HomeMy Public PortalAboutPKT-CC-2020-02-11FEBRUARY 11, 2020
EXECUTIVE (CLOSED) SESSION 6:30 P.M.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7:00 P.M.
City Council Chambers
217 East Center Street
Moab, Utah 84532
Executive (Closed) Session - 6:30 p.m.
Discussion of the Character, Professional Competence, or Physical or Mental
Health of an Individual or Individuals
Regular City Council Meeting - 7:00 p.m.
Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
Approval of Minutes
Minutes: January 14, 2020 Regular City Council Meeting
cc -min -2020 -01 -14 draft.final.pdf
Mayor and Council Reports
Administrative Reports
Citizens to Be Heard
Old Business
Back -in Parking Recommendations
back -in parking recommendations agenda summary.pdf
attachment 1 - back -in parking technical memorandum.pdf
New Business
Proposed Resolution 01 -2020: A Resolution Approving the Two -Mac Minor
Subdivision at 1053 Mill Creek Drive, Moab, UT 84532, as Referred to Council by
the Planning Commission
Briefing and possible action
cc two -mac minor subdivision agenda summary 021120.pdf
exhibit 1 pc resolution 01 -2020 two -mac minor subdivision
021120.pdf
exhibit 2 project narrative.pdf
exhibit 3 application.pdf
exhibit 4 two -mac subdivision plat.pdf
Resolution 09 -2020: A Resolution Approving a Lot Consolidation for 46 E. and
76 E. 300 North
Briefing and possible action
cc agenda summary sheet four corners lot conlsoidation.pdf
attachment 1 resolution 66 -2019 mulberry grove lot
consolidation.pdf
attachment 3 aerial photo.png
attachment 4 state code 10 -9a -608.pdf
attachment 4 state code 10 -9a -608.pdf
Authorization to Pursue UDOT's approval of Hotspot Funding to Construct
Dispersed Parking Facilities at Emma Blvd
Briefing and possible action
funding to construct the emma blvd dispersed parking facilities
agenda summary.pdf
attachment 1 - emma blvd dispersed parking exhibit.pdf
Downtown Parking Structure Discussion and Potential Action (Sponsor:
Councilmember Duncan)
Briefing and possible action
dps agenda summary.pdf
duncan agenda summary.pdf
duncan powerpoint.pdf
res 33 and cooperative agreement.pdf
Consideration, discussion and decision on whether the City of Moab shall impose
a .1% sales and use tax to fund cultural facilities, recreational facilities, and
zoological facilities and botanical organizations, cultural organizations, and
zoological organizations in the City (RAP Tax)
Consideration, discussion and decision
agenda summary sheet.pdf
city rap outline.pdf
notice of intent --rap tax.pdf
Approval of Bills Against the City of Moab
Adjournment
Special Accommodations:
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals needing special
accommodations during this meeting should notify the Recorder ’s Office at 217 East Center
Street, Moab, Utah 84532; or phone (435) 259 -5121 at least three (3) working days prior to
the meeting.
Check our website for updates at: www.moabcity.org
1.
1.1.
2.
3.
4.
4.1.
Documents:
5.
6.
7.
8.
8.1.
Documents:
9.
9.1.
Documents:
9.2.
Documents:
9.3.
Documents:
9.4.
Documents:
9.5.
Documents:
10.
11.
FEBRUARY 11, 2020EXECUTIVE (CLOSED) SESSION 6:30 P.M.REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7:00 P.M.City Council Chambers 217 East Center Street Moab, Utah 84532Executive (Closed) Session - 6:30 p.m.Discussion of the Character, Professional Competence, or Physical or Mental Health of an Individual or IndividualsRegular City Council Meeting - 7:00 p.m.Call to Order and Pledge of AllegianceApproval of MinutesMinutes: January 14, 2020 Regular City Council Meetingcc-min -2020 -01 -14 draft.final.pdfMayor and Council ReportsAdministrative ReportsCitizens to Be HeardOld BusinessBack-in Parking Recommendationsback-in parking recommendations agenda summary.pdfattachment 1 - back -in parking technical memorandum.pdfNew BusinessProposed Resolution 01 -2020: A Resolution Approving the Two -Mac Minor Subdivision at 1053 Mill Creek Drive, Moab, UT 84532, as Referred to Council by
the Planning Commission
Briefing and possible action
cc two -mac minor subdivision agenda summary 021120.pdf
exhibit 1 pc resolution 01 -2020 two -mac minor subdivision
021120.pdf
exhibit 2 project narrative.pdf
exhibit 3 application.pdf
exhibit 4 two -mac subdivision plat.pdf
Resolution 09 -2020: A Resolution Approving a Lot Consolidation for 46 E. and
76 E. 300 North
Briefing and possible action
cc agenda summary sheet four corners lot conlsoidation.pdf
attachment 1 resolution 66 -2019 mulberry grove lot
consolidation.pdf
attachment 3 aerial photo.png
attachment 4 state code 10 -9a -608.pdf
attachment 4 state code 10 -9a -608.pdf
Authorization to Pursue UDOT's approval of Hotspot Funding to Construct
Dispersed Parking Facilities at Emma Blvd
Briefing and possible action
funding to construct the emma blvd dispersed parking facilities
agenda summary.pdf
attachment 1 - emma blvd dispersed parking exhibit.pdf
Downtown Parking Structure Discussion and Potential Action (Sponsor:
Councilmember Duncan)
Briefing and possible action
dps agenda summary.pdf
duncan agenda summary.pdf
duncan powerpoint.pdf
res 33 and cooperative agreement.pdf
Consideration, discussion and decision on whether the City of Moab shall impose
a .1% sales and use tax to fund cultural facilities, recreational facilities, and
zoological facilities and botanical organizations, cultural organizations, and
zoological organizations in the City (RAP Tax)
Consideration, discussion and decision
agenda summary sheet.pdf
city rap outline.pdf
notice of intent --rap tax.pdf
Approval of Bills Against the City of Moab
Adjournment
Special Accommodations:
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals needing special
accommodations during this meeting should notify the Recorder ’s Office at 217 East Center
Street, Moab, Utah 84532; or phone (435) 259 -5121 at least three (3) working days prior to
the meeting.
Check our website for updates at: www.moabcity.org
1.1.1.2.3.4.4.1.Documents:5.6.7.8.8.1.Documents:9.9.1.
Documents:
9.2.
Documents:
9.3.
Documents:
9.4.
Documents:
9.5.
Documents:
10.
11.
FEBRUARY 11, 2020EXECUTIVE (CLOSED) SESSION 6:30 P.M.REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7:00 P.M.City Council Chambers 217 East Center Street Moab, Utah 84532Executive (Closed) Session - 6:30 p.m.Discussion of the Character, Professional Competence, or Physical or Mental Health of an Individual or IndividualsRegular City Council Meeting - 7:00 p.m.Call to Order and Pledge of AllegianceApproval of MinutesMinutes: January 14, 2020 Regular City Council Meetingcc-min -2020 -01 -14 draft.final.pdfMayor and Council ReportsAdministrative ReportsCitizens to Be HeardOld BusinessBack-in Parking Recommendationsback-in parking recommendations agenda summary.pdfattachment 1 - back -in parking technical memorandum.pdfNew BusinessProposed Resolution 01 -2020: A Resolution Approving the Two -Mac Minor Subdivision at 1053 Mill Creek Drive, Moab, UT 84532, as Referred to Council by the Planning CommissionBriefing and possible actioncc two -mac minor subdivision agenda summary 021120.pdfexhibit 1 pc resolution 01 -2020 two -mac minor subdivision 021120.pdfexhibit 2 project narrative.pdfexhibit 3 application.pdfexhibit 4 two -mac subdivision plat.pdfResolution 09 -2020: A Resolution Approving a Lot Consolidation for 46 E. and 76 E. 300 North Briefing and possible actioncc agenda summary sheet four corners lot conlsoidation.pdfattachment 1 resolution 66 -2019 mulberry grove lot consolidation.pdfattachment 3 aerial photo.pngattachment 4 state code 10 -9a -608.pdfattachment 4 state code 10 -9a -608.pdfAuthorization to Pursue UDOT's approval of Hotspot Funding to Construct Dispersed Parking Facilities at Emma BlvdBriefing and possible actionfunding to construct the emma blvd dispersed parking facilities agenda summary.pdfattachment 1 - emma blvd dispersed parking exhibit.pdfDowntown Parking Structure Discussion and Potential Action (Sponsor: Councilmember Duncan)Briefing and possible actiondps agenda summary.pdfduncan agenda summary.pdfduncan powerpoint.pdfres 33 and cooperative agreement.pdfConsideration, discussion and decision on whether the City of Moab shall impose a .1% sales and use tax to fund cultural facilities, recreational facilities, and zoological facilities and botanical organizations, cultural organizations, and zoological organizations in the City (RAP Tax)Consideration, discussion and decisionagenda summary sheet.pdfcity rap outline.pdfnotice of intent --rap tax.pdfApproval of Bills Against the City of MoabAdjournment
Special Accommodations:
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals needing special
accommodations during this meeting should notify the Recorder ’s Office at 217 East Center
Street, Moab, Utah 84532; or phone (435) 259 -5121 at least three (3) working days prior to
the meeting.
Check our website for updates at: www.moabcity.org
1.1.1.2.3.4.4.1.Documents:5.6.7.8.8.1.Documents:9.9.1.Documents:9.2.Documents:9.3.Documents:9.4.Documents:9.5.Documents:10.11.
Page 1 of 12
January 14, 2020
MOAB CITY COUNCIL MINUTES--DRAFT
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
January 14, 2020
The Moab City Council held its regular meeting on the above date in the Council Chambers at
the Moab City Center, located at 217 East Center Street. An audio recording of the evening
meeting is archived at: https://www.utah.gov/pmn/index.html and a video recording is
archived at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lh0bolF_VA.
Executive Closed Session:
Councilmember Mike Duncan moved to enter an Executive Closed Session to Discuss the
Character, Professional Competence, or Physical or Mental Health of an Individual or
Individuals. Councilmember Karen Guzman-Newton seconded the motion. The motion passed
4-0 with Councilmembers Mike Duncan, Karen Guzman-Newton, Kalen Jones and Rani
Derasary voting aye. Councilmember Tawny Knuteson-Boyd arrived at 5:40 PM. Mayor Emily
Niehaus called the Executive Session to order at 5:38 PM. Councilmember Kalen Jones moved
to end the Executive Closed Session. Councilmember Rani Derasary seconded the motion. The
motion passed 5-0 with Councilmembers Derasary, Jones, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman-Newton
and Duncan voting aye. Mayor Niehaus ended the Executive Closed session at 5:58 PM.
Pre-Council Workshop – 6:00 PM
At 6:03 PM, Mayor Emily Niehaus called a workshop meeting to order for a presentation by
Casey Hill of Red Hill Strategic to discuss legislative strategy. In attendance were Mayor Emily
Niehaus, Councilmembers Kalen Jones, Karen Guzman-Newton, Mike Duncan, Rani Derasary
and Tawny Knuteson-Boyd. Staff in attendance were City Manager Joel Linares, Assistant City
Manager Carly Castle, City Attorney Laurie Simonson, City Finance Director Rachel Stenta,
Senior Project Manager Kaitlin Myers, City Planner Nora Shepard, Assistant City Planner Cory
Shurtleff, City Recorder Sommar Johnson, and Deputy Recorder Joey Allred. Five members of
the public and media were present.
2020 Legislative Strategy Session with Casey Hill, Red Hill Strategic
Mayor Niehaus stressed that this workshop would be interactive with questions back and forth.
Casey Hill said that he is representing the Council as part of a team and that the members of his
team are David Stewart, Greg Curtis, and Mark Walker. He said that the Council will probably
meet his team when the Council goes to the Capitol during the legislative session. Hill gave
Council a brief history of his experience prior to 2005. He previously served on the Kaysville
City Council, and he explained how he began work as a lobbyist. He spoke about some of the
issues that are upcoming in the state legislature, some of the things that his team is currently
working on with City staff, and items which his firm needs further direction from the Council on
how they wish proceed. Mayor Niehaus said that she was happy to have him present, and that
the Council had discussed wanting better representation on Capitol Hill. Mayor Niehaus also
stated that one of the nice things that his firm has to offer is that Mark Walker is on their team;
He was born and raised in Moab and can speak to how Moab has changed. That is a unique and
important voice to tell Moab’s story to the legislature. Hill said that he believed that there were
some important issues facing Moab at this time which need to be acted on. There is one issue
that, if not acted on right away, could result in the loss of a significant opportunity and revenue
for the City. He reminded Council of the 0.5% municipality TRT (Transient Room Tax) tax and
the history of it. When the tax was first created, it gave municipalities twenty-five years to utilize
Page 2 of 12
January 14, 2020
that optional 0.5%, and that the twenty-five years is coming to an end in 2021. He has spoken to
Representative Carl Albrecht who sponsors a piece of legislation that has to do with reallocating
how counties are able to use their portion of the restaurant tax. This legislation would free up
some money for counties from the restaurant tax, which would allow them to use the funds
more freely and effectively in other areas. The Utah Association of Counties is willing to allow
the City to work with them and include the City’s issue as part of it. UCA §59-12-353 needs to
have the sunset language either removed or amended with language to make it clear that
municipalities can use it for 25 years or until the indebtedness is paid off. Hill didn’t think that
there would be any concerns with getting this accomplished. Utah Tourism is working with
Grand County on this issue and was happy to hear that the City is actively engaged in this
process. The Utah Tourism group thought that it would be beneficial to sit down and come up
with the answer to the question from Moab’s perspective. He felt that an important question
that the City would need to be ready to answer would be: What is Moab trying to solve, not just
in the terms of the 0.5%, but what is the purpose? The City should be able to show what they
need the revenue for. Finance Director Stenta asked Hill about the legislation which his firm is
looking to put together with the Utah Association of Counties, and if that would open it up to
new indebtedness in addition to extending the sunset? Hill said that was exactly what he had
meant. Hill has been working with Linares and Castle to compile a list of issues that would be
pertinent for the City, and that they would like the Council to give Hill direction on. David
Stewart is the lead on Hill’s team and has been talking with the State Senate President, Stuart
Adams.
TRT Extension is a short-term goal for this legislation, and Hill thinks that they can get it done
with significant time and effort. However, he noted that his team members are having
conversations with legislators about things that are still undecided and, while they have some
positive statements in their favor, it doesn’t indicate that decisions have been made, or that they
should assume that things are already decided. There is still a legislative process for each bill.
There is still a committee hearing in both the House and the Senate and a floor vote in both the
House and the Senate that the bills will have to pass.
Regarding OHV’s, Hill feels that having someone on their team who is from Moab and has
family in Moab gives them a good understanding of what Moab is like. Hill recommended a
proactive working together approach with the OHV community as they have a large active group
at the capitol, as the reality is that their concerns are legitimate and real and could have far
reaching impact on the community and the rest of the state. Mayor Niehaus stated that she
thought it was worth saying that the community is full of outdoor recreation, and OHV’s are one
piece of the community’s outdoor recreation pie. She doesn’t believe that the Council wants to
negatively affect those businesses. She believes that the Council cares a lot for the people that
operate those businesses and who are in that industry. She said that the Council wants to make
sure that the OHV’s are protected as one of the ways people want to get out and play in Moab.
There is a clear conflict with some of the OHV’s not being street legal and the noise level.
Council is looking for a resolution of some kind where they can continue to celebrate the off-
road community and their form of recreation, while making sure that they listen to the
community’s concerns about noise and safety in the residential areas in the community. Hill
wanted to give Council a clear understanding of what is winnable and to give them a realistic
expectation. One conversation Hill has had was with the Utah Tourism lobbyist and thought that
there are ways to potentially work together to address the issue and move forward with possible
changes that might be meaningful to the community. Councilmember Jones said that he thought
Page 3 of 12
January 14, 2020
there was a bill to eliminate the off-highway tag out-of-state-reciprocity and asked Hill if he was
familiar with it, and if so, what Hill thought of its chances? Hill said that he was not familiar, but
that he would investigate it. Councilmember Duncan said that he isn’t concerned with OHV’s
being in town, but he is concerned about the noise. He wondered why OHV groups would fight
any effort to make them quieter. Hill didn’t feel that he could say if OHV groups are adamantly
opposed to the idea of requiring machine modifications. Hill believes that Moab City would be
much better served to form a coalition, work with the Utah League of Cities and Towns, and
work with other resort communities that might be affected and go back to the legislature once
they have a coalition. Moab City standing alone to take on this issue is not likely to end with
success in this legislative session. Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd thought that the Council
needs to address the perception that the City hates those who come to Moab to ride OHV’s and
the way that they recreate. OHV groups’ choice of recreation makes some of our neighborhoods
very noisy. Duncan thinks that the Council should focus on the noise. Councilmember
Knuteson-Boyd thought that it would be a good idea to get legislators here to hear the noise that
the locals hear in their neighborhoods. Hill will work on trying to get legislators here in April.
Mayor Niehaus wanted to make sure that it be known that within the OHV community there is a
diversity of opinions as well. She also mentioned that there was a suggestion about curfews.
Assistant City Manager Castle and City Manager Linares said that significant push back
occurred after a curfew was brought up. City Manager Linares said that there are about eight
different organizations that are united into the OHV group. Moab is currently standing alone.
There was discussion about the creation of a CIB for a Tourism Board, and how that would
work. Hill said that it will take some work, but he believes that they can get some traction on it.
City Manager Linares said that areas that are heavily impacted by tourism can have access to
funds in the form of grants or loans with a lower percentage rate. Councilmember Duncan
wanted to know if the TRT tax would be used on the CIB. City Manager Linares said that the
CIB would be a separate, new tax associated with the tourist industry.
Hill’s firm has had conversations with the president of the senate regarding his concerns about
the overnight accommodations issue. Hill believes that President Adams’ concerns have been
addressed and the potential fires have been controlled. The City is working hard to listen to the
community about how to deal with unintended consequences. The Council and the Planning
Commission are still working to get the overnight accommodations issue resolved. Hill said that
President Adams understands the problems that the City is facing.
Hill reported that Inland Port litigation is important and explained how it could affect Moab. He
said that Salt Lake City has said that they may pursue appeal, and there are issues that they
argue which have a compelling state interest. He wanted the Council to know that the court case
could have far reaching impacts because it can empower the legislature to feel that, in every
instance where they disagree with something that a City Council is doing, there’s a compelling
temptation to step in. It could open the path for the legislature to do so, and he wanted the
Council to keep that in mind and encourage Salt Lake City to be cautious as they proceed.
Hill spoke on tax reform. The legislature passed the tax reform in a special session in December
and there were conversations about resort community tax and sales distribution that came up.
Hill said that they haven’t heard what the legislature is intending to do with those items at this
time. Councilmember Derasary said that community members may be concerned about a tax on
food and asked if he had any information on that. Hill believes that the legislature is currently
waiting to see how the referendum succeeds if they get enough signatures. Hill said that if the
Page 4 of 12
January 14, 2020
referendum is successful, the legislature will probably pass a “skinny budget” because it won’t be
on the ballot until November. Legislative session starts January 27th.
Councilmember Derasary mentioned ongoing concerns about anything that is taking away local
control for the community, whether it’s land use planning, water, or flexibility with spending
TRT funds. Hill explained that they are dealing with TRT using the restaurant tax and adjusting
that, but they won’t be adjusting TRT. Councilmember Derasary said that the County’s EMS is
working with fire professionals on potential legislation as apparently there is nothing in the state
code that requires communities to have EMS services. She will send Hill a copy of the draft
legislation and would like him to look into it. He said that he would and that he would be
interested to find out more.
Mayor Niehaus recessed the meeting at 6:57 PM.
Regular Meeting—Call to Order and Attendance:
Mayor Niehaus called the meeting to order at 7:03 PM and had a moment of silence for a
councilmember who lost a loved one recently. Mayor Niehaus then led the Pledge of Allegiance.
In attendance were Councilmembers Kalen Jones, Karen Guzman-Newton, Mike Duncan, Rani
Derasary and Tawny Knuteson-Boyd. Staff in attendance were City Manager Joel Linares,
Assistant City Manager Carly Castle, City Attorney Laurie Simonson, City Finance Director
Rachel Stenta, Senior Project Manager Kaitlin Myers, City Planner Nora Shepard, Assistant City
Planner Cory Shurtleff, City Communications and Engagement Manager Lisa Church, City
Engineer Chuck Williams, City Recorder Sommar Johnson, and Deputy Recorder Joey Allred.
Seventeen members of the public and media were present.
Approval of Minutes:
Councilmember Duncan moved to approve the minutes of the December 2, 2019, December 6,
2019, and December 10, 2019 meetings with a correction noted by Mayor Niehaus.
Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-0, with
Councilmembers Jones, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman-Newton and Duncan voting aye.
Councilmember Derasary abstained from the vote.
Mayor and Council Reports:
Mayor Niehaus reported that she attended a Millcreek Community Collaborative Meeting, and
hosted Moab’s first investors’ speed dating event with Grand County Community Development
Director Zacharia Levine. Jim Sorenson of the Sorenson Innovation Center was in attendance
and it was a nice event to introduce projects to money. She gave a shout-out to City Senior
Project Manager Myers for presenting the City’s Walnut Lane project. She also attended the
League of Cities and Towns Board Meeting and the Legislative Policy Committee (LCP) Meeting;
They are getting ready for the legislative session. She attended the USU Advisory Council
meeting, and they are currently doing new member recruitment. Their focus for this year is on
continued fundraising and programing. Councilmember Duncan has agreed to take over that
position.
Councilmember Derasary attended an EMS Special Service District Meeting. 2019 was the
busiest year by far with 1,463 calls which surpassed the previous year by 14%. 2018 had an
increase of 11%, which means that have had an increase of 25% over the past two years. It hadn’t
been predicted that they would reach 1,400 calls until 2023. There are EMT classes going on for
Page 5 of 12
January 14, 2020
both the High School and the public. She missed a Canyonlands Healthcare Special Service
District Meeting due to a death in the family.
Councilmember Duncan attended a Homeless Coordinating Committee Meeting and found that
they are at an impasse on being able to utilize the Center Street Gym as an emergency shelter
due to rules, regulations, and lack of funding; but he thanked the staff for trying to make it
happen. He attended the Water Advisory Board meeting and thanked Assistant City Manager
Castle for helping the board to become more organized. He said that the Board will try to
maintain more of an educational process. They will focus more on keeping an updated annual
report to use as a vehicle to communicate recommendations, and then prepare presentations
that the Water Board should provide to both staff and the Planning Commission.
Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd attended a Housing Authority Meeting that was short, but the
biggest take-away was that the Moab Area Land Trust is moving forward with their
infrastructure. They are very excited about how far they have come in a short period of time. The
Moab Arts Council invited Knuteson-Boyd to join their meeting when they choose who their
donations went to this year; those choices are on their website.
Councilmember Guzman-Newton attended the Millcreek Collaborative Meeting with the Mayor
and staff, and they are getting ready in the next month for community outreach to share with the
public. She attended a Transit Authority Meeting, where there was discussion of creating a
formal board or keeping the group as more of a think-tank to offer suggestions. They outlined
the priorities for 2020 which were: shuttle infrastructure planning, working with Planning and
Zoning, code changes with overnight accommodation, new design standards in order to offer
something to the statewide rural long-range plan that is being worked on for both short-term
and long-term strategies for transportation to Salt Lake City. She attended an Airport Board
Meeting and was introduced to the new Airport Board Manager, Andy Solsvig. They sent the
Board’s recommendation to the County Council to accept the bid of SkyWest Airlines to operate
the airport. The local US Census Group was awarded a $25,000 grant for the complete count
committee and they are working on promotional materials.
Councilmember Jones attended the Travel Council Meeting, which was about the role of
recreational assets in the City as a draw for tourists. Jones believes that the Travel Council will
need to do some sort of coordinated recreational asset prioritization. They have been working on
coordinating advertising in Western Colorado to promote the Dinosaur Diamond. He wanted to
make Council aware that the BLM is moving towards an oil and gas lease sale on a couple of
parcels in Sand Flats.
Mayor Niehaus announced that Brad Lancaster, Author of Rainwater Harvesting for Drylands
and Beyond, has contacted Niehaus and is willing to come to Moab on Wednesday, March 25,
2020. She has tentatively reserved the Council Chambers at lunch and in the evening, and she
encouraged staff to attend. She asked the Council if they would like to have Brad Lancaster
present to them as a Council Meeting, or more as a public gathering that takes place in the
Council Chambers. It was decided that the Council would like to encourage as much of the
community as possible to attend, and that it would take place in the evening.
Administrative Reports:
Linares stated that their Strategic Planning Session is scheduled for Friday, February 14th. It will
be on a Friday rather than a Saturday this year so that more staff will be available. The highway
Page 6 of 12
January 14, 2020
widening is still on course to tentatively begin on February 24th. The City will be posting
information about the project on both their website and Facebook page. People can request to be
emailed or mailed updated information from the City’s Communications and Engagement
Manager about the project. They can also make a request to UDOT, who will have their own
website about the project. Staff will be getting the impact fee analysis going this week. City
Public Works Director Antillon has left the City’s employ and Linares will be working as interim
Public Works Director until further notice. Antillon has moved to be closer to his family and
Linares thanked him for his service. Linares stated that the use of the Center Street Gym as an
emergency winter shelter is still in progress. They have worked out the permitting and
requirements from the state, but they are still working on funding for finance parts of it and
volunteers. It doesn’t look like it will get done this year, but they are working on how to make it
work in the future.
Engineer Williams gave updates on projects. The Regional Transportation Plan has a consultant
selected and it’s a maximum of a one-year project per the scope. There will be stakeholder
groups and public involvement. They’ve also received a UDOT grant through their technical
assistance planning to form a Unified Plan. It’s a joint plan with Grand County to update the
City/County Transportation Master Plan. Staff calls it the Unified Plan, but Council should be
the ones to name it. Grand County is putting in $20,000, the City is putting in $15,000 and
UDOT is contributing the rest of the money to get it done. The City and County will manage the
project in coordination with UDOT. UDOT opened bids on the highway widening and they came
in at 10% greater than what their engineer had estimated; This means that they will need to re-
evaluate. The North Sewer Trunk Line is moving along, and the Millcreek Waterline Design
Project’s plan should be done in about 6 weeks.
Citizens to be Heard:
Mayor Niehaus reminded the public that each person was allowed three minutes for their
comments.
Sara Melnicoff said that the City has bent over backward to make the Center Street Gym work as
an emergency winter shelter, but the committee couldn’t come up with funding for staff or
volunteers. Linares said that the City is still willing to proceed. She updated Council on the
fundraising for an Emergency fund. At City Market, they raised $11,180, and then there were
private donations. If they get donations from the City, they would be close to $25,000.
However, she spent $4,056 last month which is double what she plans to spend each month.
$2,200 went for lodging and rent. This month she has spent $3,190 thus far and a lot of that was
also rent and lodging. There is a lot of need and this was probably the busiest December they’ve
ever had. She has been promoting Moab Solutions Recycling Center and hopes that everyone
can work together in the future.
Rikki Epperson, Executive Director of Community Rebuilds, wanted to clarify a few things about
Ordinance 20-2002 and addressed concerns she has heard from the community regarding the
Community Rebuilds request for zone change. She also mentioned community concerns
regarding “commercial creep” and the possibility of the Rancho Fandango turning back into a
nightly rental. She said that she believed those issues had been addressed in Community
Rebuilds’ plan. Nothing in the neighborhood will change except that one more house will be in
the housing stock when the new office gets built. She said that they don’t have much office
traffic, but she feels that the current location of the office has more of a commercial creep feel
Page 7 of 12
January 14, 2020
than where the new office would be. Community Rebuilds is going to deed restrict both
properties as they don’t want nightly rentals in that area. The residential feel will be preserved.
Kenny Fallon said that he is an AmeriCorps Vista and he is grateful that he was able to get
housing with Community Rebuilds in their service worker lodging. He said that his friends have
had trouble finding housing. It is very difficult to find affordable housing, particularly if you are
in a volunteer program or community internship; He is grateful that he was able to get into
housing that is reserved for service organization workers. He is hoping that the zone change will
go through because it will increase that supply and help more people.
Zacharia Levine owns property bordering part of the Community Rebuilds property and he
believes that it would be beneficial to do the zone swap. He believes that it makes more sense for
the commercial parcel to have more frontage on a public road rather than being on the flag lot
portion. He would prefer the zone change because it fits more with the character of the area. He
supports Community Rebuilds as an organization and the mission and goals that it is working to
reach.
Kimberly Pettit said that she had previously sent a booklet to the Council and the Mayor
regarding her understanding of this issue. She was under the impression that, before this was to
be considered by the Council, they would have a public hearing prior to a decision being made.
She read an email that she had sent to Council earlier in the evening. She is thoroughly against
the rezone and said that she could find no postings for this meeting. She said that she also was
not notified of the public hearing on this issue when it was before the Planning Commission, and
she was not interviewed by anyone to convey a narrative to support such a zone change. She said
that the documents provided to the Planning Commission for their public hearing included a
document (number 3) approving the proposed zoning map amendment when it was only
supposed to be a public hearing. Mayor Niehaus notified Pettit that she was one minute over the
allowable three minutes for Citizens to be Heard Comments, but would allow her to finish. Pettit
mentioned that the minutes from the public hearing held by the Planning Commission stated
that the Commission passed the ordinance only with the understanding that the Council would
not pass it until they held a public hearing, but there has been no notice. She asked that Council
table this matter.
Dennis Silva said that he lives in the county but has communicated his feelings about the
Humane Society’s Trap and Neuter program. He asked that the Council talk to the Humane
Society about the program because cats kill birds. He said that he has documentation that
proves that the program kills a lot of birds, especially songbirds. He believes that birds should be
considered in the decision and a suggestion be made to the Humane Society about reducing that
program.
Ellen Amuso said that she is a Board member of the Humane Society and she read out a
statement from the Humane Society explaining how the Community’s feral cat population has
stabilized and has, in fact, decreased. She said that records showed that the City euthanized
almost 2000 cats between 1997 and 2004 at taxpayer expense in addition to paying staff salary.
The Humane Society’s Feral Cat program has successfully stopped the community runaway feral
cat population and reduced Moab’s animal shelter costs. The cat population has been steadily
declining in response to the program.
Diane Walker said that she sent a letter regarding the zone change of Community Rebuilds
earlier in the day. She said that she has been involved in a lot of zone changes in that
Page 8 of 12
January 14, 2020
neighborhood over the years and gave Council some history including the zone change
applications that had been denied. She is very much opposed to this zone swap and thinks it’s a
poor precedent for the City. She worries that this type of thing will come up again.
Proclamations:
Proclamation of January 20, 2020 as Martin Luther King Jr. Day in the City of Moab.
Mayor Niehaus read out the proclamation that annually, on the third Monday of January, be
declared Martin Luther King Jr. Day as a federal holiday to represent Dr. King’s birthday. It will
be celebrated on January 20, 2020.
Old Business
Community Contributions Recommendations for FY 2019-2020
Discussion: Communications and Engagement Manager Lisa Church and Assistant City
Manager Carly Castle were available for any questions the Council may have had.
Motion and vote: Councilmember Duncan moved that the City fund the Humane Society as
the Committee has suggested with the caveat that, in subsequent years, any funding requests
from the Humane Society should show significant deductions in the feral cat population.
Councilmember Guzman-Newton seconded the motion. Mayor Niehaus stated that there are
more items on the Community Contributions list, but she was comfortable with isolating this as
a motion if Council agreed, however they would still need a motion for the remaining
contribution items. There was no further discussion. The motion passed 5-0 with
Councilmembers Duncan, Guzman-Newton, Derasary, Knuteson-Boyd and Jones voting aye.
Motion and vote: Councilmember Jones moved to approve the Community Contributions Ad
Hoc Committee’s recommendations for the rest of the fiscal year 2019-2020 grants.
Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd seconded the motion. Councilmember Derasary asked if the
motion was to approve the rest of the recommendations as is, and Councilmember Jones said
that it was. Councilmember Derasary said that there was interest in revisiting the
recommendation for the Youth Garden Project at the last meeting. Councilmember Guzman-
Newton had a suggestion of moving some funds from KZMU to give to the Youth Garden. She
also mentioned that WabiSabi’s request could be reallocated. Councilmember Derasary asked if
there was any interest in reallocating any funding that is allotted for events for groups, and
Councilmember Jones said that he was interested. Mayor Niehaus called for a vote of the motion
on the table to approve the recommendations as is. The motion failed 4-1 with Councilmember
Duncan voting aye and Councilmembers Derasary, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman-Newton and Jones
voting nay.
Motion and vote: Councilmember Guzman-Newton moved to approve the Community
Contributions Ad Hoc Committee’s recommendations for 2019-2020 grants with the deletion of
$1000 from WabiSabi and $500 from KZMU to enable $1,500 to go to the Youth Garden Project
for their Summer Camps. Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd seconded the motion. The motion
passed 5-0 with Councilmembers Guzman-Newton, Knuteson-Boyd, Derasary, Duncan and
Jones voting aye.
Page 9 of 12
January 14, 2020
Ordinance 2019-30: An Ordinance Amending the City of Moab Municipal Code
Section 17.31 RC Resort Commercial Zone to Allow New Hotels and Motels,
Subject to Revised Development Standards:
Discussion: City Planner Nora Shepard presented and said that she was looking for some
direction from the Council, as she had received wide-ranging comments and questions from the
Council at the last meeting. The Planning Commission didn’t have a quorum for last week’s
meeting, so they were unable to vote on a recommendation. She gave a brief history and pointed
out what has been approved by the County Council as well as the recommendations that were
made by City Council. The County approved overlays by use. Shepard provided updated
numbers of all existing motels and hotels as well as those that are pending. There are 388
bedrooms pending rather than the 38% increase number that has been thrown around in the
community. Shepard said that it is unknown where the 38% number actually came from
City Planner Shepard said that they are looking for direction on energy efficiency, density and
size, incentives for commercial square footage and the mixed-use requirements. Mayor Niehaus
asked if the Council was in favor of moving forward with metering, if they would like to revisit
overlays, or move forward in the Resort Commercial zones with standards. Councilmember
Duncan said that the Council hears a lot about slowing down overnight accommodations from
the community. He was uncomfortable with using strict standards to try to slow things down.
He is nervous about pursuing standards alone and asked how the rest of the Council felt about
it. Councilmember Guzman-Newton was in favor of starting with very strong standards and
loosening them a little if they are too onerous. She would like more minimum commercial space
than the 5%. Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd would prefer higher standards to overlays. She
also stated that there are apartments that are 100% solar. They generate everything they need
and sell back to the grid. They have a zero-waste component to rent the apartments so it’s not
going to be as lucrative, but she believed that it could be done. Councilmember Jones said that,
for the RC zone only, he was willing to try using standards to balance the benefits of new
development with other community benefit needs. He was accepting of the standards as written.
The assured housing offers an option to calculate the economics of individual developments and,
for the developer, to propose alternative assured housing numbers. However, Councilmember
Jones is still concerned that a developer will come back and say that they are in favor of the
standards and also assured housing, but what if a developer cannot afford the housing because
they build to the stricter standards? City Manager Linares said that the Council passed the
Assured Housing Ordinance over a year ago, and staff doesn’t have the authority to negotiate
one for the sake of the other. That is something that would have to be done through the Council
if they wanted to do it as a per project type of approval. Councilmember Jones is concerned that
there may be a loophole. City Manager Linares assured him that staff does not see it that way.
Councilmember Duncan agreed with Councilmember Guzman-Newton about requiring more
than a 5% minimum commercial. He also likes the idea of the setback tiered levels, but that it
creates a shade issue for solar panels. Councilmember Derasary said that she could see why
people wanted to discuss the overlays, and she feels that the community needs some sort of
metering, but she is accepting of the standards in the RC zone. Mayor Niehaus clarified if, for
the RC zone, Council Derasary is amenable with standards; Derasary said that she was. She
didn’t currently have an opinion on the percentage of commercial space requirement. Mayor
Niehaus summarized that the Council was going to continue moving forward with standards for
the resort commercial zone. She stated that the outstanding standard questions are on the 80%
on-site energy development requirements, the percentage of commercial space requirements,
Page 10 of 12
January 14, 2020
and the impact that this may have on their ability to leverage affordable housing units through
the WaHoo if they have greater restrictions. Mayor Niehaus asked City Planner Shepard to go
back to the Planning Commission and have deeper conversations about commercial space.
Shepard said that she could do that, or Council could give her direction of what they think
makes sense. Mayor Niehaus said that if the on-site energy development, commercial space,
stepping of the levels, and basic design criteria were workshopped by the Planning Commission,
and a recommendation came back to the Council, they would be in a good place. She suggested
that a couple of the Council and Planning Commission members get together to discuss design
criteria. Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd said that she could be on the committee.
Councilmember Jones was willing to do so, as well. It was noted that the County Council
included a greywater standard, but it is not legal unless the legislature passes the greywater rule
for commercial properties. There was extensive discussion fleshing out the best way to go about
metering overnight accommodations.
New Business:
Confirmation of Mayoral Appointment of Luke Wojciechowski to the City
Planning and Zoning Commission:
Discussion: There was no discussion.
Motion and vote: Councilmember Jones moved to confirm the mayoral appointment of Luke
Wojciechowski to the City Planning and Zoning Commission, effective immediately, to replace
the appointment formerly held by Allison Brown. Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd seconded the
motion. The motion passed 5-0 with Councilmembers Derasary, Duncan, Knuteson-Boyd,
Guzman-Newton and Jones voting aye.
Reappointment of Arne Hultquist to the Water Conservation and Drought
Management Advisory Board term commencing immediately and expiring on
December 31, 2022:
Discussion: There was no discussion.
Motion and vote: Councilmember Duncan moved to approve the reappointment of Arne
Hultquist to the Water Conservation and Drought Management Advisory Board commencing
immediately and the term expiring on December 31, 2022. Councilmember Jones seconded the
motion. The motion passed 5-0 with Councilmembers Derasary, Duncan, Knuteson-Boyd,
Guzman-Newton and Jones voting aye.
Reappointment of Kara Dohrenwend to the Water Conservation and Drought
Management Advisory Board, term commencing immediately and expiring on
December 31, 2022:
Discussion: There was no discussion.
Motion and vote: Councilmember Guzman-Newton moved to approve the reappointment of
Kara Dohrenwend to the Water Conservation and Drought Management Advisory Board
commencing immediately and the term expiring on December 31, 2022. Councilmember
Duncan seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0 with Councilmembers Derasary, Duncan,
Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman-Newton and Jones voting aye.
Page 11 of 12
January 14, 2020
Ordinance 2020-01: An Ordinance Approving a Zoning Map Amendment for
Property Owned by the City of Moab at 193 Walnut Lane (Mailing Addresses 250
& 280 W. Walnut Lane) from R-2 Single-Household and Two-Household
Residential Zone to R-4 Manufactured Housing Residential Zone, and Amending
the City of Moab Official Zoning Map:
Discussion: Senior Project Manager Kaitlyn Myers was present to answer any questions that
the Council might have. Councilmember Derasary said that she received a note from Walnut
Lane neighbors who are in support of the project; however, they are concerned that things may
change in the future, and that they could end up with a three-story apartment building next
door. She was assured that the City was going for a PAD in that area and that they would need to
bring a site plan to the Council for approval before they could proceed. There will also be public
design meetings and a tall solid fence along the property line, no matter how they move
forward.
Motion and vote: Councilmember Duncan moved to approve Ordinance 200-01: An
Ordinance Approving a Zoning Map Amendment for Property Owned by the City of Moab at 193
Walnut Lane from R-2 Single-Household and Two-Household Residential Zone to R-4
Manufactured Housing Residential Zone and Amending the City of Moab Official Zoning Map.
Councilmember Jones seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0 with Councilmembers
Derasary, Duncan, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman-Newton and Jones voting aye.
Ordinance 2020-02: An Ordinance Approving a Zoning Map Amendment for
Properties Owned by Community Rebuilds, from R-3 Multi-Household
Residential, to C-2 Commercial Residential Zoning, and from C-2 Commercial
Residential, to R-3 Multi-Household Residential Zoning; and Amending the City
of Moab Official Zoning Map:
Discussion: Assistant Planner Cory Shurtleff presented the current zoning as well as the
proposed zoning, which would be swapping the zones to allow an office to be built.
Councilmember Duncan asked if a C-1 zone would work. Shurtleff said that parking, setbacks
and landscaping buffer requirements made C-2 the better option. Councilmember Guzman-
Newton asked how they could legally deed restrict the property, and will that deed restriction
last in perpetuity? She stated that it isn’t realistic to believe that Community Rebuilds will own
the property forever. Councilmember Derasary noted that, in full disclosure, she is a neighbor to
the property and can see the points on both sides of the issue. There was extensive discussion
regarding the pros and cons of the zone swap, and the possible zones that could and couldn’t
work. The idea of classifying Community Rebuilds as school lodging due to the scope of their
mission and operations was discussed. Councilmember Derasary asked why they weren’t having
a public hearing on the issue. City Manager Linares said that the Council hadn’t received correct
information during public comments, and that the Planning Commission can only recommend a
zoning change for approval since the Council makes the decision. The Planning Commission
recommended that the Council have a public hearing, and Linares balanced that with the due
process rights of the applicant. The public hearing was held at the Planning Commission during
the first stage, which met the due process rights of both the applicant and the neighbors; the
City can’t get into a situation where it would appear that the Planning Commission is giving the
Council direction rather than the other way around. Mayor Niehaus stated that she was not part
of the conversation about the public hearing at the Planning Commission; Linares agreed and
clarified that the discussion was internally done. Derasary inquired if there were any creative
Page 12 of 12
January 14, 2020
planning tools that could be utilized to allow a one-time office without allowing offices in all of
the R-3 zone. Linares said that the Council needs to decide if they would like to have another
public hearing on the matter or not. He also said that this zone flip flop is really unique.
Shepard said that Utah state code doesn’t allow use variances, so that’s not an option in this
situation. Mayor Niehaus reiterated the idea of classifying Community Rebuilds as a school,
which would permit an office in a residential zone. City Manager Linares said that option would
require research before a decision could be made.
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Jones moved to approve Ordinance 2020-02: An
Ordinance Approving the Zone Change for Community Rebuilds based on the findings required
by Moab Municipal Code 17.04.060 Map Amendment Approval Criteria. The Motion died due to
lack of a second. Councilmember Derasary moved to table this agenda item to allow staff time to
look into the possibility of Community Rebuilds being designated as a school. Councilmember
Guzman-Newton seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-1 with Councilmembers Derasary,
Duncan, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman-Newton voting aye, and Councilmember Jones voting no.
Review of Council Member Community Organization Liaison and Board
Assignments:
Discussion: There was no discussion.
Motions and vote: Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd moved to table this agenda item.
Councilmember Duncan seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0 with Councilmembers
Derasary, Duncan, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman-Newton, and Jones voting aye.
Appointment of the 2020 Mayor Pro Tem
Discussion: Mayor Niehaus reappointed Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd as Mayor Pro Tem
Appointment of the Council Member Responsible for Reviewing the City’s Bills in
2020:
Discussion: Mayor Niehaus reappointed Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd as the
Councilmember responsible for reviewing the City’s bills in 2020.
Approval of Bills Against the City of Moab:
Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd said that she went through the bills to see what they were
spending locally; she noted that the City’s charges to Amazon went down markedly last month.
She moved to approve the bills in the amount of $270,516.30 and noted that $150,163.36 of that
was spent locally. Councilmember Jones seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0, with
Councilmembers Derasary, Jones, Knuteson-Boyd, Duncan and Guzman-Newton voting aye.
Adjournment: Councilmember Duncan moved to adjourn the meeting. Councilmember
Guzman-Newton seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0, with Councilmembers Derasary,
Jones, Knuteson-Boyd, Duncan and Guzman-Newton voting aye. Mayor Niehaus adjourned the
meeting at 10:01 PM.
APPROVED: __________________ ATTEST: ___________________
Emily S. Niehaus, Mayor Sommar Johnson, City Recorder
Moab City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: February 11, 2020
Title: Back-in Parking Recommendations
Disposition: Discussion and possible action
Staff Presenter: Chuck Williams, City Engineer
Attachment(s): - Attachment 1: Back-in Parking Technical Memorandum
Recommended Motion: None
Background/Summary: This item was previously brought to and tabled by City Council on December 10, 2019. Staff are resubmitting the item for reconsideration per City Council request. In May 2019, the City converted existing front-in angle parking on 100 South between 100 West and Main Street to back-in angle parking in order to increase safety for bicycle riders who use 100 South. This was done as a pilot program so that staff could also assess back-in angle parking as a parking treatment, and make recommendations for implementation at other locations. Since May, staff has received several comments from businesses on 100 South regarding issues they have observed since the installation of the back-in angle parking. In response, engineering staff instigated a review of the pilot project to assess how well it is functioning. Video submitted by a local business owner indicates that some drivers have difficulty efficiently backing in to the parking spaces, and may block traffic in the travel lanes. In late October, staff pulled accident reports for this location, and found none that resulted from the back-in angle parking. Further video was recorded and bicycle counts were performed by staff in November, however both vehicle and bicycle volumes observed were likely well below peak volumes due to the season of the year. Further vehicle and bicycle counts should be performed in spring 2020. The attached Technical Memorandum includes a more detailed discussion of the data collected in the course of the review.
In consideration of the safety data, staff recommends continuing the back-in angle parking program. Per City Code the City Council determines the location of angled parking. The attached Technical Memorandum also includes discussion of potential additional locations for back-in angle parking, should Council wish to expand this parking treatment to other locations.
217 East Center Street
Moab, Utah 84532-2534
Main Number (435) 259-5121
Fax Number (435) 259-4135
Emily S. Niehaus
Tawny Knuteson-Boyd
Rani Derasary
Mike Duncan
Karen Guzman-Newton
Kalen Jones
Mayor:
Council:
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
To: Moab City Council
From: Chuck Williams
Date: December 5, 2019
Subject: Back-in Angle Parking Recommendations
Back-in angle parking is a traffic engineering technique used throughout the country,
which is intended to improve the safety of on-street parking. Back-in angle parking has
multiple safety and operational benefits for all road users, such as:
When leaving the space, drivers have an unobstructed frontal view of traffic and
can enter the traffic stream directly. This also allows eye contact and verbal or
non-verbal communication between exiting drivers and other road users. In
particular exiting drivers can see bicycles in the roadway when they are present.
Increase in number of parking spaces versus parallel parking.
When vehicle doors are open, occupants are able to enter or exit the vehicle
from the sidewalk without obstruction from the car door.
Positions the back of the vehicle to the sidewalk, enabling easier access to the
trunk.
The City launched a back-in angle parking pilot program on the west side of 100 South
in May, 2019. The City received several comments from 100 South businesses
regarding some drivers blocking the traffic flow while parking. In response to these
complaints engineering staff has reviewed the pilot project location for additional data.
This included:
Reviewing video provided by a business owner
Staff recorded additional videos
Staff has observed the parking during weekday and weekend hours
Staff conducted bicycle counts (See exhibit A)
Staff has reviewed Police accident data since the striping was implemented in
May 2019.
Vehicle count data collected by the City shows average daily traffic (ADT) on 100 South
was 4,214 when collected in July 2017.
City staff observed 25 successful parking and 13 unsuccessful parking (parking over the
parking stripe or forward angle parking) in videos provided by the business owner and
staff recorded videos.
Staff conducted a two hour bicycle count, which showed that two bicycles used the bike
lane in 100 South during the count. Staff observed shared use path bike traffic
significantly higher than the bike roadway traffic. This count was conducted in
November on a cloudy day. Staff believes the count was low due to this being the off
season.
Police accident data (May - October 2019) shows there is no accident that involves
back-in angle parking in this location.
City Council has also asked staff to provide other potential locations in the City where
back-in angle parking could be implemented. Below are five more locations for Council
consideration where staff believes we can install back-in angled parking that will
improve safety along bicycle routes and lanes for the bicyclist that share streets with
cars.
1. 100 North at Moab Food Truck Park
West of Main Street on 100 North the average width of the pavement is 68’ wide.
Currently the north side is striped for forward angled parking, and the south side is
parallel parking. Replacing the parallel parking to back-in angle parking on the south
side would provide six additional parking spaces. The north side would also be
converted to back-in angle parking.
2. 100 North at Moonflower Cooperative
Moonflower Cooperative does not provide on-site parking. The Cooperative’s customers
frequently angle park in and out in front of the building. East of the Cooperative, 100
North has bike lanes that end at the 200 East intersection. 100 North is used by a large
number of bicyclist to cross Main Street or go to the Cooperative. When using
conventional forward angle parking, drivers have more difficult sightlines to see
bicyclists in the road when leaving the parking space. Back-in angled parking should
provide a safer environment for bicyclists using the road. In addition to this
cooperatives’ customers will be able access their truck for loading from the curb rather
than from the street.
3. 100 South between 100 East and Main Street
The 100 South Reconstruction Project plans to install bike lanes between Main Street
and 200 East along with back-in angled parking on the south side of the street adjacent
to the Best Western Inn. The City Moab Biking Route Plan (February 2018) that was
adopted by the city council plans for future bike lane to be installed along 100 South
from Main Street to 400 East {Resolution # 15-2018}.
4. 100 North at MARC
Restriping conventional angle parking to back-in angled parking should provide a safer
environment for bicyclist using the road.
5. 300 South at The Ad-vertiser
Replacing the forward angle parking to back-in angle parking would allow us to extend
bike lanes to the intersection. In addition to The Ad-vertiser company will be able
access their truck for loading and unloading from the curb rather than the street. The
City of Moab Biking Route Plan (February 2018) plans for the existing bike lane to be
extended all the way to the intersection of Main Street.
Sincerely,
Chuck Williams, PE
Moab City Engineer
111111111111111111111111E11111111
uuilllluuulllllluuuulllllluulliull
u ;910 alaTml win
I • 1 r_
Moab City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: February 11, 2020
Title: Consideration and Possible Approval of Resolution #01-2020 the Two-
Mac Minor Subdivision of Property Located at 1053 Mill Creek Dr. Moab,
Utah 84532.
Staff Presenter: Cory P. Shurtleff, Assistant Planner
Attachment(s):
Attachment 1: Draft Resolution 01-2020
Attachment 2: Application
Attachment 3: Project Narrative
Attachment 4: Draft Plat
Options:
1. Approve Moab Resolution #01-2020, with or without
modifications; or
2. Continue or Table action to a later meeting with
specific direction to City Staff and Applicant as to
additional information needed to make a decision;
or
3. Deny the minor subdivision
Applicant: Douglas McElhaney, 493 Cottonwood Ln,
Moab Utah 84532
Motion for Positive Recommendation: I move to approve the Two-Mac Minor
Subdivision Resolution #01-2020.
Background:
On July 29, 2019, The Subdivision Application Form was submitted to the City. The
application was reviewed by the Development Review Team (DRT) and comments sent
to the applicant on October 15, 2019.
On October 15, 2019, Lucas Blake, Red Desert Land Surveying, responded to the
comments provided by the DRT with a revised plat. The discrepancy of Right of Way
(ROW) size was adjusted from the original plat.
At this time the Two-Mac Minor Subdivision application was submitted for review to the
Moab City Planning Commission.
On January 23, 2020, the Planning Commission forwarded a positive recommendation
to the Council, passing 5-0.
Project Summary:
1053 Mill Creek Drive, parcel #01-007-0094, is currently a 1.49 acre parcel on Mill
Creek Drive, zoned C-4, General Commercial Zone. The proposal is to split the parcel
into (3) lots. Lot 1 as 0.62 acers, Lot 2 as 0.36 acres, and Lot 3 as 0.22 acres;
Access will be from Mill Creek Drive and all utilities are already established in the public
right of way. The property has a (cliff) hill on the northern boundary, no removal or
contouring of the hill is requested. The applicant’s intent for subdividing the parcel into
smaller lots would be for, “hopefully local”, developers to build small commercial projects
on the lots.
Process:
MMC Section 16.08.020 allows for exceptions to the final plat hearing process for minor
subdivisions of five lots or less. These applications must be reviewed by the Planning
Commission and referred to Council with a recommendation, as noted below.
“MMC Section 16.08.020, Exceptions--Final plat, discusses the process and required
documents
In subdivisions of less than five lots, land may be sold after recording of a plat, if all the
following conditions are met:
A. The subdivision plan shall have been approved by the planning commission,
the planning coordinator, the city engineer, the city attorney, other agencies the
zoning administrator deems necessary, and the city council;
B. The subdivision is not traversed by lines of a proposed street, and doe s
not require the dedication of any land for street or other purposes;
C. Each lot within the subdivision meets the frontage width and area requirements
of the zoning title or has been granted a variance from such requirements by the
appeal authority;
D. All final plat requirements shall be complied with;
E. All provisions of Chapter 16.20 of this title shall be complied with; and
F. The water supply and sewage disposal shall have been approved by the
utility supervisor
CITY OF MOAB RESOLUTION NO. 01-2020
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE TWO-MAC MINOR SUBDIVISION AT 1053 MILL CREEK DRIVE.
MOAB, UT 84532, AS REFERRED TO COUNCIL BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION
The following describes the intent and purpose of this resolution:
a. Douglas McElhaney, (Applicant), has applied for a minor subdivision of the property located at
1053 Mill Creek Drive. Moab, Utah; and
b. Applicant submitted to the City of Moab the appropriate application and documents for review
and approval of the proposed (3) three-lot minor subdivision as required in MMC Chapter
16.08.020; and
c. The property is in the C-4 General Commercial Zone and the proposed intended uses are allowed
as permitted uses; and
d. Owner desires to subdivide the parcel into (3) three parcels. Lot 1 as 0.62 acers, Lot 2 as 0.36
acres, and Lot 3 as 0.22 acres; and
e. The proposed lots satisfy the dimensional requirements of the C-4 Zone; and
f. The Moab Planning Commission reviewed the application for the Two-Mac Minor Subdivision in
a regularly scheduled meeting held on January 23, 2020, to review the application and
subsequently recommending approval to the City Council in accordance with MMC Chapter
16.08.020 that allows a minor subdivision of less than five (5) lots to be reviewed without a
public hearing; and
g. The Moab City Council reviewed the application and considered the Planning Commission and
Staff recommendations of the meeting held on February 11, 2020; and
h. Following the consideration of the technical aspects of the pertinent code sections, the Moab City
Council, pursuant to Resolution #01-2020, hereby finds, that the subdivision can meet or exceeds
the pertinent code requirements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MOAB CITY COUNCIL, the application for the
Two-Mac Minor Subdivision is hereby APPROVED.
PASSED AND APPROVED in open Council by a majority vote of the Governing Body of Moab City
Council on February 11, 2020.
SIGNED: ________________________________
Emily Niehaus, Mayor
ATTEST: ________________________________
Sommar Johnson, Recorder
1053 Mill Creek Drive (Tri Mac Subdivision)
1053 Mill Creek Drive parcel #01-007-0094 is currently a 1.49 acre parcel on Mill Creek
Drive. Zoned C-4.
The proposal is to split the parcel into 3 lots. Access will be from Mill Creek Drive
and all utilities are already in Mill Creek Drive. The property has a hill on the northern
boundary, no removal or contouring of the hill is requested.
The smaller lots should allow small hopefully local developers to build commercial
projects on these lots.
you
Dougl • s McElhaney
CITY OF
MINOR SUBDIVISION APPLICATION
FORM MUST BE COMPLETED IN INK
Cy?* ddl—bIZ?
MOAB
UTAH
A. GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Name of property owner: Qd l! L JQt 0 1� , ear i i a_ • M e 1=-1 hei h t y
Address: V/ 3 CO tie I,tvptot L.iA,� AQabj LI 1` qe/S-3_- l
Phone: '7 ?S'^ 6Q- A hgef Fax:
E-mail: oI(jtti 1.014 Otih JVfja n eO , re At
Name of property owner:
Address:
Phone:
E-mail:
Fax:
Attach additional owner information if necessary.
If the owner(s) of record as shown by the county assessor's office is (are) not the agent,
the owner's (owners') signed and notarized authorization(s) must accompany this application.
2. Applicant or contact person:
116 epic e6 /&! /14I ALA P I
Address: / 4 3 CD1..tivet L ak /0 &ea, t /' 62-1.753'L
Phone: y3 s'-. p'2 ht — o2 bqt)e` Fax:
E-mail: r/oG.t c%/1'At,at, Qy1.90 e0r^-
3. Name of land surveyor:
Address:
Phone:
tc&f Wake.
`f 9c 2;nnyhuV4jU, LaLme, Moat., trial
y'--96o-o/o '
E-mail: l4(41* reel e(e.'d-tirue, , (
Fax:
4. Description of proposal: giC/ 1 A e e Pa rte ( j n lv a !oh
ql1 W;t-t\ a.rc€sr oPP,i lI C2(ee k r7,ve
Propel/7 06AI' n s a 1�;1 I r !l a refri®ua t o if Po id-otlr; ,� 'P k.
) , 11 ).1 rey /fp.t /Ndl.
5. Does the property/site contain hillside slopes over 25%? IX yes ❑ no ❑ unknown
6. Does any portion of the property/site reside in the FC-1 flood zone? ❑ yes Juno ❑ unknown
7. Are any restrictive covenants existing or proposed? (If yes, please attach.) Dyes JgQo
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
217 EAST CENTER STREET • MOAB, UTAH • 84532
Phone: (435) 259-5129 • Fax: (435) 259-4135 • E-mail: info@moabcity.org
Website: www.moabcity.org
CITY OF
MINOR SUBDIVISION APPLICATION
FORM MUST BE COMPLETED IN INK
8. Are there underlying/overlying agreements on the property?
If yes, check as appropriate and provide a copy of the decision document:
❑ Conditional Use Permit
❑ Zoning Variance
❑ Planned Unit Development
❑ Other:
Under which jurisdiction was the approval given?
❑ City of Moab ❑ Grand County
MOAg
UTAH
❑ yes no ❑ unknown
Approval date:
k
eby
tify that I have read this application and know the same to be true and correct.
e
ture of owner or authorized aunt
pouylas C'. MC- iiahe7
Please Print Name
Date
*Signature of owner or authorized agent Date
Please Print Name
*If signatory is not the owner of record, the attached "Owner/Agent Agreement" must be signed and notarized
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
217 EAST CENTER STREET • MOAB, UTAH • 84532
Phone: (435) 259-5129 • Fax: (435) 259-4135 • E-mail: info@moabcity.org
Website: www.moabcity.org
CITY OF
MINOR SUBDIVISION APPLICATION
FORM MUST BE COMPLETED IN INK
MO'g
UTAH
DATE STAMP
FOR CITY USE ONLY
To BE FILLED OUT BY APPLICA T
[,
PROJECT NAME (if any): rr'"' j MILL SLib , �. v I S i i,_
PROJECT STREET ADDRESS /0E3 Al` ` I C (Oak :0 r I tie
OR ACCESS STREET: AA, 04 ! ! 7 ka h.
FOR CITY USE ONLY
APPLICATION NUMBER: 11 IN Z7
DATE RECEIVED: J D. tot cl
APPLICATION FEE: $200.00 PLUS $25.00 PER LOT
T
TREASURER'S RECEIPT NUMBER: Rs 69 3 3 0
All applications are subject to review by city staff for completeness. Staff will notify the applicant of deficiencies or
completeness within fifteen days.
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
MYLAR FINAL PLAT REQUIRED PRIOR TO CITY COUNCIL REVIEW
APPLICATION
One original (which must contain an original signature of owner/agent)
FULL-SIZE DRAWINGS
THREE (3) copies of the required drawings must be provided.
Drawings must be 18" x 24" or 24" x 36" in size.
REDUCED DRAWINGS
TWO (2) copies of the drawings reduced to 8.5" x 11" or 11"x 17" must be provided.
FEES
$200.00 plus $25.00 per lot
ATTACHED SUBMITTAL
CHECKLIST
Please refer to attached Submittal Checklist for further information.
Note: when submitting this application, please do not copy or include the Submittal Checklist
sheets attached to the back of this application.
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
217 EAST CENTER STREET • MOAB, UTAH • 84532
Phone: (435) 259-5129 • Fax: (435) 259-4135 • E-mail: info @moabcity.org
Website: www.moabcity.org
FINAL PLAT OF
TWO -MAC SUBDIVISION
13.35'
A=149.38'
\R=434 .60'
CB=N 34 22 00 W
CL=148.65'
N
CINEMA COURT LLC
01-007-0086
VICINITY MAP
(N T S )
APPROVAL BY MOAB CITY PUBLIC WORKS
APPROVED THIS DAY OF
20
AD,
Fl
RED ROCK PARNTERS
01-007-0006
A SUBDIVISION LOCATED WITHIN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER
SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 26 SOUTH, RANGE 22 EAST,
SALT LAKE BASE AND MERIDIAN
N 89°50'06" E 343.75'
R=1572.00'
L=242.01'
C=N 46°18'44"W
CL=241.77'
/
GRAPHIC SCALE
20 0 10 20 40
1" (INCH) = 20' (FEET)
/
APPROVAL BY MOAB CITY ATTORNEY
APPROVED THIS DAY OF
AD, 20
311.04'
LOT 1
26,800 sq. ft.
0.62 ac
40.0'
11/
rb
Co
R=1572.00'
L=29.24'
C= N 51°15'20"W
CL=29.24'
N
APPROVAL BY MOAB CITY ENGINEER
APPROVED THIS DAY OF
AD, 20
LOT 2
15,690 sq. ft.
0.36 ac
CO
vv
LOT 3
9,676 sq. ft.
0.22 ac
19.36'
0
0
Ui
P.O.B.
TRACT
S 89°50'06" W 357.86'
FOUND
REBAR &
CAP
W
•
V
(TIE)
MOAB RECREATION
CENTER INC
01-007-0087
FOUND REBAR
CAP
APPROVAL BY MOAB CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVED THIS DAY OF AD, 20____
EASTY4 CORNER,
SECTION 7, T26S,
R22E, SLB&M
(FOUND BRASS
MONUMENT)
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
I, Lucas Blake, do hereby certify that I am a Professional Land Surveyor, and that I hold License No. 7540504, as prescribed
under the laws of the State of Utah. I further certify that by authority of the owners, I have made a survey of the tract of land
shown on this plat and described hereon, and have subdivided said tract of land into lots and streets, together with easements,
hereafter to be known as
TWO -MAC SUBDIVISION
and that the same has been correctly surveyed and monumented on the ground as shown on this plat.
Lucas Blake
License No. 7540504
Date
BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION
Beginning at a point which bears South 89°50'06" West 357.86 feet from the East %4 corner of Section 7, Township 26
South, Range 22 East, Salt Lake Base and Meridian, and proceeding thence South 01°13'30" East 276.53 feet; thence
South 43°27'51" West 48.92 feet; thence North 50°57' West 298.86 feet; thence along the arc of a 434.6 foot radius curve
to the right 149.4 feet (said curve has a chord which bears North 34°22' West 148.7 feet) to the north line of the SEX
Section 7; thence with said line North 89°50'06" East 343.75 feet to the point of beginning.
Contains 1.50 acres, more or less.
OWNER'S DEDICATIION
Know all men by these presents that the undersigned are the owners of the above described tract of land, and hereby cause the
same to be divided into lots, parcels and streets, together with easements as set forth to be hereafter known as
TWO -MAC SUBDIVISION
and do hereby dedicate for the perpetual use of the public all roads and other areas shown on this plat as intended for public use.
The undersigned owners also hereby convey to any and all public utility companies a perpetual, non-exclusive easement over
the public utility easements shown on this plat, the same to be used for the installation, maintenance and operation of utility lines
and facilities. The undersigned owners also hereby convey any other easements as shown on this plat to the parties indicated
and for the purposes shown hereon.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
STATE OF
COUNTY OF
ON THE
DAY OF
S.S.
20___, PERSONALLY APPEARED BEFORE ME,
WHOM DID ACKNOWLEDGE
TO ME THAT THEY SIGNED THE FOREGOING OWNER'S DEDICATION FREELY AND VOLUNTARILY AND FOR
THE USES AND PURPOSES STATED THEREIN.
NOTARY PUBLIC
NOTARY PUBLIC FULL NAME:
COMMISSION NUMBER:
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES:
SURVEY NARRATIVE
The property has been accurately surveyed with the intent to subdivide land. The basis of bearing is N 00°17'00" E
between the SE corner and the NE corner of Lot 2, Section 1, Township 26 South, Range 21 East, Salt Lake Base and
Meridian.
The purpose of the survey is to subdivide the parcel into three lots.
5/8" x 24" rebar with survey cap to be placed at all lot corners or rights of way. Off -set pins to be placed in the back of the
curb where applicable, in lieu of rebar and cap at front corners.
SE CORNER
NEY4SE%4
SECTION 7, T26S,
R22E, SLB&M
(FOUND BRASS
MONUMENT)
STANDARD LEGEND
APPROVED THIS
APPROVAL BY MOAB CITY COUNCIL
DAY OF _ AD, 20
PROP. CORNER FOUND 0 7'T01'. CORN-R S-
RED DESE
Land Surveying
30 South 100 East
Moab, UT 84532
435.259.8171
4_ SECTION MONUMENT
Project
141-19
Date
12/1/19
Sheet 1 OF 1
L
COUNTY RECORDER NO.
STATE OF UTAH, GRAND COUNTY, RECORDED AT THE REQUEST OF
DIRECTOR
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY ENGINEER
CHAIR
MOAB CITY MAYOR
ATTEST:
DATE
BOOK PAGE
COUNTY RECORDER
FEE
Moab City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: February 11, 2020
Title: Resolution No. 09-2020: A resolution approving a lot consolidation for Four Corners
Behavioral Health, located at 46 E 300 North and 76 E 300 North.
Disposition: Discussion and possible action
Staff Presenter: Nora Shepard, AICP, Planning Director
Attachment(s):
Attachment 1: Resolution No. 09-2020
Attachment 2: Lot Consolidation Plat
Attachment 3: Aerial Photo
Attachment 4: State Code 10-9A-608
Recommended Motion:
“I move to adopt the Resolution No. 09-2020 Approving a lot consolidation for 46 E and 76 E
300 North, Moab UT”
Summary:
Property Owner: Four Corners Community Behavioral Health (FCCBH)
Applicant: Karen Dolan, FCCBH Inc
Location: 46 E and 76 E 300 North
Parcel Size IDs: 01-0001-0062 and 01-0001-0063
Zoning: C-5 Neighborhood Commercial Zone
Background:
FCCBH own 2 contiguous lots on 300 North. The attached plat (Attachment 2) shows 1 parcel.
By recording this plat, smaller lot (46 E 300 North) will be combined with the larger parcel (76 E
300 North as seen on the Aerial Photo in Attachment 3). FCCBH intends to build a new facility
on the combined parcel. That application is subject to Site Plan review by the Planning
Commission (scheduled for February 13, 2020).
Process:
Utah State Code Section 10-9A-608 (Attachment 4) addresses this situation:
10-9a-608-14 Unless a local ordinance provides otherwise, the public hearing requirement of
Subsection (1)(c) does not apply and a land use authority may consider at a public meeting an
owner’s petition to vacate or amend a subdivision plat if:
a) The petition seeks to
b) Join two or more of the petitioner fee owner’s contiguous lots;…
Moab Municipal Code (16.08.050) includes a public hearing exemption for an amended plat if
owners of both parcels sign the plat. The City Council has the authority to approve the plat
amendment (lot consolidation) at a public meeting without a public hearing.
CITY OF MOAB RESOLUTION NO. 09-2020
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A LOT CONSOLIDATION FOR 46 E AND 76 E 300 NORTH
The following describes the intent and purpose of this resolution:
a. Property Owner Four Corners Community Behavioral Health (FCCBH) wishes to consolidate 2
contiguous lots to make one parcel upon which they propose a new facility
b. Applicant submitted to the City of Moab the appropriate application and documents for review
and approval of the proposed lot consolidation as required in MMC Chapter 16; and
c. The property is in the C-5 Neighborhood Commercial and the proposed uses are allowed as
permitted uses; and
d. Owner desires to combine two contiguous parcels into one parcel, and
e. Utah State Code Section 10-9a-608-14 states that no public hearing is required for a petition that
seeks to join two or more of the petitioner fee owner’s contiguous lots; and
f. Moab Municipal Code Section 16.08.050 allows the City Council to approve plat amendments
(Lot Consolidations) at a public meeting without a public hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MOAB CITY COUNCIL, the application for the
FCCBH Lot Consolidation is hereby APPROVED
PASSED AND APPROVED in open Council by a majority vote of the Governing Body of Moab City
Council on _______ __, 2020.
SIGNED: ________________________________
Emily Niehaus, Mayor
ATTEST: ________________________________
Sommar Johnson, Recorder
i
.41
4 111
�t))(:1
Utah Code
Effective 5/14/2019
10-9a-608 Vacating, altering, or amending a subdivision plat.
(1)
11-A fee owner of land, as shown on the last county assessment roll, in a subdivision that has
been laid out and platted as provided in this part may file a written petition with the land use
authority to have some or all of the plat vacated or amended.
12-If a petition is filed under Subsection (1)(a), the land use authority shall provide notice of the
petition by mail, email, or other effective means to each affected entity that provides a service to an
owner of record of the portion of the plat that is being vacated or amended at least 10 calendar
days before the land use authority may approve the vacation or amendment of the plat.
13-If a petition is filed under Subsection (1)(a), the land use authority shall hold a public hearing
within 45 days after the day on which the petition is filed if:
(i) any owner within the plat notifies the municipality of the owner's objection in writing within 10
days of mailed notification; or
(ii)a public hearing is required because all of the owners in the subdivision have not signed the
revised plat.
14-Unless a local ordinance provides otherwise, the public hearing requirement of Subsection
(1)(c) does not apply and a land use authority may consider at a public meeting an owner's petition
to vacate or amend a subdivision plat if:
(a) the petition seeks to:
(b) join two or more of the petitioner fee owner's contiguous lots;
(c) subdivide one or more of the petitioning fee owner's lots, if the subdivision will not result in a
violation of a land use ordinance or a development condition;
(d) adjust the lot lines of adjoining lots or parcels if the fee owners of each of the adjoining lots or
parcels join in the petition, regardless of whether the lots or parcels are located in the same
subdivision;
(e) on a lot owned by the petitioning fee owner, adjust an internal lot restriction imposed by the
local political subdivision; or
(f) alter the plat in a manner that does not change existing boundaries or other attributes of lots
within the subdivision that are not:
(A) owned by the petitioner; or
(B) designated as a common area; and
(g) notice has been given to adjacent property owners in accordance with any applicable local
ordinance.
15-Each request to vacate or amend a plat that contains a request to vacate or amend a public
street or municipal utility easement is also subject to Section 10-9a-609.5.
16-Each petition to vacate or amend an entire plat or a portion of a plat shall include:
(a) the name and address of each owner of record of the land contained in the entire plat or on
that portion of the plat described in the petition; and
(b) the signature of each owner described in Subsection (4)(a) who consents to the petition.
(5)
(a) The owners of record of adjacent parcels that are described by either a metes and bounds
description or by a recorded plat may exchange title to portions of those parcels if the
exchange of title is approved by the land use authority in accordance with Subsection (5)(b).
(b) The land use authority shall approve an exchange of title under Subsection (5)(a) if the
exchange of title will not result in a violation of any land use ordinance.
(c) If an exchange of title is approved under Subsection (5)(b):
Page 1
Utah Code
(i) a notice of approval shall be recorded in the office of the county recorder which:
(A) is executed by each owner included in the exchange and by the land use authority;
(B) contains an acknowledgment for each party executing the notice in accordance with the
provisions of Title 57, Chapter 2a, Recognition of Acknowledgments Act; and
(C) recites the descriptions of both the original parcels and the parcels created by the
exchange of title; and
(ii) a document of conveyance shall be recorded in the office of the county recorder.
(d) A notice of approval recorded under this Subsection (5) does not act as a conveyance of
title to real property and is not required in order to record a document conveying title to real
property.
(6)
(a) The name of a recorded subdivision may be changed by recording an amended plat making
that change, as provided in this section and subject to Subsection (6)(c).
(b) The surveyor preparing the amended plat shall certify that the surveyor:
(i) holds a license in accordance with Title 58, Chapter 22, Professional Engineers and
Professional Land Surveyors Licensing Act;
(ii) has completed a survey of the property described on the plat in accordance with Section
17-23-17 and has verified all measurements; and
(iii) has placed monuments as represented on the plat.
(c) An owner of land may not submit for recording an amended plat that gives the subdivision
described in the amended plat the same name as a subdivision in a plat already recorded in
the county recorder's office.
(d) Except as provided in Subsection (6)(a), the recording of a declaration or other document that
purports to change the name of a recorded plat is void.
Amended by Chapter 384, 2019 General Session
Page 2
Utah Code
Effective 5/14/2019
10-9a-608 Vacating, altering, or amending a subdivision plat.
(1)
11-A fee owner of land, as shown on the last county assessment roll, in a subdivision that has
been laid out and platted as provided in this part may file a written petition with the land use
authority to have some or all of the plat vacated or amended.
12-If a petition is filed under Subsection (1)(a), the land use authority shall provide notice of the
petition by mail, email, or other effective means to each affected entity that provides a service to an
owner of record of the portion of the plat that is being vacated or amended at least 10 calendar
days before the land use authority may approve the vacation or amendment of the plat.
13-If a petition is filed under Subsection (1)(a), the land use authority shall hold a public hearing
within 45 days after the day on which the petition is filed if:
(i) any owner within the plat notifies the municipality of the owner's objection in writing within 10
days of mailed notification; or
(ii)a public hearing is required because all of the owners in the subdivision have not signed the
revised plat.
14-Unless a local ordinance provides otherwise, the public hearing requirement of Subsection
(1)(c) does not apply and a land use authority may consider at a public meeting an owner's petition
to vacate or amend a subdivision plat if:
(a) the petition seeks to:
(b) join two or more of the petitioner fee owner's contiguous lots;
(c) subdivide one or more of the petitioning fee owner's lots, if the subdivision will not result in a
violation of a land use ordinance or a development condition;
(d) adjust the lot lines of adjoining lots or parcels if the fee owners of each of the adjoining lots or
parcels join in the petition, regardless of whether the lots or parcels are located in the same
subdivision;
(e) on a lot owned by the petitioning fee owner, adjust an internal lot restriction imposed by the
local political subdivision; or
(f) alter the plat in a manner that does not change existing boundaries or other attributes of lots
within the subdivision that are not:
(A) owned by the petitioner; or
(B) designated as a common area; and
(g) notice has been given to adjacent property owners in accordance with any applicable local
ordinance.
15-Each request to vacate or amend a plat that contains a request to vacate or amend a public
street or municipal utility easement is also subject to Section 10-9a-609.5.
16-Each petition to vacate or amend an entire plat or a portion of a plat shall include:
(a) the name and address of each owner of record of the land contained in the entire plat or on
that portion of the plat described in the petition; and
(b) the signature of each owner described in Subsection (4)(a) who consents to the petition.
(5)
(a) The owners of record of adjacent parcels that are described by either a metes and bounds
description or by a recorded plat may exchange title to portions of those parcels if the
exchange of title is approved by the land use authority in accordance with Subsection (5)(b).
(b) The land use authority shall approve an exchange of title under Subsection (5)(a) if the
exchange of title will not result in a violation of any land use ordinance.
(c) If an exchange of title is approved under Subsection (5)(b):
Page 1
Utah Code
(i) a notice of approval shall be recorded in the office of the county recorder which:
(A) is executed by each owner included in the exchange and by the land use authority;
(B) contains an acknowledgment for each party executing the notice in accordance with the
provisions of Title 57, Chapter 2a, Recognition of Acknowledgments Act; and
(C) recites the descriptions of both the original parcels and the parcels created by the
exchange of title; and
(ii) a document of conveyance shall be recorded in the office of the county recorder.
(d) A notice of approval recorded under this Subsection (5) does not act as a conveyance of
title to real property and is not required in order to record a document conveying title to real
property.
(6)
(a) The name of a recorded subdivision may be changed by recording an amended plat making
that change, as provided in this section and subject to Subsection (6)(c).
(b) The surveyor preparing the amended plat shall certify that the surveyor:
(i) holds a license in accordance with Title 58, Chapter 22, Professional Engineers and
Professional Land Surveyors Licensing Act;
(ii) has completed a survey of the property described on the plat in accordance with Section
17-23-17 and has verified all measurements; and
(iii) has placed monuments as represented on the plat.
(c) An owner of land may not submit for recording an amended plat that gives the subdivision
described in the amended plat the same name as a subdivision in a plat already recorded in
the county recorder's office.
(d) Except as provided in Subsection (6)(a), the recording of a declaration or other document that
purports to change the name of a recorded plat is void.
Amended by Chapter 384, 2019 General Session
Page 2
Moab City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: February 11, 2020
Title: Approval for City Staff to Request UDOT Approval to Use Dispersed Parking Hotspot Funding to Construct the Emma Blvd Dispersed Parking Facilities
Disposition: Discussion and possible action
Staff Presenter: Chuck Williams, City Engineer
Attachment(s): - Attachment 1 - Emma Blvd Dispersed Parking Exhibit
Recommended Motion: None
Background/Summary: In 2019 City Council approved the final plat of the Amended Lot 14, Block “E”, Plat “B” Utex Subdivision. This plat records the exchange of a longitudinal portion of Emma Blvd for 38-feet of street right-of-way across lot 14, thereafter named Minnie Lee Avenue. Council directed that access to MiVida Dr from Emma Blvd shall be closed upon installation of Minnie Lee Ave, in order to discourage highway traffic from circulating near Helen M. Knight Elementary School. Staff has attempted to negotiate with landowners in the north area of town to obtain space for dispersed parking, but at present all offers have been rejected. As an alternative to acquiring new space, staff propose utilizing existing street right-of-way on Maxine Ave and Emma Blvd. See attachment 1, which shows the proposed parking on Emma Blvd. This proposal will put to beneficial public use the future northern dead-end of Emma Blvd at MiVida Dr. Funds will be provided from the UDOT-administered Dispersed Parking Hotspot funding. However, UDOT will not fund construction of Minnie Lee Ave. That would have to be funded and built concurrent with the Emma Blvd Dispersed Parking Lot using City funds. Staff request City Council permission to seek UDOT approval for the proposed use of Hotspot funding if Council concurs with funding construction of Minnie Lee Ave.
Attachment 1 - Emma Blvd Dispersed Parking Exhibit
Moab City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: February 11, 2020
Title: Downtown Parking Structure Discussion and Potential Action
Date Submitted: February 6, 2020
Staff Presenter: Joel Linares, City Manager
Attachment(s):
• Resolution 33-2019, A Resolution Approving a Cooperative Agreement with the Utah
Department of Transportation for Construction of a Downtown Parking Structure
• Cooperative Agreement for the Downtown Parking Structure
• Agenda summary prepared by Councilmember Mike Duncan
• PowerPoint presentation prepared by Councilmember Mike Duncan
Options: Approve, deny, or modify
Recommended Motion: Staff recommends taking no action on Councilmember Duncan’s
proposed resolution. Staff recommends the City Council set a workshop meeting to discuss the
Downtown Parking Structure and strategy moving forward.
Background/Summary: On May 28, 2019, the Moab City Council passed a resolution
authorizing the Mayor to enter into a Cooperative Agreement (Agreement) with the Utah
Department of Transportation (UDOT). The Resolution provides that the Utah State Legislature
appropriated $160 million to tourism-based communities for transportation improvements, and
that UDOT Region 4 conducted a process that identified a Downtown Parking Structure as a
high priority for this funding. The Resolution directs staff to pursue completion of the
Downtown Parking Structure and authorizes the Mayor to enter in the Cooperative Agreement
The Cooperative Agreement provides that UDOT will give Moab City $8,300,000 to design and
construct the parking structure in downtown Moab. The Description of Work in the Agreement
outlines general specifications for the parking structure, as well as roles and responsibilities of
UDOT and the City of Moab in completing design and construction. Additional provisions of the
Agreement address liability, the process by which work can be conducted on Main Street,
payment, environmental compliance requirements, termination, and the appropriate steps for
changing scope and schedule.
Since the signing of the Agreement, the City has proceeded with design of the parking structure,
and some members of the community have recently engaged the City Council regarding the
project. Members of the Council have requested the opportunity to reevaluate the project and
investigate alternatives with staff.
Moab City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: February 11, 2020
Title: Resolution 2020-xx to immediately suspend the Downtown Parking Structure project,
including on-going design work, pending study of alternative uses of UDOT transportation funds
.
Date Submitted: February 5, 2020
Presenter: Mike Duncan, City Council member
Options: Approve, deny, or modify.
Recommended Motion: I move to approve Resolution 2020-xx to immediately suspend the
Downtown Parking Structure project, including on-going design work, pending study of
alternative uses of UDOT transportation funds.
Summary: There is no clear need for a West side Downtown Parking Structure as well as
liabilities. Further, there are optional approaches that better satisfy Moab’s transportation needs
and make better use of UDOT HotSpot funds.
Background: A pair of Downtown Parking Structures, one on the east and one on the west side
of Main Street, was one of several projects proposed in a 2017 UDOT Region 4 Arches Hotspot
Study:
https://uplan.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=3e4e78bee14e4030aabe0a5a70
ffe94f
Parking structures were ranked third in priority after 1) a bypass and 2) Main Street
Improvements. Parking structures were touted at that time to reduce congestion, increase
economic opportunities and increase recreation tourism opportunity. Subsequently in 2018 $10M
in funding was allocated. Small portions of that funding were used to conduct a Conceptual
Preliminary Bypass study and a Downtown Parking Study.
While a bypass enjoyed considerable popular support, since that time it has encountered strong
opposition by residents near proposed corridors. Making its impacts acceptable is believed to be
financially prohibitively. Subsequently the idea has gone dormant.
The Downtown Parking Study focused on new medians for safety reasons. This necessitated
removing on-street parking. If implemented, there indeed would be a need for on-street parking
replacement. However, the idea encountered strong opposition from merchants and has since
gone dormant. However, the requirement for new parking structures is now much less obvious.
This study also found that the West side city-owned surface lot which was planned to house the
West side Downtown Parking Structure is not running at capacity. It further found that visitors
tend to walk not further than 600 feet from where they park, although it is possible that visitors
who are merely enjoying a stroll around town rather than shopping for specific items may well
venture further. Thus, businesses in the near vicinity of new DPS’s may well rejoice, but those
further south may cry foul.
The remaining $8.5M of funding is not adequate to build both east and west side parking
structures, so that the East structure is not presently under consideration. However,
implementation of the West side DPS is underway, currently about $200K into its contracted
detailed design phase.
Notably, things have changed in the past year. Moab’s enthusiasm for new “increase(d)
economic opportunities and increase(d) recreation tourism opportunity” has waned as evidenced
by a moratorium on new Overnight Accommodations and subsequent removal of OA uses in
commercial zones, with plans to reinstate them only under standards and locations more
acceptable to the city. Residents and visitors constantly re-iterate that they love Moab’s rural,
rustic feel. A big-city multi-story concrete monolith parking garage, while perfectly sensible in a
big, non-resort city, makes little sense in Moab, the little town that really wants to stay little.
More importantly, design of the (West) DPS has changed due to cost constraints. Unfortunately,
it makes the structure more objectionable. Originally conceived as one story underground and
two above, for cost reasons it has morphed into none below and four stories above ground. Its
height is 42 feet (not counting the additional height of cars parking on the top story), even though
the maximum height allowed in its C-3 zone is 40 feet. It will block the viewshed both looking to
the north and south, to the disappointment of visitors who constantly admire Moab’s rims. No
other buildings in C-3, for example the Hoodoo hotel nearby, are taller than two stories.
Presently, DPS design does not accommodate over-sized vehicles, either overly-long (for
example trailers) or overly-tall (for example RV’s). This does nothing to alleviate Moab’s
chronic problem of providing parking for oversize vehicles, which otherwise often park on
residential streets.
Cost considerations are not yet well addressed. We’ve already seen unexpected anticipated
construction cost force redesign. Potential overruns are common. Maintenance will be required,
but unless DPS is metered, there is no revenue. Even if free, DPS will be the parking destination
of last resort, since motorists dislike the extra complication of threading congested off-Main
Street access streets, as well as navigating ingress/egress into a multi-story structure. If DPS is
metered, there is an additional incentive not to use it when all remaining parking in town is free.
Since the current surface lot on which DPS is to sit is under-utilized, it is not clear if DPS will
break even or turn a profit even if metered.
Thus, it seems prudent to re-evaluate the wisdom of building a huge (by Moab standards)
concrete monolith to provide off-street parking for which there is no clear need. We suggest
suspending DPS design work while alternatives are explored. Those alternatives include
expanding other surface lots. It is possible that we can realistically provide fewer new parking
spaces doing so than with DPS. However, considering the advantages of doing so, that is not a
bad thing. If UDOT wants some of their money back because fewer spaces are to be provided,
give it back. To do otherwise is a Faustian bargain.
To summarize again:
-Don’t accept an unneeded albatross just because somebody else is paying for it.
-Since we’re keeping Main Street parking, there’s no need.
-Residents and visitors love Moab’s rural feel. Don’t needlessly damage it.
o It’s the tallest building downtown and will block view of the rims.
o It’s ugly, like trying to put makeup on Gollum.
-It won’t be heavily used whether we charge for parking or not.
o It won’t pay for itself
-It won’t accommodate oversize vehicles.
-It will further congest an already congested area.
-Expansion of dispersed surface lots makes more sense.
.
The Downtown Parking
Garage is not a good idea!
Don’t accept an unneeded albatross just because somebody else is paying for it.
Since we’re keeping Main Street parking, there’s no need.
Residents and visitors love Moab’s rural feel. Don’t needlessly damage it.
It’s the tallest building downtown and will block view of the rims.
It’s ugly, like trying to put makeup on Gollum.
It won’t be heavily used whether we charge for parking or not.
It won’t pay for itself
It won’t accommodate oversize vehicles.
It will further congest an already congested area.
Expansion of dispersed surface lots makes more sense.
CITY OF MOAB RESOLUTION NO. 33-2019
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE UTAH
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A DOWNTOWN
PARKING STRUCTURE
The following findings describe the reasons for this resolution and explain its purpose:
a. In 2017 the state legislature appropriated approximately $160 million to assist tourism based
communities in Reducing Traffic Congestion, Supporting Economic Development and to
Increase Recreation & Tourism Opportunities.
b. In 2017/2018 UDOT Region 4 held a series of workshops to determine the "Arches Area"
needs to compete for the available funding. The number 3 highest rated project was a West of
Main Street Downtown Parking Structure.
c. In May 2018 the State Transportation Commission awarded $10 million to the Arches Area
for a Downtown Parking Structure and Dispersed Parking Lots.
d. UDOT has requested that the City of Moab manage the Downtown Parking Structure project.
The mechanism which will enable the City to do so is by signing the attached UDOT
Cooperative Agreement.
e. The City finds that there is a compelling public interest to enact this resolution due to the
need for the Downtown Parking Structure
Now therefore, the City of Moab resolves as follows:
1. Definitions. The term "Downtown Parking Structure" is as is defined in the UDOT
Cooperative Agreement.
2. Direction to Staff. Staff is directed to pursue completion of the Downtown Parking
Structure within the timeframe identified in the UDOT Cooperative Agreement.
3. UDOT Cooperative Agreement. The Mayor is authorized to sign the attached UDOT
Cooperative Agreement.
PASSED AND APPROVED by a majority of the City Council, this 28th day of May, 2019
Emily S. Niehaus, Mayor
Attes
By:
Sommar Johnson, Recorder
VW/7
Date
Date
LiMMCM.b. State of Utah
Department of Transportation
!/! Keeping Utah Moving
Cooperative Agreement
p g
Local Agency Performing
Work for UDOT
Project Description: Moab Downtown Parking
Structure
Local Agency: The City of Moab
,$8,300,000 I
Pin: 16912
Project: S 0191(167)125 1
Date Executed
Jul 22, 201S.
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on the 07/22/19 by and between the UTAH DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION, hereinafter referred to as "UDOT", and I The City of Moab', a political subdivision of
the State of Utah, hereinafter referred to as the "Local Agency."
The Moab area has been identified for transportation improvements in area with recreation and tourism activity
that experiences significant congestion. Moab City is receiving money designated for this purpose in SB 277
(2017). The Transportation Commission has funded a parking structure in downtown Moab City. Subject to
the attached provisions, Local Agency will perform the Work for the Project. UDOT will not provide any
additional funds beyond the lump sum payment amount of $8,300,000.00.
Description of Work:
Moab City will construct a parking structure in downtown Moab to accommodate 320 parking stalls, The structure will
be 4 levels, 3 above ground and 1 below. The chosen location for this structure is on City owned land located mid -block
between 100 N and Center Street. The City of Moab will contract engineering, architectural, and any additional services
needed to deliver the project for advertisement within 14 months from the effective date of this agreement. No more
than 6% or $498,000 of these funds will be used for structural aesthetics. The City of Moab will also be responsible for
construction inspection and engineering management, UDOT will not be paying the City of Moab separately for any of
these costs. The City of Moab will own, operate, and maintain the parking facility. Any remaining funds from the
parking structure project will be used to further the design and construction of Main Street improvements from 100 S to
200 N as detailed in the funding request. UDOT will give The City of Moab $8,300,000 for this work. The City of
Moab is required to maximize the parking stall to extent feasible. The proposed structure is based on a few assumptions.
1. The parking structure will be four levels, but The City of Moab is concerned that ground water or utilities may
make a below ground level unfeasible, height limitations will only allow for 3 levels above ground. If the
structure is reduced to three levels, then 320 stalls may not be feasible.
2. Current plans also require some minor right-of-way acquisition, it appears the property owner is agreeable;
however, if this property cannot be acquired by The City of Moab, the lack of this right-of-way
may also reduce the number of stalls possible. I
Costs to include:
List or Description of Items
Item #
Item Description
Estimated
Quantity
Unit Price
Estimated Cost
#1
Dowunlnii n parking structure and Hain Street
improvements
1
$8,300,000
$8,300,000.00
#2
#3
Estimated Total Cost
$8,300,000.00
;LUMP SUM PAYMENT: TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE PAID BY UDOT
(Fill in only if actual cost approach is not used.)
$8,300,000.00
1 of 3
16912 Cooprattve agreement_Parking Structure_07082019.docx
7/9/2019
Project Completion Date: TBD
Provisions
. Local Agency's contractor will perform the Work
described in this Agreement. If Main Street work
is performed, UDOT will review the plans and
specifications. The City of Moab will only perform
Main Street Work from UDOT approved plans. .
Local Agency will notify UDOT two weeks in
advance prior to starting the Main Street work so
UDOT may inspect the work. UDOT has the right
to inspect the Main Street work but may choose
not to exercise this right. Regardless of any
inspection by UDOT, Local Agency is still
required to construct the Main Street work in
accordance with the plans and specifications.
UDOT, through its inspection of the Main Street
work, will provide Local Agency with information
addressing any problems or concerns UDOT may
have with acceptance of the work. Upon
completion of the Main Street work, the Local
Agency will contact UDOT for a final review and
inspection of Main Street Work. The Local
Agency has the right to correct any deficiencies
in a timely manner and resubmit the Work for
inspection and approval.
I. Liability:
UDOT and the Local Agency are both
governmental entities subject to the
Governmental Immunity Act. Each party agrees
to indemnify, defend and save harmless the other
party from any and all damages, claims, suits,
costs, attorney's fees and actions arising from or
related to its actions or omissions or the acts or
omissions of its officers, agents, or employees in
connection with the performance and/or subject
matter of this Agreement. The obligation to
indemnify is limited to the dollar amounts set forth
in the Governmental Immunity Act, provided said
Act applies to the action or omission giving rise to
the protections of this paragraph. This paragraph
shall not be construed as a waiver of the
protections of the Governmental Immunity Act by
the parties. The indemnification in this paragraph
shall survive the expiration or termination of this
Agreement.
II. Termination:
This Agreement may be terminated as follows:
a. By mutual agreement of the parties, in writing
b. By either UDOT or the Local Agency for
failure of the other party to fulfill their
obligations as set forth in the provisions of
this Agreement. Reasonable allowances will
be made for circumstances beyond the
control of the parties. Written notice of intent
to terminate is required and shall specify the
reasons for termination. If a party fails to cure
the breach, the other party may terminate this
Agreement.
c. By UDOT for the convenience of the State
upon written notice to the Local Agency.
However, UDOT will be responsible for the
Costs incurred for the Work before the
termination of the Agreement.
Ill. Maintenance:
The City of Moab will maintain the parking
structure in perpetuity.
IV. Payment and Reimbursement to Local
Agency:
UDOT will pay estimated costs for preliminary
engineering within 30 days from the execution of
the agreement by both parties. Remaining funds
will be paid to the Local Agency quarterly based
on estimated cash flow needs. If at any point,
costs exceed estimated cash flow, UDOT will
transfer additional funds within 5 business days
of written notice from the Local Agency,
V. Change in Scope and Schedule:
If Work scope or schedule changes from the
original intent of this Agreement, UDOT will notify
the Local Agency prior to changes being made. If
the Local Agency modifies its Project and the
modification affects the Work, Local Agency will
immediately notify UDOT. In the event there are
changes in the scope of the Work, extra work, or
changes in the planned Work covered by this
Agreement, a modification to this Agreement
must be approved in writing by the parties prior to
the start of work on the changes or additions.
VI. Environmental Compliance
The Local Agency will assure compliance of the
Project with all applicable state and federal
environmental statutes, regulations, rules, and
permitting requirements.
2 of 3
16912 Cooprative agreement_Parking Structure_07082019.docx
7/9/2019
VII. Miscellaneous:
Each party agrees to undertake and perform all
further acts that are reasonably necessary to
carry out the intent and purposes of the
Agreement at the request of the other party.
The failure of either party to insist upon strict
compliance of any of the terms and conditions, or
failure or delay by either party to exercise any
rights or remedies provided in this Agreement, or
by law, will not release either party from any
obligations arising under this Agreement.
This Agreement does not create any type of
agency relationship, joint venture or partnership
between the parties.
Each party represents that it has the authority to
enter into this Agreement.
This Agreement may be executed in counterparts
by the parties.
VIII. Content Review:
Language content was reviewed and approved
by the Utah AG's office on February 2, 2015.
'Local Entity !
jtltah Department of Transportation Region 4 1
fBy
—N„._
!Date
7-11-/7
gy
—
Date
917/1 '
Emily '. Niehaus, Mayor
', Ryan Anderson, UDOT Project Manager
IBy
► U j , .
(Date
1'11'4.
BY
:Date !
"7/1'
ISommar Johnson, Recorder !
!Monte Aldridge, Region Director j
!By
!Date
By
'Date !
d7/2;
;Comptrollers Office I
3 of 3
16912 Cooprative agreement_Parking Structure_07082019.docx
7/9/2019
/19
/19
/19
1
Moab City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: February 11, 2020
Title: Consideration, discussion and decision on whether the City of Moab shall impose a .1%
sales and use tax to fund cultural facilities, recreational facilities, and zoological facilities and
botanical organizations, cultural organizations, and zoological organizations in the City (RAP
Tax)?
Presenter: Joel Linares
Attachment(s):
●Memorandum of Procedures
●Notice of Intent
Suggested Motion: "I move to submit an opinion question to the residents of the City of Moab
so that each resident’s opinion on the imposition of a local sales and use tax of .1% located
within the City to fund cultural facilities, recreational facilities, and zoological facilities and
botanical organizations, cultural organizations, and zoological organizations may be considered
and to provide the proper Notice of Intent to do so to Grant County.
Background/Summary:
The City of Moab (City) may submit an opinion question to the residents of the City, by majority
vote of all members of the Moab City Council, so that each resident of the City has an
opportunity to express the resident’s opinion on the imposition of a local sales and use tax of .1%
on the transactions described in Utah Code § 59-12-103(1) located within the City, to fund
cultural facilities, recreational facilities, and zoological facilities and botanical organizations,
cultural organizations, and zoological organizations in the City of Moab.
The opinion question shall state: “Shall the City of Moab, Utah, be authorized to impose a .1%
sales and use tax to fund cultural facilities, recreational facilities, and zoological facilities and
botanical organizations, cultural organizations, and zoological organizations in the City?”
The election shall be held at a regular general election or a municipal general election and shall
follow the procedures outlined in Title 11, Chapter 14, Local Government Bonding Act.
If the Moab City Council determines that a majority of the City’s registered voters voting on the
imposition of the tax have voted in favor of the imposition of the tax, the Moab City Council may
impose the tax by a majority vote of all members of the City Council.
A tax authorized under this part shall be levied for a period of eight years and may be
reauthorized at the end of the eight-year period in following these same procedures.
Utah Code § 59-12-402(6) states before the Moab City Council submits an opinion question to
the residents of the City, the City Council shall submit to the county legislative body in which the
City is located a written Notice of the Intent to submit the opinion question to the residents of
the City of Moab.
Memorandum of RAP Tax Procedures
A city legislative body may submit an opinion question to the residents of that city, by majority vote of all members of the legislative
body, so that each resident of the city has an opportunity to express the resident’s opinion on the imposition of a local sales and use
tax of .1% on the transactions described in Subsection 59-12-103(1) located within the city, to fund cultural facilities, recreational
facilities, and zoological facilities and botanical organizations, cultural organizations, and zoological organizations in that city.
The opinion question required by this section shall state: “Shall the City of Moab, Utah, be authorized to impose a .1% sales and use
tax to fund cultural facilities, recreational facilities, and zoological facilities and botanical organizations, cultural organizations, and
zoological organizations in the city?”
The election shall be held at a regular general election or a municipal general election and shall follow the procedures outlined in
Title 11, Chapter 14, Local Government Bonding Act.
If the city legislative body determines that a majority of the city’s registered voters voting on the imposition of the tax have voted in
favor of the imposition of the tax, the city legislative body may impose the tax by a majority vote of all members of the legislative
body.
A tax authorized under this part shall be levied for a period of eight years and may be reauthorized at the end of the eight-year
period in following these same procedures.
Before a city legislative body submits an opinion question to the residents of the city, the city legislative body shall submit to the
county legislative body in which the city is located a written notice of the intent to submit the opinion question to the residents of
the city and receive from the county legislative body a written resolution passed by the county legislative body stating that the
county legislative body is not seeking to impose a RAP Tax. The city may also receive a written statement from the county legislative
body that the results of a county opinion question submitted to the residents of the county permit the city legislative body to submit
the opinion question to the residents of the city in accordance with this part.
Within 60 days after the day the county legislative body receives from a city legislative body the notice of the intent to submit an
opinion question to the residents of the city, the county legislative body shall provide the city legislative body the written resolution
described above or written notice that the county legislative body will submit an opinion question to the residents of the county for
the county to impose a tax under that part.
If the county legislative body provides the city legislative body the written notice that the county legislative body will submit an
opinion question to create its own RAP Tax, the county legislative body shall submit the opinion question by no later than, from the
date the county legislative body sends the written notice, the later of a 12-month period; the next regular primary election; or the
next regular general election.
Within 30 days of the date of the canvass of the election at which the opinion question is voted on, the county legislative body shall
provide the city legislative body written results of the opinion question submitted by the county legislative body indicating that the
city legislative body may not impose a tax under this part because a majority of the county’s registered voters voted in favor of the
county imposing the tax and the county legislative body by a majority vote approved the imposition of the tax; or for at least 12
months from the date the written results are submitted to the city legislative body, the city legislative body may not submit to the
county legislative body a written notice of the intent to submit an opinion question under this part because a majority of the
county’s registered voters voted against the county imposing the tax and the majority of the registered voters who are residents of
the city voted against the imposition of the county tax; or the city legislative body may submit the opinion question to the residents
of the city in accordance with this part because although a majority of the county’s registered voters voted against the county
imposing the tax, the majority of the registered voters who are residents of the city voted for the imposition of the county tax.
At any time a county legislative body may provide a city legislative body a written resolution passed by the county legislative body
stating that the county legislative body is not seeking to impose a RAP Tax, which permits the city legislative body to submit an
opinion question to the city’s residents.
Joel Linares
City Manager
217 E. Center Street
Moab, Utah 84532-2534
Phone: 435-259-5121
NOTICE OF INTENT OF THE CITY OF MOAB TO IMPOSE A RECREATION, ART
AND PARK TAX
Grand County Council
c/o Chair Mary McGann
125 E. Center St.
Moab UT, 84532
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City of Moab (City) may submit an opinion
question to the residents of the City, by majority vote of all members of the Moab City Council,
so that each resident of the City has an opportunity to express the resident’s opinion on the
imposition of a local sales and use tax of .1% on the transactions described in Utah Code § 59-12-
103(1) located within the City, to fund cultural facilities, recreational facilities, and zoological
facilities and botanical organizations, cultural organizations, and zoological organizations in the
City of Moab.
The opinion question shall state: “Shall the City of Moab, Utah, be authorized to impose a .1%
sales and use tax to fund cultural facilities, recreational facilities, and zoological facilities and
botanical organizations, cultural organizations, and zoological organizations in the City?”
The election shall be held at a regular general election or a municipal general election and shall
follow the procedures outlined in Title 11, Chapter 14, Local Government Bonding Act.
If the Moab City Council determines that a majority of the City’s registered voters voting on the
imposition of the tax have voted in favor of the imposition of the tax, the Moab City Council may
impose the tax by a majority vote of all members of the City Council.
A tax authorized under this part shall be levied for a period of eight years and may be
reauthorized at the end of the eight-year period in following these same procedures.
The Grand County Council is receiving this notice as required by Utah Code § 59-12-402(6).
Before the Moab City Council submits an opinion question to the residents of the City, the City
Council shall submit to the county legislative body in which the City is located a written Notice
of the Intent to submit the opinion question to the residents of the City of Moab.
Within 60 days after the day the County Council receives from the City Council this Notice of
Intent to submit an opinion question to the residents of the City, the County Council shall
provide the City Council the written resolution stating that the County Council is not seeking to
impose a RAP Tax or written notice that the County Council will submit an opinion question to
the residents of Grand County for the County to impose a RAP Tax.
At any time the County Council may provide the City Council a written resolution passed by the
Grand County Council stating that the County Council is not seeking to impose a RAP Tax,
which permits the City of Moab to submit an opinion question to the City’s residents.
Dated this 11th day of February, 2020.
Joel Linares
City Manager