Meeting: Redevelopment Agency Board Meeting

Start Position

Bookmark0

Chair Fullmer called for a motion.

Motion: BOARDMEMBER WELSH MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT ITEM AS PRESENTED. BOARDMEMBER SIFUENTES SECONDED THE MOTION. CHAIR FULLMER, BOARDMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, SIFUENTES, AND WELSH VOTED YES. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. BUSINESS ITEMS 3.1 PUBLIC HEARING – Participation Agreement with Flagborough, LLC for Tax Increment Funds and Triggering Phases 5A and 5B of the HTRZ (Resolution U2023-02) Flagborough, LLC is requesting an extension for the collection of Phase V of the Geneva Urban Renewal Area. The RDA Board will act to adopt (or deny) this request by Resolution.

Chair Fullmer called for a motion to open the public hearing.

Motion: BOARDMEMBER WELSH MOVED TO GO INTO A PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:01 PM. BOARDMEMBER FLAKE SECONDED THE MOTION. CHAIR FULLMER, BOARDMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, SIFUENTES, AND WELSH VOTED YES. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

Chair Fullmer turned the time over to City Manager Ezra Nair to give context.

Mr. Nair explained that the City Council and the state had approved a Housing and Transit Reinvestment Zone (HTRZ) around the Vineyard FrontRunner Station, which was a separate zone that allowed for increased density around the station to encourage ridership. He stated that when an area was in one of these special zoning districts, the property needed to be triggered for it to start collecting tax increment. He further explained that there were 25-year life cycles for when an area was triggered, and that the Vineyard RDA didn’t have 25 years left. This allowed the city to extend the life of the RDA so that the HTRZ could be triggered first, followed by the RDA.

Chair Fullmer called for public comments.

Resident Julie Gray, living in the Villas, wanted to see what the planned intent was for that community. She expressed concern for housing density and its impact on the city.

Pete Evans with Flagborough commented that this was a complicated issue and that it had taken time to get to this point. He explained that this would not change the approved usage, zoning, or densities in the area, and that most of property had not yet been fully planned. He said that these were simply financial tools to allow state and city to implement environmental cleanup, infrastructure, and redevelopment goals.

Mr. Nair added that the portion of the RDA that was being extended now was on the north side and that within a few months they would request that the remainder of the untriggered areas be triggered as well.

Mr. Brim showed a map of the affected area.

Mr. Evans described the intended development as being denser around the train station and getting less dense going north. There would be a large linear Promenade that would connect the train station to the lake, and a pedestrian bridge to go over the future Connector.

Ms. Gray asked why the extension was needed.

Mr. Nair responded, indicating that the HTRZ was a financing tool recently created by the state and that it did not exist when the RDA was first created. A brief discussion ensued about how this tool helped to address the housing crisis, develop infrastructure, and that it was the envy of the nation.

Ms. Gray asked if we had a model in the state of Utah that we could compare this to.

Chair Fullmer responded that Vineyard might be that model. She added that Vineyard was not the only place in the country with this kind of transit-oriented development and affordable housing approach, but that it was newer to the state. The discussion continued.

Councilmember Welsh remarked that the residents could be proud that as soon as this was passed by the state legislature, Vineyard was one of the first to apply. Now almost every other city in the county that was eligible was lining up to use this mechanism.

Nate Hutchinson with Flagborough pointed out that one of questions with density was traffic. He said that growth in Utah was a given, and this concept was to make it smart growth, so the density would be clustered around the transit stations.

Resident Daria Evans, living in the Villas, asked about the train station parking. She understood it was temporary, and asked where the new parking would be placed in relation to the new development.

Mr. Evans explained that the agreement with Utah Transit Authority (UTA) was that there would eventually be a parking structure near the train station with a shared parking agreement.

Chair Fullmer called for further questions from the public. Hearing none, she called for a motion to close the public hearing.

Motion: BOARDMEMBER WELSH MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:16 PM. BOARDMEMBER FLAKE SECONDED THE MOTION. CHAIR FULLMER, BOARDMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, SIFUENTES, AND WELSH VOTED YES. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

Chair Fullmer called for further discussion or a motion.

Motion: BOARDMEMBER WELSH MOVED THAT WE ADOPT RESOLUTION U2023-02. BOARDMEMBER SIFUENTES SECONDED THE MOTION. ROLL CALL WENT AS FOLLOWS: CHAIR FULLMER, BOARDMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, SIFUENTES, AND WELSH VOTED YES. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. ADJOURNMENT

Chair Fullmer called for a motion to adjourn the meeting.

Motion: BOARDMEMBER WELSH MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 6:17 PM. BOARDMEMBER FLAKE SECONDED THE MOTION. CHAIR FULLMER, BOARDMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, SIFUENTES, AND WELSH VOTER YES. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MINUTES APPROVED ON : April 26, 2023 CERTIFIEDCORRECTBY: /s/ Kelly Kloepfer Kelly kloepfer, deputy RECORDER