4 hours, but we had pizza and snacks for all so that was a bonus!  We had over 100 people who showed up and many stayed for the whole portion.  

As usual, I wrote a lot of notes and don't know how to slim it down.  The process of this meeting was really to go through it section by section just like the survey.  City Manager Dave Larsen would talk about prominent things in each section, review what most public comment mentioned/discussed and then allowed the PC/CC to make comments/feedback.  I will try to give a brief feedback to each section.  

Intro: It was decided that being a gateway to recreation wasn't as clearly defined and we could do better.  Discussion about what kinds of commercial could/should be added and where took place.  They also talked about how this discussion of types of commercial has been talked about and goals have been set but no plan was made - how do we put that plan into action?  Talk about downsizing the allowable units per acre, as well as possibly keeping larger lots more prominent on the plan and becoming known for the community that only does larger lots happened. 

Citizen Involvement:  Many of the CC/PC commended the amazing public involvement and gave thanks to those who have been working hard to get the word out.  A discussion on how the city can be better at that and the potential (and how to's) of adding a citizen's committee of some sorts took place.   Other ways currently underway was updates to the city website, email lists and looking into live streaming meetings.  

Moderate Income Housing: The PC/CC reviewed the most selected options of Senate Bill 34 according to the survey.  All were in agreement of choosing the ones that had the least amount of impact and how to implement them into our city.  In the end, they whittled the choices down to Option L- preserving existing MIH (not tearing down buildings that currently serve for MIH which is mostly the apartments), Option B - facilitate infrastructure for growth (updates to our sewer, west end reservoir and even water lines like recently discussed would apply) and Option U which was submitting for grants for numerous projects (many of which we have already applied for).  Just to be clear, the decision on these options was not made as it was a work meeting only.  However more than likely these will be the options they will submit to the state. 

Existing Environment: Much of this focus was on our sensitive lands.  The fact that we have numerous studies showing the concerns of our slopes was discussed and if it could be added that no building or development on our slopes could be added to the general plan.  Other hazards/concerns were also discussed and thought about being added as well including wetlands, easements, landslides, fire, wind and railroads.  Staff also said they suggested to look into and re-evaluate our maximum buildout acreage and population numbers.  

Land Use:  Only the first little part of land use was discussed which happened to be the 5 proposed High Density Housing zones.  51% of the surveys responded to this question that none of these properties should be HDH.  A lot of talk about changing our codes and our units/acre was discussed.  A new moderate and patio home zone as well as dropping our highest units per acre, currently at 13, down to 8 was also suggested.  This was where the meeting ended.  Staff will look into further defining these new zones and logistics.  

The next meeting for this will probably be November 12th, also held at Highmark.  Stay tuned for more details on that.  This will be a bit of process as there is so many things to look at and discuss.  I just want to let you all know all the work and time that everyone put into doing the survey was worth it!! Many, many times tonight our officials referred back to what the citizens want and the comments that were submitted.  The process is working!  I would just like to thank all our officials once again for all the hard work and time they put into our beautiful city and thank you all here for betting involved and staying involved! 

#SWmorethan20

General Plan Survey Results

The survey results are in!  We got 489 survey's in from public comment.  That is so awesome.  I am looking forward to tomorrow night's meeting where we will see for the first time our planning commission and city council officials review and make changes to our general plan.   Here are some results of the survey.  If you would like to see the entire results, click here.

I wasn't able to get all the breakdown of this question into one frame, but to summarize the second to the left is option B - working on infrastructure in the city (the updates to the sewer on the east end would qualify here),  the next highest column in orange is option E which is to add accessory dwelling (mother in law apartments and basement rentals), the top blue column was to preserve existing MIH mandates and the final highest in green on the right is option U which is applying for grants - some of which we have already done so. 

Our meeting tomorrow night will take place at HighMark at 6:00.  Hope to see you there!

Q&A: SWCU Facebook Group & Me, Development and HDH, South Bench Drive and Others

I have loved how much public involvement there has been of late and how engaged South Weber citizens are.  I am glad to get many questions - it means people are doing their due diligence in learning more about the candidates before they vote.  I am happy to answer some questions that come up often.

1.  Are you the face of the South Weber United Facebook Group? Did they ask you to be a candidate?

The South Weber Citizen's United group was created in July by 4 concerned citizens who were worried about proposed development they learned was coming into their neighborhood.  I don't actually remember how I was added to the group but I remember learning for the first time about The Lofts project and the concerns with it.  I knew the general plan was underway, and having heard about the concerns that comes with mixed use in other communities, I started commenting and asking questions.  The SWCU grew exponentially over then next 6 weeks, going from under 30 when I joined to over 900 in 6 short weeks.   In that time period I became a frequent poster and began learning more and more about many happenings going on in the city.  I started attending all the meetings and telling others how it went.  

No one in the facebook group had ever talked to me about running for office.  I was toying with the idea of doing a write-in for a few days, but knowing how difficult it would be to not be on the ballot- and the extra work I would have to do to catch up and get my name out there, I wasn't sure about it.   One morning I woke up and realized that if I didn't do anything, I would regret it.  Simply put, I could not not try.  I went to city office that morning, took a deep breath, and filled out the paperwork.  

My plans were to not tell anyone until after the long weekend (Labor Day).  However word got out much quicker than I anticipated.  I told a few members of the group the following day, and more members of the group later that night.  It was news to all of them and I honestly didn't know if I would have their support or not.  Choosing to run for office was my decision alone and no one in the South Weber Citizen's United Group had anything to do with it in any form.

2.  Why are you a moderator of the SWCU Facebook group?
This decision came about when the number of the group climaxed very quickly.  At the time only one moderator was available and learned that it wasn't going to be possible to keep up on everything.  Because I was active on the page and often checking in, I was asked to be a moderator.  If I make it into office however, I will be removed as moderator and someone else will take my place. 

3. If you get into office, will you be the leader of the SWCU Facebook group?

I think this question comes because a lot of my initial support for office did come from this Facebook group.  However, the SWCU Facebook group is not a collective whole.  There are few, if any, things every single person agrees with in the group.  The SWCU is simply a place where citizens can come to get information about the doings and going ons of South Weber City and ask questions.  Currently it has 1,000 members.  You would be hard pressed to find something everyone agrees on in a group that big!  

It is a great asset in gaining the voice of people who were previously untapped - particularly that of younger families who because of family responsibilities and/or careers are not able to attend every meeting, but still want to be involve and included in public matters.  This has been a great thing for our city! We have unprecedented numbers and comments at our meetings in large part because of the Facebook group.  If I make it into office, I still plan to continue getting information to this Facebook group about things coming up in the city and reach out to as many citizens as possible.  My goal has always been to get correct and factual based information to the residents so they can make informed comments and suggestions back to city officials.  I plan to continue that avenue.  But it certainly won't be the only one.  I have met face to face many, many residents.  I have been invited into homes with groups of people to answer questions.  I have also met a great deal of residents at events the SWPCA has put on and hope to continue to reach out in that format.  It is also why I created this blog.  I understand a lot of people aren't on Facebook, and don't want to be.  I wanted them to have the ability to get the same information as well.  If I am elected, I hope to branch out the way we are currently reaching out to our residents so we can get more people involved and informed.  

4.  What is your stance on development within South Weber, especially high-density housing?

I understand we can't stop development, and we must always honor a property owner's right to develop their land if they wish.  But we also have a responsibility to take into consideration those of the neighbors and residents of that property that will be directly impacted by development.  We can be wise with our growth.  I personally don't feel we should add any more high-density zones to our general plan and have opposed every HDH zone on our proposed general plan.  While offering different types of housing and diversity is important, I feel we already have it.  We have townhomes, condos, apartments, and single family homes.  South Weber is a small town, and I want to keep it that way.  I believe moving forward we need to be very wise about the developments that will be coming into our city.  We need to seriously consider the impacts it will have on all aspects of our city, not just the parcel of land it sits on.  We need to consider the rising costs developments will have to our public safety, roads and utlities.  I would like to revisit our city codes, namely are units per acre in each zone, development agreements and conditional use permits and form based code.  We can do better to make sure we are attracting the type of development we want, vs. seeing what a developer will bring to us.  

5. What do you think about South Bench Drive? 

When I very first began studying our general plan in June and heard about a connection to Layton I like the idea of the convenience.  However, after hours upon hours upon hours of research, I have decided that convenience is a rotten apple, South Bench Drive being possibly the most rotten possible.  This road is intended to be a major corridor through our city.  The amount of traffic this will bring to our city is phenomenal, and it will not be local traffic only.   The more I learned about the proposed South Bench Drive, the more concerned I became.  I have worked tirelessly to get that information out to the citizens so everyone can be fully aware of the impact this road will have on our city.  

But what about other local road options to Layton?  I will be honest, currently I'm not convinced.  Every option we have of a connection, comes with serious risks and concerns; slope stability, contamination and costs just being a few.  Even connecting at 1900 E seems like the cost is too great.  It is a north facing road.  The plowing and snow removal of that road will fall to the property tax of the residents.  It is very steep.  Also a developer won't pay to do this road, so it will be on tax payers dime,  At this time, I haven't seen a good option where the concerns of this connection do not heavily outweigh the costs.

6. How can the city be more transparent? 

I think there are lots of avenues the city staff and elected officials can use that are currently not being utilized.  The city facebook, website, email list and the newsletter are just a few of these.  I would like to see live videos, a youtube channel, monthly or weekly checkins from city council members and mayor on a public site all used.  I praise the city for their recent efforts on this.  I would also like to see more citizens on committees to help offer suggestions and learn about processes and issues the public isn't usually aware of.  I think the time of expecting people to be involved solely by coming to the meetings has passed.vvIn an age where we have so many viable options of sharing information, we should be utilizing every avenue we can.  It is inexpensive and not terribly time consuming.  I think surveys and polls are great options, but only if the residents know they even exist.  We need to do better to communicate with the residents on every front we have available.

7.  Does it count if I write you in?  How accurate does it need to be?

Yes! Writing me in WILL count! I am the only offical and registered write-in candidate.  Because of that, it means any time your write anything in that line it will be compared to my name.  So as long as it is close and legible, it will count.  I have been asked if 'sassy blond chick' will work, and I'm not sure that one will - but maybe 'Hayley Alberts - the sassy blond chick' will.  :-)   

I am 3 months late to this race, and my name is not on the ballot.  Believe me, no one realizes this disadvantage more than me!  I hope my hard work thus far shows how willing and able I am to serve this city.  I feel I can bring a lot to the table and I feel I can help make sure our future vision of South Weber City is realized.  I am dedicated to it!  I have been a candidate for 42 days.  In that time I have done 45 posts, helped put on 3 events with the SWPCA - The Park-n-Protest, The Town Hall Style Meeting with Mayor Jo and The South Bench Drive Viewing Party.  I have attended every single Planning Commission Meeting and City Council Meeting since July and done recaps for citizens who weren't able to make it.  I have done many live videos, my most popular being the one who helped citizens fill out the general plan survey and have met with many people in their homes.   I have countless emails to the current city council, mayor and staff learning and understanding things better and many more from residents.  I love this city, and I want to protect it and serve it.  I would love your vote and your support.