DRAFT - Logan, Utah Minutes 19February5.pdf · 48 approve ratification of JaDene Denniston and Julene Butler as presented. Motion 49 carried unanimously. 50 51 Mayor Daines reported

1 | P a g e

DRAFT Logan Municipal Council Minutes ~ Logan, Utah ~ February 5, 2019

Logan Municipal Council Logan, Utah February 5, 2019 1

2

Minutes of the meeting of the Logan Municipal Council convened in regular 3

session on Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 5:30 p.m. in the Logan City Municipal Council 4

Chamber, 290 North 100 West, Logan, Utah. Chair Jeannie F. Simmonds conducting. 5

6

Councilmember’s present at the beginning of the meeting: Chair Jeannie F. 7

Simmonds, Vice Chair Amy Z. Anderson, Councilmember Thomas C. Jensen, 8

Councilmember Jess W. Bradfield and Councilmember Herm Olsen. Administration 9

present: Mayor Holly H. Daines, Finance Director Richard Anderson, City Attorney 10

Kymber Housley and City Recorder Teresa Harris. 11

12

Chair Simmonds welcomed those present. There were approximately 260 in attendance at 13

the beginning of the meeting. 14

15

OPENING CEREMONY: 16

17

Logan City Finance Director Richard Anderson offered a thought and led the audience in 18

the pledge of allegiance. 19

20

Meeting Minutes. Minutes of the Council meeting from January 15, 2019 were reviewed 21

and approved with no changes. 22

23

ACTION. Motion by Councilmember Jensen seconded by Councilmember Olsen to 24

approve the January 15, 2019 minutes and approve tonight’s agenda. Motion 25

carried unanimously. 26

27

Meeting Agenda. Chair Simmonds announced there are three public hearings 28

scheduled for tonight’s Council meeting. 29

30

Meeting Schedule. Chair Simmonds announced that regular Council meetings are 31

held the first and third Tuesdays of the month at 5:30 p.m. The next regular Council 32

meeting is Tuesday, February 19, 2019. 33

34

QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS FOR MAYOR AND COUNCIL: 35

36

There were no questions or comments for the Mayor or Council. 37

38

MAYOR/STAFF REPORTS: 39

40

Board appointments (Logan Library Board) – Mayor Daines 41

42

Mayor Daines asked for ratification to reappoint JaDene Denniston and ratification for a 43

new appointment of Julene Butler to serve on the Logan Library Board which, are three 44

year terms. 45

46

2 | P a g e


ACTION. Motion by Councilmember Olsen seconded by Vice Chair Anderson to 47

approve ratification of JaDene Denniston and Julene Butler as presented. Motion 48

carried unanimously. 49

50

Mayor Daines reported on the Logan River Golf Course and stated that a public input 51

meeting was held on January 29, 2019 and was well attended. After carefully weighing 52

the public comment with the opportunities presented in the proposals, it is the City’s 53

intent to continue with golf course operations as currently constituted. The City intends to 54

work with both Jeff John (Head Golf Professional) and Randy Oldham (Superintendent) 55

to implement many of the ideas presented at the public hearing to increase revenues and 56

control costs. The goal will be to run the Logan River Golf Course in the most efficient 57

and effective manner possible and to reduce the reliance on general fund tax dollars. 58

There will be regular reviews to assess progress. Mayor Daines added that all options 59

remain on the table for future discussions if we cannot reduce the subsidy to the golf 60

course. Her hope is that this approach will be successful in sustaining golf course 61

operations well into the future and she encouraged communication from golfers on how 62

we can best achieve the desired results. 63

64

Mayor Daines also reported on the Dogs in the Parks Pilot Program. A public input 65

meeting was held on January 22, 2019. She said a workshop of the findings from the 66

public input meeting will be presented to the Council on February 19, 2019. There were 67

10 parks proposed as being dog friendly and based on the input from the public meeting, 68

2 of the parks were eliminated (Dahle and Lundstrom) because they have playgrounds 69

and pavilions. One of the parks that does include a playground and pavilion will remain 70

in place (Jens Johansen Park) on a trial basis. She is working with staff to create an 71

educational and clean-up campaign if Council authorizes staff to move forward with the 72

pilot program. More details will be presented to the Council on February 19, 2019 but the 73

request to the Council will be to authorize a one year pilot program allowing dogs in 74

designated City parks which includes an educational campaign and if the pilot program 75

goes well, then after the one year time period, staff will propose an amendment to the 76

current ordinance allowing dogs in designated City parks. 77

78

No further items were presented. 79

80

COUNCIL BUSINESS: 81

82

Planning Commission Update – Chair Simmonds 83

84

Chair Simmonds reported on the Planning Commission held in January where they 85

discussed Density and Height Bonuses. This will be presented to the Council at tonight’s 86

meeting. 87

88

No further items were presented. 89

90

91

92

3 | P a g e


Chair Simmonds explained how the public hearing process works and said it’s a time for 93

the Council to listen to both sides of an issue. It’s not a time to clap, cheer or jeer. The 94

purpose of a public hearing is for the public to have an opportunity to share their 95

thoughts. 96

97

ACTION ITEMS: 98

99

PUBLIC HEARING - Budget Adjustment FY 2018-2019 appropriating: 100

$11,873,350 fund reserves that will be accumulated over the next 3 years toward the 101

construction of the Sewer Treatment Plant; $8,662 reimbursable State funded police 102

overtime shifts; $93,709 State alcohol funds received toward police alcohol 103

enforcement – Resolution 19-04 104

105

At the January 15, 2019 Council meeting, Finance Director Richard Anderson addressed 106

the Council regarding the proposed budget adjustments. 107

108

Chair Simmonds opened the meeting to a public hearing. 109

110

There were no comments and Chair Simmonds closed the public hearing. 111

112

ACTION. Motion by Vice Chair Anderson seconded by Councilmember Jensen to 113

approve Resolution 19-04 as presented. Motion carried unanimously. 114

115

Consideration of a proposed resolution approving the form and execution of an 116

Agreement to Participate in the Utah Association of Municipal Power Systems 117

(UAMPS) Power Exchange – Resolution 19-03 118

119

At the January 15, 2019 Council meeting, Mr. Housley addressed the Council regarding 120

the proposed resolution. He said Logan purchases all or a portion of its external supply of 121

electric power and energy from or through UAMPS. He said that UAMPS presently 122

operates a power pool pursuant to those certain Pooling Agreements between UAMPS 123

and each of its members which provides a mechanism for the economic scheduling and 124

utilization of the electric power and energy resources available to the member of 125

UAMPS. 126

127

He continued and said that UAMPS has now established its Power Exchange which 128

enables each of the members of UAMPS to enter into forward transactions with one 129

another and with UAMPS for the purchase, sale and exchange of firm electric power and 130

energy. 131

132

There is currently an agreement in place but we are updating the agreement at this time to 133

authorize certain positions in the Light & Power Department rather than named 134

individuals for the power exchange with UAMPS. 135

136


approve Resolution 19-03 as presented. Motion carried unanimously. 138

139

4 | P a g e


Consideration of a proposed ordinance amending Sections 2.52.040 and 2.52.050 of 140

the Logan Municipal Code regulating Logan City’s Employee Appeals Board – 141

Ordinance 19-01 142

143

At the January 15, 2019 Council meeting, City Attorney Kymber Housley addressed the 144

Council regarding the proposed ordinance. The intent is to make the ordinance consistent 145

with State law and the terms of those serving on the Appeals Board. 146

147


adopt Ordinance 19-01 as presented. Motion carried unanimously. 149

150

PUBLIC HEARING – Consideration of a proposed ordinance enacting Title 8 151

Chapter 36 of the Logan Municipal Code Prohibiting the Distribution of Disposable 152

Plastic Bags – Ordinance 18-21 153

154


156

Justin Robinson, Renewable Energy and Conservation Advisory Board Member 157

(RECAB) addressed the Council. He noted there are several countries that have plastic 158

bag bans. San Jose, California adopted a City Ordinance “Bring Your Own Bag” on 159

January 1, 2012. In 2016 there was a 76% litter reduction in rivers/creeks and 69% storm 160

inlets drain. In 2017 in regards to Consumer Behavior Changes, 45% of bags were 161

reusable up from 3%. 162

163

Recycling Contamination Study in Cache Valley 164

• 1 in 5 items being recycled aren’t actually recyclable in our facilities. 165

• The majority of the contaminants were items which people likely mistook for 166

being recyclable. 167

• The most common contaminants included: 168

o Plastic bags and sheeting pet food and gardening bags 169

o Food and candy wrappers 170

o Styrofoam 171

172

Mr. Robinson stated that RECAB supports the Single Use Plastic Bag Initiative. Plastic 173

pollution is a local and global issue. Plastic bags are not biodegradable, are increasingly 174

difficult to recycle and commonly end up in landfills or litter the landscape where they 175

take hundreds of years to decompose and they release toxins into the soil and water. 176

Additionally, plastics break down over time into micro plastic pollution where it can be 177

consumed in our food and water. International and domestic studies show this is an 178

effective management strategy. In 2017-2018 at least 73 bills were introduced in State 179

Legislature regarding the use of plastic bags in retail settings. The majority of these bills 180

propose a ban or fee on plastic bags. The proposed bag initiative is a prudent request to 181

address a local issue that is impacting the community and the City of Logan. Mr. 182

Robinson thanked the Council for listening and he urged the Mayor and Council to 183

support and approve the ordinance. 184

185

186

5 | P a g e


187

Logan resident Tony Peacock addressed the Council. He said his concern is the proposed 188

ordinance will not have the same affect that it does in other cities. He said only 1 in 10 189

shoppers on average bring back the reusable bags. The EPA’s determination is that single 190

use plastic bags constituted 0.28% of the weighted mass in the landfills and that plastic 191

bag initiatives don’t really have an effect as intended. He also feels that the penalties for 192

the bags are too much and feels banning plastic bags will hurt businesses and we are 193

prejudicing businesses by implementing a ban. 194

195

Logan resident Mary DaSilva addressed the Council. She showed the Council and 196

audience members various reusable bags that she uses and that are available for others 197

most of which are free. 198

199

Logan resident Erin Jacobs addressed the Council. She supports the plastic bag ban and 200

feels having a ban in place will help keep Cache Valley beautiful for generations to come. 201

202

Julie Gortlen addressed the Council and stated she is a small business owner and she is 203

concerned about the increased costs of purchasing paper bags for her customers. She is 204

also concerned because most of her customers need to have plastic bags with handles so 205

they are easy to carry. She reuses plastic bags throughout her home and she feels that 206

people need to teach their children not to litter and that people should have the freedom to 207

choose whether or not they want a bag or not. 208

209

Logan resident Jake Shaum addressed the Council. His main focus is the preservation of 210

the planet. He said there are other options besides plastic bags such as paper bags and 211

cardboard boxes. In 2006 Logan implemented a mandatory recycling program and there 212

was a lot of pushback from the public in the beginning but after time people have 213

accepted it and now Logan City is becoming a leader in recycling. He feels we can still 214

push to be a leader in recycling in the State of Utah, we are doing a good job but can 215

improve. 216

217

Logan resident Gina Millett addressed the Council. She said we need to be careful when 218

imposing bans on our citizens and in this case it’s the business owners in Logan. She 219

agrees that conservation is important but trying to change the behavior by restricting and 220

penalizing the use of plastic bags is the wrong decision and is not something the Council 221

should be imposing on the citizens and companies that do business in Logan City. She 222

reuses plastic bags in her home and teaches her children to reuse various items rather than 223

throwing them in the garbage or recycle bin. 224

225

Logan resident Jo Leary addressed the Council and said she walks to the grocery store 226

and always carries her reusable bags and if she does not have her bags she uses her hands 227

or pockets. She has also used carry-on luggage to bring her groceries home. 228

229

Logan resident Travis Hansen addressed the Council. He said a ban will lead to more 230

rules and restrictions and feels that people can be guided into a better direction rather 231

than imposing restrictions. He feels it will hurt businesses if there is a ban especially 232

smaller businesses. 233

6 | P a g e


234

Logan City Environmental Department employee Kristy Hyden addressed the Council. 235

She works at the landfill and has witnessed several times throughout the day being blown 236

around. The wind carries the bags into the rivers, streams and the farmers’ fields. She 237

feels we have an issue with all plastic items and she feels we need to start somewhere and 238

feels that Logan can be a leader in Cache Valley by banning single use bags. 239

240

Logan resident Paige Morgan addressed the Council. She supports the idea of bags but 241

she is opposed to the ordinance and how it will affect businesses. She suggested that 242

those who can pay for the paper bags such as larger businesses help smaller businesses. 243

She also said that individuals such as herself and others in the audience could start a Go 244

Fund me account to help those who want paper bags rather than having a ban. 245

246

Logan resident Bethany Haskell addressed the Council. She feels we need a compromise 247

and suggested a fee that each individual store could implement on each single use plastic 248

bag. She feels that imposing a fee on the bags will let the consumer decide if they want a 249

bag or not. 250

251

Logan resident Mike Barben addressed the Council. He is opposed to the ban and 252

suggested putting the ban on an upcoming ballot and let the voters decide if they want to 253

support the ban. 254

255

Logan resident and USU student Nick McErleu addressed the Council. He is working on 256

a project to gather 400 reusable bags and they will be given to families that are less 257

fortunate. 258

259

Logan resident Jeff Dransfield addressed the Council. He referred to studies which show 260

that banning single use plastic bags increases pollution and causes environmental harm. 261

He said that single use plastic bags use a smaller amount of materials compared to what 262

other bags use. He asked the Council to further research plastic bags before they make a 263

decision. 264

265

Logan resident Bryce Johnston addressed the Council. He supports the ban and said that 266

plastic bags take 20 years to degrade in the landfill and paper bags take one month. 267

268

Jonathan Badger owner of Lee’s Marketplace in Logan addressed the Council. He feels 269

the current ordinance as written will not address the issues that are being presented from 270

an environmental and business standpoint. He is representing several businesses who 271

were not able to attend tonight’s public hearing. He said if the ban is not incorporated 272

throughout Cache Valley it gives a benefit to those stores located outside of Logan City. 273

The plastic bags from those cities outside of Logan will still come back into Logan City 274

and will eventually end up in the landfill. He feels we can all agree that plastic is bad for 275

the environment but it has been mentioned and he agrees that a lot of the plastic bags 276

distributed at the stores now are reused in homes as garbage can liners and for other uses. 277

He said there is a litter problem throughout Cache Valley and most of this litter is not 278

plastic bags. There are national chains that will be removing plastic bags from their stores 279

within the next six years. Doing this will give the stores and customers time to provide 280

7 | P a g e


education of their intention to eliminate or reduce the use of plastic bags. He feels the 281

two-month time period indicated in the ordinance is not long enough for businesses and 282

the timeline will be costly for them. He and others support reducing the use of plastic 283

bags but he feels there should be additional education and a longer timeline to implement 284

these changes. 285

286

Logan resident Chelsie Dentell addressed the Council. She agreed there should be an 287

education campaign but also feels that the ban can be implemented now and the 288

education can be done later. Plastic bags are convenient but she feels there are a lot of 289

easy adjustments that can be made to replace the use of plastic bags. 290

291

Logan resident and USU student Nicole Parker addressed the Council. She feels if we 292

make changes now that people in the future will know how to live in regards to the use of 293

plastic bags. She feels we need to start somewhere and changes need to be made today. 294

295

Logan resident Nadra ?? addressed the Council. She said there is a long list of things that 296

should be recycled and people should be aware of these things. There should be more 297

education on what can and should be recycled. 298

299

Logan resident and Logan High School student Wesley Carter addressed the Council and 300

said he supports the ban on plastic bags. He feels we need to reduce our consumption of 301

plastic bags today and start thinking that everything doesn’t need to be convenient. 302

303

Logan resident and Logan High School student Kristen ?? addressed the Council. She 304

supports the ban on plastic bags and said we need to continue to find ways to reduce 305

consumption and it starts with individuals and businesses. 306

307

Logan resident Andy Hofmeister addressed the Council and expressed his thoughts about 308

living in Logan and how much he appreciates the City and all they do to make it a better 309

place to live. 310

311

Logan resident Paul Consalub addressed the Council. He believes that education is 312

important when in comes to the implementation of using plastic bags, but education is not 313

effective every time so there needs to be definitive implementation for people to 314

understand how it works and what it means. He suggested putting the ban in place and 315

not worry about the educational benefits which can be costly. 316

317

Logan resident Keith Schnare addressed the Council. He said it seems to him that we 318

need to start somewhere and the timeline for implementation of the ban should be 319

extended. He reminded the Council that the fence at the landfill is only a band aid and 320

more time should be spent getting it right before a ban goes into effect. 321

322

Sherrie Badger owner of Lee’s Marketplace in Logan addressed the Council. She said 323

that Lee’s gives back to the community and is very involved in the community. Lee’s 324

wants to help educate and do what they can to help the community understand when it 325

comes to plastic bags. She is also in competition with businesses outside of Logan City 326

8 | P a g e


that won’t have a plastic bag ban in place. She asked the Council to give the ban more 327

time and to make it a countywide issue rather than just Logan City. 328

329

Logan resident Krista ?? addressed the Council. She is frustrated with corporations and 330

governments saying that things will change in the future and she wants results now. She 331

feels that Logan is in a great position to be the leader on the issue of banning plastic bags. 332

333

Logan resident and former Logan City Environmental Department employee Frank 334

DeYoung addressed the Council. He worked on a study regarding plastic bags which 335

found that plastic bags are the number one contaminator of recycling cans. He supports 336

the ban and urged the Council to move forward. 337

338

Logan resident Ken ?? addressed the Council. He supports the ban and feels it will force 339

people to be more conscious about recycling. 340

341

Logan resident Rob Davies addressed the Council. He is very proud of the community 342

and in the past, the Council has shown courage when working through controversial 343

issues. He supports the ban and feels we will have a better community by eliminating 344

plastic bags and be a model for other communities to follow. 345

346

There were no further comments and Chair Simmonds closed the public hearing. 347

348

Chair Simmonds said she is in favor of banning plastic bags but she is also a realist in 349

terms of politics in Utah. Four years ago, a Utah State Senator proposed a ban on plastic 350

bags statewide. The Senator got it out of committee and it was defeated by the Senate. 351

The Senator repeated the process and the second time it never got out of committee. Last 352

year the bill that came out of committee was a ban on a city’s ability to ban plastic bags. 353

This bill went all the way through the Senate and it was in the House of Representatives 354

and was fought by the Utah League of Cities and Towns and was defeated in the last 355

hour. This bill is coming forward again and they do not want our communities to be able 356

to make this type of legislation. There is backing from the petroleum industry this year 357

and it will be an interesting challenge. If Logan City takes a step forward and says yes, 358

we want to ban plastic bags, we could actually be told in 45 days that we cannot ban 359

bags. We all need to remember that as much as we want to control our own destiny, we 360

are often precluded in that control by someone else. She encouraged everyone attending 361

tonight’s public hearing to speak to their State Legislators. Cities and Town need to be 362

more proactive and there are some in the State Legislature that don’t want cities to be 363

making these types of decisions. 364

365

Chair Simmonds announced that our State Legislators meet every Saturday at 7:00 a.m. 366

in the County Administration building and the public is invited to attend. 367

368

Councilmember Olsen said the plastic bag ban started as a concern regarding the 369

pollution that he saw throughout the community and his concern about the preservation 370

of the beauty of Cache Valley and Logan. Utah has been the fastest growing State in the 371

Union for the past 10 years. People are coming and they will continue coming and we 372

cannot control the impact but, we can control their behavior as they come to Cache 373

9 | P a g e


Valley and our behavior as we remain here. We cannot solve all of the problems but can 374

solve one of the problems in Logan which are plastic bags. He said freedom to choose 375

does not include freedom to pollute. If a merchant decides to distribute single use plastic 376

bag they should pay a plastic management fee for distributing the bag which causes 377

pollution. That would also require a ten cent per bag fee for those who choose to use the 378

bag. He heard an economist state that the way to prevent pollution is to charge for it. He 379

does not feel that in the long run this will hurt businesses but will instead help businesses 380

and if approved, he feels the ban will save businesses money. He said a poll/vote has 381

been done and has been represented at tonight’s public hearing. He said there are many 382

businesses that support the ban. He is aware of three polls that were completed one of 383

which was done by a business. It showed that 80% of the customers that go to this 384

business said they support the proposed ban. A broader community poll showed that 80% 385

of the people would support a ban. He has known Jonathan and Sherrie Badger for many 386

years and appreciates all they do for the community. He said Logan City spent $28,000 387

for a wind fence to control the bags from blowing onto the farmer’s fields. The fence was 388

blown over this morning due to the wind so it works well when the wind blows one 389

direction. He selected April 22, 2019 as the implementation day to ban plastic bags 390

which, is also Earth Day. He proposed extending the implementation day to July or 391

August. He encouraged everyone to speak with our State Legislators regarding the 392

plastic bag ban and not let them take away our freedoms here in Logan to make decisions 393

about our future. He said we need to do something now and Logan should lead the way 394

on this issue. 395

396

Councilmember Bradfield said he feels this is a case of important versus urgent. He does 397

believe that plastic waste is important but he feels it’s hard to view as urgent. He is 398

strongly against the ban but he is open to compromise. He said if cities do not trust their 399

residents on most basic decisions, what other decisions will neighbors and elected 400

officials determine we are too inept to manage about our daily lives. As far as he knows 401

there has never been a product ban in the history of Logan and he asked if the plastic bag 402

ban rises to the mandated level that would be placed upon the citizens of Logan. He finds 403

it hard to believe that plastic bags are a local crisis. They are a nuisance but before this 404

issue was brought forward he never received a single complaint about bags blowing in 405

the wind and he can’t recall ever seeing a bag blowing in the wind and he lives by open 406

fields. The plastic bags are recyclable and we can join with other cities and have them 407

recycled for free as long as we have a place to store them. He asked how does the 408

Council feel comfortable banning something when we don’t know all of the costs 409

involved. The County Council hasn’t been consulted on plastic bags and he would like to 410

have input from them before anything is decided for Logan City. He said that almost 411

unanimously businesses have stated that they do not want a ban and will make changes 412

on their own in regards to bags. With a ban we are telling businesses that we don’t care 413

about their opinion. He suggested issuing a challenge rather than a mandate to businesses 414

and let them decide what to do. He is concerned about an entitlement attitude towards a 415

desire to control our residents and businesses. Many of the letters he received in support 416

of the ban focused on solidarity with what is considered progressive cities, states and 417

countries and wanting to be a leader in this area. We have the opportunity to work with 418

the County and work on a compromise that everyone can agree to in regards to plastic 419

bags. He feels we can solve this because it’s a Logan ideal and we can find common 420

10 | P a g e


ground by working together. He thanked everyone for attending and appreciates the civil 421

atmosphere of the audience. 422

423

Vice Chair Anderson said she understands that we need to start somewhere. Her concern 424

is the timeline and suggested that it be pushed to January 1, 2020 to give businesses time 425

to develop a plan and provide community education. The countywide impact is also a 426

concern to her and making sure we have plastic management plan for all plastic items and 427

not just single use bags. She also feels we need to think broader and what businesses can 428

do to manage their plastic waste in an effective manner. 429

430

Councilmember Jensen complimented Councilmember Olsen for his initiative in 431

proposing this ordinance. He also complimented those in attendance and asked that 432

people attend future meetings to voice their concerns about other issues. Studies show 433

that we have a larger plastic problem in our world and the single use bags are just a very 434

small piece of the problem. Our environment is Cache County and he feels that we should 435

not limit only to Logan and should include other Cache County cities. We need to think 436

of this as a valley problem and not just a Logan City problem and a ban only in Logan 437

City will affect businesses. He suggested that the Council take more time on 438

implementing a ban and get input from the County and try and do a countywide plan 439

rather than just Logan City. 440

441

Chair Simmonds said in the State of Utah we cannot make businesses charge for the bags 442

because it is perceived as a tax and Logan City is not allowed to levy a tax. She talked 443

with ULCT Executive Director Cameron Diehl and asked what if we were to work on 444

something statewide where we would charge 5-10 cents for a bag and the money would 445

go into a fund towards recycling education for school children because they are the ones 446

who are going to inherit our earth. Mr. Diehl thought it was a good idea but said it 447

probably would not happen this legislative session. 448

449

Councilmember Jensen said he would like to explore what he’s heard from 450

Environmental Director Issa Hamud about the idea for a Plastic Management surcharge 451

and he believes if we create a cost for the use of a bag that it will make a difference. He 452

still believes that it should be a countywide issue and not just Logan City. 453

454

City Attorney Kymber Housley suggested that direction be given to Mr. Hamud to look 455

at the possibility of a countywide program and give him a date specific time to bring it 456

back to the Council. 457

458

Councilmember Olsen said the bags can be recycled if you are in the right area. The 459

information he has is that 1% of single use plastic bags are recyclable and that means that 460

97-99% of bags never make it into the recycling stream. He is comfortable that we 461

explore the Plastic Management surcharge which Mr. Hamud is working on at this time. 462

With the fee, if businesses choose to utilize single use plastic bags they will pay a 463

surcharge. He proposed to continue a decision until March 2019 so the Environmental 464

Department has time to gather more information. The implementation day could be 465

sometime in July. 466

467

11 | P a g e


Councilmember Olsen said he reached out to the Mayors of Hyrum, Providence, North 468

Logan and Smithfield and asked for their input on this issue and not one of the Mayors 469

responded back to him. He feels that is the same response we will get from the 470

Legislature if Logan doesn’t do something. 471

472

Mr. Housley said it was mentioned that we can’t have an ordinance that requires a fee for 473

a bag and that was under the proposal that if businesses charge 10 cents for a bag and we 474

take a portion of that money to use for education. If the businesses kept that money he 475

doesn’t think it would be an illegal tax. 476

477

Councilmember Anderson said those living in the County need to contact their Mayors 478

and City Council and express their thoughts on a countywide ban. 479

480

Mr. Housley said the County Council cannot approve a countywide ban on plastic bags. 481

He feels that what Mr. Hamud will propose doesn’t require a countywide ban and can be 482

done under our current fee structure and would include industrial and commercial users. 483

484

Environmental Director Issa Hamud clarified that the Council is looking for a plastic 485

management program along with public education and a surcharge if businesses or 486

industries don’t adopt a management plan. He said the process will require that he 487

prepare the policy and send it to the Solid Waste Advisory Board for their input. Then, 488

with their recommendation take it to the Cache County Council and with the approval of 489

the County Council, then it becomes countywide. 490

491

Mr. Hamud clarified that the option is voluntary so a business can offer a plastic bag and 492

pay the surcharge or offer an alternative which would be a paper bag or something else. 493

494

Mr. Housley said one of the options to avoid a surcharge is the business can offer a single 495

use plastic bag for a fee such as 10 cents and it will still give the consumer the option if 496

they want to pay more for a bag. 497

498

Councilmember Bradfield said his understating is there would not be a surcharge 499

involved but there would be a charge to the businesses and they could then pass it along 500

to the customer to help recoup those costs. 501

502

Mr. Housley clarified that to avoid the surcharge businesses would need to have a Plastic 503

Management Plan in place and one of those options is to charge for a single use plastic 504

bag. If they charge for the bag then the business will avoid the surcharge. We are also 505

considering adding other plastic materials other than bags which, is the part that still need 506

to be developed. 507

508


continue Ordinance 18-21 to the March 19, 2019 Council meeting pending a 510

proposal from the Logan City Environmental Department for a Plastic 511

Management Program and amend the implementation date to August 1, 2019 as 512

presented. Motion carried unanimously. 513

514

12 | P a g e


Recessed at 7:45 p.m. 515

516

Reconvened at 7:55 p.m. 517

518

PUBLIC HEARING - REZONE – Bracken Atkinson/Logan Riverwalk Land 519

Holdings, LLC authorized agent/owner, request a zone change from Mixed-Use 520

(MU) to Commercial (COM) of 6 acres, a design review for a master planned 521

commercial development consisting of a hotel and 15,000 SF of retail space, and a 522

conditional use permit to allow for parking in the front yard within the Commercial 523

(COM) zone located at 500 South Main – Ordinance 19-02 524

525

Councilmember Olsen recused himself from Ordinance 19-02 due to the fact that his law 526

firm owns a portion of the Riverwoods building in the area of the proposed rezone. 527

528

At the January 15, 2019 Council meeting, Community Development Director Mike 529

DeSimone addressed the Council regarding the proposed rezone. He said this is a 530

proposal to construct one (1) new 60,000 SF hotel, three (each) 4,800 SF commercial 531

buildings, and a commercial parking lot on an approximately 6.94-acre site. The 532

development is divided into three parcels through a boundary line adjustment, one for the 533

hotel (3.19 acres), one for the commercial buildings (2.48 acres), and one for the 534

commercial parking lot (1.27 acres). The development is a new phase of the Riverwoods 535

development to the South and shares similar uses and development patterns. The 536

development is connected through internal pathways and a riverside walkway that 537

connects Main Street to 100 E. The development will be connected to the adjacent 538

Riverwoods development via a pedestrian bridge over the Logan River. The proposal 539

includes surface asphalt parking located around all buildings and fronting 100 E and 400 540

S, landscaping, underground storm-water retention and three driveway accesses. 541

542

Hotel 543

The proposed hotel contains 112 guest rooms. In order to improve the connection to the 544

existing Riverwoods development and capitalize on the natural feature of the river, the 545

hotel placement is along the northside of the Logan River. To allow this placement and 546

accommodate front yard parking along 100 E, a Conditional Use Permit has been 547

requested. The hotel is surrounded on three sides by asphalt parking. A proposed pathway 548

and bridge along the Logan River connects the hotel to surrounding areas and the 549

adjacent Riverwoods development. Project #19-002 The Riverwalk at the Riverwoods 550

Staff Report for the Planning Commission meeting of January 10, 2019 - 2 - Commercial 551

Buildings The three commercial buildings front Main Street. Proposed parking for the 552

buildings is primarily located behind the buildings with some parking located to the side 553

yard. Two of the proposed buildings include a vehicular drive-through lane. The primary 554

entrance for all commercial buildings is oriented towards the parking lot. 555

556

Commercial Parking 557

The commercial parking lot is located in the northeast portion of the development and 558

consists of 111 parking stalls. The parking lot has a 10’ setback landscaping buffer along 559

100 E adjacent to parking stalls and a 5’ setback and landscaping buffer along 400 E 560

adjacent to a parking drive lane. 561

13 | P a g e


562

Rezone Request 563

The applicant is requesting a rezone from Mixed Use (MU) to Commercial (COM). The 564

Logan City Future Land Use Plan found inside the Logan City General Plan identifies the 565

area as Mixed-Use Center (MUC). The Mixed-Use Center is described as having high 566

concentrations of commercial and mandatory residential uses developed in a compact 567

walkable pattern. By creating compact, pedestrian-oriented development, the City of 568

Logan can concentrate growth inward and upward relieving pressures surrounding rural 569

or more open areas. This development pattern is contrary to status-quo horizontal 570

automobile-oriented larger development footprint patterns. The Commercial zone is 571

described in the Logan City General Plan as being designed for a wide-range of 572

commercial uses and services intended to serve local and regional populations. 573

Residential development is possible but not mandatory in the Commercial zone. The 574

proposed project, while near to previous housing development at the Riverwoods, does 575

not contain any residential housing. The proposed development’s uses and development 576

pattern regarding building massing, parking, setbacks, and design are more congruent 577

with the Commercial zone. 578

579

Conditional Use Permit 580

The LDC 17.10.080 typically requires parking areas to be located to the side and rear in 581

the Commercial zone to prioritize architecture over asphalt parking lots. The Commercial 582

zone, through a Conditional Use Permit process, allows for the placement of up to 50% 583

of the required parking stalls in the front of a building if findings can be made 584

demonstrating the proposed site layout is compatible with adjoining properties, is 585

consistent with surrounding land use and development patterns, provides enhanced 586

pedestrian functionality and walkability in relationship to the adjoining street, will not 587

compromise future projects or designs, and includes substantial landscaping adjacent to 588

the parking area. 589

590

The hotel parking is designed with 33 front yard parking stalls (30% of required parking) 591

to accommodate the placement of the hotel adjacent to the Logan River. An examination 592

of the adjoining properties and surrounding land use shows that the proposed parking is 593

compatible Project #19-002 The Riverwalk at the Riverwoods Staff Report for the 594

Planning Commission meeting of January 10, 2019 with the existing Riverwoods projects 595

to the south as that development contains three parking areas that front streets. There are 596

two smaller parking areas along Main Street and 100 E fronting the street, and a large 597

parking area fronting 700 S. The remaining parking at the Riverwoods is located in the 598

side or rear yard. Residential development along 100 E consists of driveways for single 599

family homes and some front yard parking for a multi-family development at 440 S 100 600

E. Commercial development west and north of the project area along Main Street 601

primarily consist of side and rear parking with some front parking on the corner of 400 S 602

and Main. The pedestrian walkability and connection to 100 E is not compromised by the 603

front parking. The project features an enhanced connection to 100 E via a riverside 604

pathway and sidewalk connections. Landscaping buffers along the parking are 605

conditioned to include a berm and dense plant materials. As conditioned, the project 606

meets the requirements of the LDC. 607

608

14 | P a g e


Staff Summary 609

The rezone request is consistent with adjacent land uses and the proposed project is 610

consistent with the intent of the Commercial zone as defined by the Logan City General 611

Plan. The proposed project will provide enhanced access to commercial services in the 612

community. The architecture and development pattern is consistent with development in 613

the area, particularly the existing Riverwoods development to the south. The exception to 614

allow the placement of the hotel along the river and not fronting 100 E is consistent with 615

the site features and permissible through the Conditional Use Permit process to allow the 616

parking to be located in front of the hotel. The development of commercial parking is 617

permissible and does not interfere with future redevelopment of the area. 618

619

Recommendation 620

Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval for a rezone from 621

Mixed Use (MU) to Commercial (COM). Staff recommends that the Planning 622

Commission conditionally approve a Design Review Permit for Project #19-002, The 623

Riverwalk at the Riverwoods, for one 60,000 SF hotel, three (each) 4,800 SF commercial 624

buildings, and a commercial parking lot located at approximately 500 South Main Street, 625

TIN #02-054-0041, 0042, 0043. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission 626

conditionally approve a Conditional Use Permit that allows up to 50% of the required 627

parking stalls for the new hotel be placed in the front yard. 628

629

Current Land use adjoining the subject property North: COM & NR-6: Commercial Uses, 630

Residential Uses East: NR-6: Residential Uses South: COM: Commercial Uses West: 631

COM: Commercial Uses. 632

633

On January 10, 2019, the Planning Commission recommended that the Municipal 634

Council approve The Riverwalk at the Riverwoods Rezone project that amends the 635

Official Zoning Map. 636

637


639

Logan resident Mike Barben addressed the Council and said he has property near the 640

proposed rezone and has no concerns. 641

642

Developer Bracken Atkinson representing Wasatch Development Group addressed the 643

Council. He said originally there was a Mixed-Use component because they thought they 644

were getting more parcels but did not. He encouraged the Council to move forward and 645

approve the rezone and thanked the Council for their consideration. 646

647

Logan resident Katie Anderson addressed the Council. She lives on East Center Street 648

and is concerned about traffic congestion in the area of 300 South 100 East. 649

650

Logan City Public Works Director Paul Lindhardt responded the City is in the process of 651

working with UDOT on improvements in the area of 300 South Main Street and 300 652

South 100 East. 653

654

15 | P a g e


Mr. DeSimone said the parking lot has been realigned so a future traffic light could be 655

installed on 500 South Main Street. A left-hand turn onto Main Street will be hard to do 656

without a light. 657

658


660

ACTION. Motion by Councilmember Jensen seconded by Councilmember 661

Bradfield to adopt Ordinance 19-02 as presented. Motion carried 4-1 (Olsen recused 662

himself). 663

664

WORKSHOP ITEMS: 665

666

Budget Adjustment FY 2018-2019 appropriating: $2,926 for a grant the 667

Communications Center was awarded for this fiscal year from the State of Utah; 668

$128,169 to reimburse the Fire Department budget for wildland deployment – 669

Resolution 19-07 – Richard Anderson, Finance Director 670

671

Finance Director Richard Anderson addressed the Council regarding the proposed budget 672

adjustments. 673

674

The proposed resolution will be an action item and public hearing at the February 19, 675

2019 Council meeting. 676

677

Consideration of a proposed resolution adopting the 5-Year Strategic Plan Priorities 678

and Goals for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program 679

Consolidated Plan 2019-2023 – Resolution 19-09 – Aaron Smith 680

681

Planner Aaron Smith addressed the Council regarding the proposed resolution. He said 682

Logan City has developed a Strategic Plan based on an analysis of the data contained in 683

the Community Needs Assessment and Housing Market Analysis; and through 684

community workshops, surveys, and service provider interviews. Through these efforts, 685

the City has identified four priority needs and related goals. The priority needs are: 686

• Provide for a suitable living environment 687

• Improve the capacity of community service providers 688

• Improve affordable housing options 689

• Invest in CDBG planning and administration 690

691

To address these needs, the following goals have been identified: 692

• Invest in neighborhood infrastructure in low and moderate-income areas 693

• Invest in remediation of access and mobility barriers in all neighborhoods 694

• Provide housing rehabilitation assistance to low and moderate-income residents 695

• Provide down payment assistance to low and moderate-income residents 696

• Invest in public facility improvement that serve low and moderate-income 697

residents 698

• Invest in capacity and programmatic improvements for service providers that 699

primarily serve low and extremely low-income residents, particularly those 700

residents at risk of experiencing homelessness 701

16 | P a g e


• Invest in neighborhood and strategic planning to help identify needs within the 702

community 703

704

It is estimated that Logan City’s CDBG program will receive approximately $2,250,000 705

in funding over the next five years. Because CDBG funding is limited and the needs 706

within each of the priority areas far outweigh CDBG resources, Logan City has 707

prioritized the investment of local funding towards these goals. Specifically, the City 708

heavily invests Redevelopment Agency (RDA) funding in housing rehabilitation and 709

down payment assistance program. While RDA funding is still available, CDBG funding 710

will not be allocated towards the specific priority need of improving affordable housing 711

options and its supporting goals. When RDA funding is no longer available or RDA 712

funding priorities change, CDBG funding may then be used to address that need and goal. 713

Instead CDBG funding will be invested in the following areas: 714

715

Provide a Suitable Living Environment (50% of all CDBG funding over 5 years) 716

40% - Invest in neighborhood infrastructure in low and moderate-income areas. 717

10% - Invest in remediation of access and mobility barriers in all neighborhoods. 718

719

Improve the capacity of community service providers (30% of all CDBG funding 720

over 5- years) 721

20% - Invest in public facility improvement that serve low and moderate-income 722

residents. 723

10% - Invest in capacity and programmatic improvements for serve providers that 724

primarily serve low and extremely low-income residents, particularly those residents at 725

risk of experience homelessness. 726

727

Invest in CDBG Planning and Administration (20% of all CDBG funding over 5-728

years) 729

5% - Invest in neighborhood and strategic planning to help identify needs within the 730

community. 731

15% - Program administration funding. 732

733

CDBG Funding Estimates 734

• $2,250,000 - CDBG funding over the next 5 years 735

• $1,125,000 - Provide for a suitable living environment (50%) 736

• $675,000 - Improve the capacity of community service providers (30%) 737

• $0 – Improve affordable housing options (0%) 738

• $1,000,000 – Estimated RDA funding for housing rehab and down payment 739

assistance 740

• $450,000 – Invest in CDBG planning and administration (20%) 741

742

Strategic Plan Comparison 743

2014-2018 Consolidated Plan 744

• 70% - Neighborhood Infrastructure 745

• 10% - Support eligible service providers 746

• 20% - Planning and administration 747

748

17 | P a g e


2019-2023 Consolidated Plan 749

• 50% - Neighborhood Infrastructure 750

• 30% - Support eligible service providers 751

• 20% - Planning and administration 752

753

Mayor Daines said the focus was on neighborhood infrastructure particularly sidewalks 754

because during the time that she served on the City Council she heard from a lot of 755

people who wanted sidewalks. She has a concern about changing the 70% to 50% 756

because she keeps hearing that people want more sidewalks. 757

758

Councilmember Olsen commented that he likes the new emphasis because areas such as 759

CAPSA and affordable housing are addressed. 760

761

Mr. Smith said there is a lot of unrest amongst service providers about access to grants in 762

the current climate so having local funding available is a good thing. 763

764

Councilmember Bradfield agreed with Mayor Daines and said residents want sidewalks. 765

766

Vice Chair Anderson disagreed and said the way the Plan is written gives flexibility that 767

funds can be used for access related projects whether it be City owned or not. 768

769

Mr. Smith said the Consolidated Plan can be amended if needed. 770

771



774

Consideration of a proposed resolution adopting Amendment 2 of the Community 775

Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Year 2018 (PY2018) Annual Action 776

Plan for the City of Logan – Resolution 19-06 – Aaron Smith 777

778

Planner Aaron Smith addressed the Council regarding the proposed resolution. He said 779

the purpose of this amendment is to make changes to projects that were approved in the 780

PY2018 Annual Action Plan. The Logan City CDBG Annual Action Plan for PY2018 781

that was adopted May 2018 requires an amendment. One project that was previously 782

approved, The Center Street Pedestrian Improvement project, needs to be cancelled and 783

the funding reallocated to other projects. The proposed changes are as follows: 784

785

• Cancel the CDBG funding for the Center Street Pedestrian Improvement Project 786

(to be completed with local funding). 787

• Approve the 600 East Pedestrian Improvement Project $160,000 for Design and 788

Construction. 789

• Reallocate $20,000 from the Center Street Pedestrian Improvement Project to the 790

200 West 1300 North Sidewalks & Corners Project. Total CDBG funding for the 791

200 West 1300 North Sidewalks % Corners Project will now be $35,000. 792

• Reallocate $160,000 from the Center Street Pedestrian Improvement Project to 793

the 600 East Pedestrian Improvement Project. 794

795

18 | P a g e


Cancellation of the Center Street Pedestrian Improvement Project is proposed due to 796

sufficient local funding to complete the project. 797

798

The 600 East Pedestrian Improvement Project consists of sidewalk and corner 799

improvements along the 600 East Corridor from 500 North to 900 North. These 800

improvements will help provide safe pedestrian infrastructure along a primary road in the 801

area. 802

803

Public Works Director Paul Lindhardt said as the Center Street Project was discussed it 804

was determined that the funds were not appropriate for that project. There are a lot of 805

students in the area of 600 East from 500 North to 900 North and there is a need for a 806

sidewalk in this area which currently does not exist. There is also a resident that lives at 807

570 North and he has a major drainage issue at this location that a sidewalk would take 808

care of and from a Public Works standpoint, this project would be beneficial to help solve 809

the drainage problem and would provide a sidewalk for the USU students. 810

811



814

CODE AMENDMENT – Consideration of a proposed Code Amendment. Logan 815

City requests to amend the Land Development Code Section 17.34 to include 816

provisions for Density and Height Bonuses in the Town Center (TC) zones – 817

Ordinance 19-04 – Mike DeSimone, Community Development Director 818

819

Community Development Director Mike DeSimone addressed the Council regarding the 820

proposed Code Amendment. He explained the proposed amendment creates a residential 821

density and height bonus program in the Town Center (TC-1) zone. The proposal rewards 822

superior development utilizing building materials traditional to downtown Logan and/or 823

projects utilizing structured parking to meet at least 75% of a project’s required parking 824

by offering increased density (units/acre) and/or additional building height. The bonuses 825

allowed in each of the two categories are weighted differently based on their level of 826

importance in the TC-1 zone; however, the density bonus is cumulative meaning that a 827

project could obtain a density bonus for a superior design and an additional density bonus 828

for a parking structure, while the height bonus is not cumulative. While the original 829

proposal considered density and height bonusses I the TC-2 zone, the Planning 830

Commission determined that the use of bonuses was more appropriate in only the TC-1 831

zone. This program does not waive or modify any other specific standard in the code, 832

e.g., parking requirements, setbacks, design standards, etc. 833

834

Staff recommended that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the Municipal 835

Council to amend the Land Development Code Chapter 17.34 to include a density and 836

height bonuses program for the Town Center (TC-1) zone. 837

838

On January 24, 2019, the Planning Commission recommended that the Municipal 839

Council approve the Land Development Code Amendment to Chapter 17.34 creating the 840

Town Center Density and Height Bonus Program. 841

842

19 | P a g e


Purpose & Intent 843

• Promote exceptional site and building design 844

• Promote efficient & flexible use of land 845

• Encourage use of traditional building materials 846

• Encourage use of structured parking 847

• Incentivize new development in TC-1 with density/height bonuses 848

849

General Requirements 850

• Track 2 design review process 851

• Neighborhood Residential height/setback transition 852

• Application of density/height bonuses does not waive other requirements 853

• Development agreement, deed restriction – runs with the land 854

• Burden of proof is on the applicant to demonstrate how bonuses are being 855

achieved 856

857

Two Ways to Obtain a Bonus 858

• Superior design using traditional materials common to downtown Logan 859

• Structured parking for up to 75% of the parking demand 860

861

Superior Design 862

• Traditional building materials 863

• Materials commonly found on commercial buildings in downtown Logan 864

• Brick, stone, wood, tile, metal – yes 865

• Stucco, composites, plastics, glass – no 866

• Traditional versus modern 867

• Traditional design characteristics 868

• Building form, orientation, scale, massing, fenestration 869

• Design elements – Projections, reveals, moldings, overhangs, cornices 870

• Traditional form versus modern form 871

872

Parking Structure 873

• Quantitative: Numbers based 874

• 75% of required parking 875

• Can be integrated or separate 876

• Potential density bonus: 30 dwelling units per acre 877

• Potential height bonus: 24’ 878

879

880

20 | P a g e


881 Compliance 882

• Legal mechanism – development agreement and/or deed restriction 883

• Changes require PC approval 884

• Timing of improvements specified in permits 885

• Compliance tied to construction phases & certificate of occupancy 886

• Long-term expectations/requirements 887

• Spelled out in permits 888

889

The proposed ordinance will be an action item and public hearing at the February 19, 890


892

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS: 893

894

No further considerations were addressed by the Council. 895

896

ADJOURN TO MEETING OF THE LOGAN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 897

898

Chair Simmonds welcomed those present. There were approximately 12 in attendance at 899

the beginning of the Logan Redevelopment Agency meeting. 900

901

Councilmember Olsen recused himself from voting on Resolution 19-01 RDA, 902

Resolution 19-05 RDA and Resolution 19-02 RDA due to the fact that his law firm owns 903

a portion of the Riverwoods building in the area of the South Main River Project. 904

905

ACTION ITEMS: 906

907

Consideration of a proposed resolution approving and adopting tax increment 908

interlocal agreements for the South Main River Community Reinvestment Project 909

Area – Resolution 19-01 RDA 910

911

21 | P a g e


City Attorney Kymber Housley explained that to finalize the interlocal agreement process 912

the RDA is required to collectively approve all three of the interlocal agreements (Logan, 913

Cache County and the Logan City School District). 914

915


approve Resolution 19-01 RDA as presented. Motion carried 4-1 (Olsen recused 917

himself). 918

919

PUBLIC HEARING – Consideration of a proposed resolution adopting the Project 920

Area Budget for the South Main River Community Reinvestment Project Area – 921

Resolution 19-05 RDA 922

923

Mr. Housley stated that the Council acting as the Redevelopment Agency now needs to 924

consider and then adopt the budget for the South Main River Community Reinvestment 925

Project Area. He stated there is not a requirement to place a cap on the overall budget 926

which, hasn’t been done in the past. The budget is just over six million dollars and is the 927

maximum during the 15-year time period that the Agency can receive from the taxing 928

entities. 929

930


932

Logan resident Mr. Garcia addressed the Council and said he owns property in the area of 933

600 South 100 West. It was his understanding that there is a project in this area to divert 934

traffic from Main Street to 100 West and then all the way to the South McDonald’s. 935

936

Mr. Housley responded that the boundaries of the South Main RDA do not go across 937

Main Street. 938

939

Mr. Garcia also asked when will the 100 West project begin. 940

941

Mr. Lindhardt responded that he does not have the completed costs of the 100 West 942

project budgeted but the project is scheduled to begin in 2023. 943

944


946

ACTION. Motion by Councilmember Jensen seconded by Councilmember 947

Bradfield to approve Resolution 19-05 RDA as presented. Motion carried 4-1 (Olsen 948

recused himself). 949

950

Consideration of a proposed resolution approving Agency Assistance to Logan 951

Riverwalk Hotel Holdings, LLC for its redevelopment project in the South Main 952

River Community Reinvestment Project Area – Resolution 19-02 RDA 953

954

955

956

957

958

22 | P a g e


Mr. Housley said it is proposed that Logan Riverwalk Hotel Holdings, LLC will receive: 959

• 100% of available tax increment 960

• Cap = $1.85 million 961

962

Available tax increment: 963

• Generated and received by the Agency (70% of what is generated) 964

LESS: 965

• 10% = Affordable Housing 966

• 5% = Administrative Costs 967

968

Condition: The creation/maintenance of the Riverside Trail which would be accessible to 969

the public. 970

971

Costs of Redevelopment: 972

• Acquisition of buildings to be razed 973

• Demolition and blight removal 974

• Environmental remediation 975

• Flood zone/river restoration 976

• Public amenities 977

978

Community Benefits: 979

• Catalyst for additional growth 980

• Jobs 981

• Master-planned development 982

• New businesses 983

• Public amenities 984

• Tax base 985

986

ACTION. Motion by Councilmember Bradfield seconded by Vice Chair Anderson 987

to approve Resolution 19-02 RDA as presented. Motion carried 4-1 (Olsen recused 988

himself). 989

990

WORKSHOP ITEM: 991

992

Budget Adjustment FY 2018-2019 appropriating: $100,000 funds the City’s portion 993

of a River Restoration Project bordering the South Main Redevelopment Project 994

Area – Resolution 19-08 RDA – Kirk Jensen, Economic Development Director 995

996

Logan City Finance Director Richard Anderson addressed the Council regarding the 997

proposed budget adjustment. These funds are for restoring the Logan River and making 998

improvements. The City received a grant in the amount of $51,000 for the restoration and 999

the proposed $100,000 is the City’s portion. 1000

1001

Mr. Lindhardt added the original project estimate was $300,000 and this originated as a 1002

Logan River Task Force project. The City initially applied for a $100,000 grant and we 1003

applied as co-applicants with Wasatch Development. We received a grant in the amount 1004

23 | P a g e


of $51,000 which is less than what we were hoping. There is the possibility of an 1005

additional $30,000 - $50,000 that we could receive but that is yet to be determined. The 1006

work will be flood plain mitigation and it also includes a low trail and a high trail along 1007

the river in this area. 1008

1009



1012

ADJOURNED. There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting 1013

of the Logan Municipal Council adjourned at 8:50 p.m. 1014 1015

1016

Teresa Harris, City Recorder 1017

Documents

DRAFT - Logan, Utah Minutes 19February5.pdf · 48 approve ratification of JaDene Denniston and Julene Butler as presented. Motion 49 carried unanimously. 50 51 Mayor Daines reported