CITY OF OREM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 56 North State Street, Orem, Utah August 22, 2018
This meeting may be held electronically to allow a Councilmember to participate.
3:30 PM PRE-MEETING – AGENDA REVIEW, CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM, 56 NORTH STATE STREET, OREM, UT
4:30 PM REGULAR SESSION – CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. INVOCATION BY INVITATION
3. 4:30 PM SCHEDULED ITEMS
3.1. The applicant requests preliminary plat approval for The Farm Plat B located at 580 South 200 West in the R8 zone. Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the preliminary plat for The Farm Plat B located at 580 South 200 West in the R8 zone.
The_Farm_Staff_Report (4).docx Zoning Map.pdf The Farm Plat B.pdf The Farm MailerBack.pdf
3.2. 2018 Orem City General Plan Adoption Send a recommendation to City Council regarding the adoption of the 2018 Orem City General Plan and appendices.
Commission_General_Plan_Update_StaffReport_2018.08.22.docx Orem General Plan 2018_2018.08.16.pdf Orem Moderate-Income Housing Study_2018.08.16.pdf
4. 5:00 PM SCHEDULED ITEMS
5. MINUTES REVIEW AND APPROVAL
5.1. August 1, 2018 Planning Commission Minutes Approval
2018-08-01.pcmin DRAFT.docx 1 6. ADJOURN Next meeting scheduled for Wednesday, September 5, 2018
THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO PARTICIPATE IN ALL CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS. If you need a special accommodation to participate in the City Council Meetings and Study Sessions, please call the City Recorder's Office at least 3 working days prior to the meeting. (Voice 801-229-7000)
This agenda is also available on the City's webpage at orem.org
2 2 Agenda Item No: 3.1
Planning Commission Agenda Item Report Meeting Date: August 22, 2018 Submitted by: Kristina Haycock Submitting Department: Development Services Item Type: Site Plan Agenda Section: 4:30 PM Scheduled Items
Subject: The applicant requests preliminary plat approval for The Farm Plat B located at 580 South 200 West in the R8 zone.
Suggested Action: Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the preliminary plat for The Farm Plat B located at 580 South 200 West in the R8 zone.
Presenter: Kristina Haycock
Background:
Potentially Affected Area:
Attachments: The_Farm_Staff_Report (4).docx
Zoning Map.pdf
The Farm Plat B.pdf
The Farm MailerBack.pdf
3 Item #: 3.1 Planning Commission Prepared By: August 22, 2018 Kristina Haycock, Planner
Applicant: PRELIMINARY PLAT – The applicant requests preliminary plat approval of Bruce Dickerson The Farm Plat B located at 580 South 200 West in the R8 zone.
NOTICES: REQUEST: ● Posted in 2 public places The applicant requests preliminary plat approval of The Farm Plat B located at ● Posted on City webpage 580 South 200 West in the R8 zone. and City hotline ● Faxed to newspapers ● E-mailed to newspapers BACKGROUND: ● Mailer sent out 8/9/2018 The Farm is a 10-acre development at about 500 South and 170 West. When to properties within 500 completed there will be 60 new lots in the subdivision. Phase 1 was passed by ft the Planning Commission on April 4, 2018 and now the applicant wants to complete the final phase, Phase 2.
SITE INFORMATION: RECOMMENDATION: ● General Plan Designation: Low Density The Development Review Committee determined this request complies with Residential the Orem City Code. Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the ● Current Zone: R8 preliminary plat of The Farm, Plat B located at 580 South 200 West in the R8 ● Acreage: 10.93 zone. ● Neighborhood: Stonewood
FINDINGS: The Planning Commission shall find and be satisfied: ● The preliminary plat complies with all applicable City Codes.
ACTION: The Planning Commission is the final approving authority regarding the site plan request.
4 The Farm Plat B Subdivision Zoning Map
t
173 WESTs 400 SOUTH
e
W
0 O r e m 350 South R7.5
23
t
t
s
s
e
e
W
W
t
0 0
s
5 0
e 1 t 1
W s
e
0
W
8
2 0
0
2 t
400 South s e W
0 4
1 t
s outh
e 460 S
W
0
t 2 s 3 R8 e
W Low Density 0
6 50 Residential
3 0 South uth 500 So
540 South t
s
e
t
s W
e
0
W 0
1
0
3 3 580 S 560 South outh t
s
e
W
600 South t 0
s
3
e 1
t t
W
s s 62 t 0 South
e e
0
s
0
e
W W
3 th
0 0 63 0 Sou W
5 5
0
1 3
0 125 250 500 Feet 0 2 I 5 Legend Selected Parcels Surveyor's Certificate
Site Boundary Description
Scott Shipley Daniel McKeon Kenneth Carlson Rob Wible Steven Gunnell
LDS Church Northstone Subd Stonewood Subd LDS Church Stonewood Subd
S 00°21'43" E 227.06' S 00°21'44" E 190.96'
Lot 65 Lot 42 Lot 43 8574 SF 10014 SF 8054 SF Vicinity Map Lot 41 500 South (not to scale) 9987 SF
S 50°33'53" W 40.79' Lot 64 106.66' W 88°53'10" S 150 West Street Curve Data Table 12350 SF Owner's Dedication
The Farm Plat "A" Lot 63 S 89°09'39" E 245.93' Lot 45 Lot 44 32056 SF 9172 SF 8560 SF
S 01°06'50" E 564.04'
N 00°50'24" E 138.49' 107.00' W 88°53'10" S Lot 59 Lot 60 Lot 46 Lot 53 Acknowledgement S 89°10'17" E 90.63' Lot 52 13275 SF 13558 SF Lot 40 9667 SF 13275 SF 9407 SF 13122 SF Edgar Monterrosa 400 South Street
N 00°50'24" E 112.47' Lot 54 Lot 58 Lot 61 Lot 47 Lot 51 11371 SF 11494 SF 11966 SF The Farm Plat "A" 9826 SF 10786 SF
450 South Street
John Benson Kenrex Plat "A" Acceptance by the City of Orem
N 87°46'58" W 293.11' Richard Benson L = 15.70' Lot 49 Lot 62 R = 30.00' Lot 48 Lot 50 Lot 55 Lot 56 Lot 57
S 89°09'34" E 150.40' 8720 SF NeilChord Johnson = 15.52' 9265 SF 10157 SF 14396 SF Bears = S 74°10'10" E 8732 SF 9310 SF 10347 SF S 37°28'03" W S 00°35'19" E 111.07' 530 South Street 51.84'
480 South Street Planning Commission Approval S 89°09'34" E 73.49' Lot 39 8309 SF 200 West Street Hughs
N 00°40'36" W 131.10' Lot 31 Conditions of Approval Lot 38 Lot 37 Lot 36 Lot 35 Lot 34 Lot 33 Lot 32 Lot 30 8798 SF 8798 SF 8309 SF 8480 SF 8480 SF 8480 SF 8408 SF 9858 SF 8798 SF
David Young
S 89°09'34" E 92.26' S 89°21'01" W 106.00' W 89°21'01" S N 00°38'59" W 785.90' Plat " B "
Jerry Denbow Michael May Mark Graham Brian Nish Jim Tessers Linda Keller Robert Horton Brymar Estates Subd Randy Rehrer 500 South Street The Farm
Brymar Estates Subd Including a vacation of Wes Farley Amended Plat "A", Subdivision
Plat Vacation Notice Subdivision Orem City, Utah County, Utah Scale: 1" = 50 Feet
Approved as to Form
6 7 Agenda Item No: 3.2
Planning Commission Agenda Item Report Meeting Date: August 22, 2018 Submitted by: Kirby Snideman Submitting Department: Development Services Item Type: Resolution Agenda Section: 4:30 PM Scheduled Items
Subject: 2018 Orem City General Plan Adoption
Suggested Action: Send a recommendation to City Council regarding the adoption of the 2018 Orem City General Plan and appendices.
Presenter: Kirby Snideman
Background: The Development Services department has completed the 2018 Orem City General Plan, which is an update of the 2011 General Plan. This update will bring the General Plan into agreement with the master plans that have been completed after 2011. The 2018 Orem City General Plan includes changes to the appendix, as well.
Potentially Affected Area:
Attachments: Commission_General_Plan_Update_StaffReport_2018.08.22.docx
Orem General Plan 2018_2018.08.16.pdf
Orem Moderate-Income Housing Study_2018.08.16.pdf
8 Item #: 3.2 Planning Commission Prepared By: August 22, 2018 Kirby Snideman, AICP PUBLIC MEETING – Adopting the 2018 General Plan, which updates the Applicant: 2011 General Plan, bringing the General Plan into alignment with the ten Development Services master plans and neighborhood plans that have been completed since 2011. .
NOTICES: REQUEST: The Development Services Department requests the Planning ● Posted in 2 public places Commission review and recommend the City Council adopt the 2018 General ● Posted on City webpage Plan, which updates the 2011 General Plan, bringing the General Plan into and City hotline alignment with the 10 master plans and neighborhood plans that have been ● Faxed to newspapers completed since 2011. ● E-mailed to newspapers ● Posted at utah.gov/pmn BACKGROUND: A general plan is a comprehensive long-term plan for the physical development of the city. In a way, it is a “blueprint” for future development of the city. Utah State code (10-9a-4) requires that the City maintain a General Plan and keep it SITE INFORMATION: updated regularly. The last updated of the General Plan was completed in 2011. ● Neighborhood Chair: Since that time, the following master plans and neighborhood plans have been N/A completed: ● General Plan Designation: State Street Corridor Master Plan 2014 N/A Economic Development Strategic Plan 2015 ● Current Zone: N/A Transportation Master Plan 2016 ● Acreage: N/A Parks, recreation, Trails, and Open Space Plan 2017 ● Neighborhoods: Street Connection Master Plan 2017 N/A Neighborhood Plans: o Canyon View, Orchard, & Cascade 2015 ACTION: o Orem North & Sharon Park 2017 The Planning Commission o Northridge, Heatheridge, & Windsor 2017 shall provide a o Aspen & Timpview Neighborhood Plan 2017 recommendation to the City o Geneva Heights, Orem Park, & Suncrest 2018 Council regarding this request. The General Plan was updated by drawing from data, maps, recommendations, and plans contained in the various master plans and neighborhood plans. This new information was inserted into the relevant chapters of the General Plan. These chapters are as follows: Chapter 1: Introduction Chapter 2: Land Use Chapter 3: Urban Design Chapter 4: Housing Chapter 5: Economics Chapter 6: Transportation Chapter 7: Parks & Recreation Chapter 8: Public Services & Facilities Appendix: (containing the most up to date master plans and neighborhood plans) 9 In addition to updating the General Plan, a moderate income housing plan was also completed. This will be included in the appendix of the General Plan and serves as the basis for the Housing chapter. Also, it is proposed that a new official land use map be adopted as part of the General Plan updated. This new land use map will accommodate the newly zoned City Center District zone as well as the four additional district zones which will be presented to City Council later in 2018. A new land use category, the “mixed-use district,” is placed on the land use map. This land use category is established to allow for mixed-use, higher density development.
RECOMMENDATION: The Development Services Department requests the Planning Commission provide a positive recommendation to the City Council regarding the adoption of the 2018 General Plan, which updates the 2011 General Plan, bringing the General Plan into alignment with the ten master plans and neighborhood plans that have been completed since 2011.
10 11 GENERAL PLAN 2 0 1 8 OREM GENERAL PLAN
12 Orem City General Plan
Adopted in 2018 Updated from the 2011 General Plan
Mayor and Council
Richard Brunst, Mayor Debby Lauret, Councilmember Sam Lentz, Councilmember Tom Macdonald, Councilmember Mark Seastrand, Councilmember David Spencer, Councilmember Brent Sumner, Councilmember
Planning Commission
Carl Cook, Planning Commission Chairman Mickey Cochran, Planning Commissioner Carlos Iglesias, Planning Commissioner Karen Jeffreys, Planning Commissioner David Moulton, Planning Commissioner Ross Spencer, Planning Commissioner Mike Staker, Planning Commissioner
13 OREM GENERAL PLAN
City Staff
Jamie Davidson, City Manager Bill Bell, Development Services Director Chris Tschirki, Public Works Director Ryan Clark, Economic Development Division Manager Paul Goodrich, Transportation Engineer Steve Earl, Deputy City Attorney Jason Bench, Planning Division Manager J. Kirby Snideman, Long Range City Planner
Message from the Mayor Orem is a wonderful city to live, work, and play in here in Utah County. Originally Orem was incorporated as a city so that the local agricultural community could pass a bond to pay for new water canals bringing water up the Provo River to water their crops and fruit trees in the area. Orem has developed from a farming community to a manufacturing community and now to a major retail, education, and diversified business community. Orem's population has now grown to over 100,000 residents. In recent years Orem has received many awards as one of the best cities in the nation to raise a family, to build a business, and to grow old successfully. It is important that our city have a general plan outlining official city policy on future growth, land use, economic development, transportation needs, housing requirements, zoning, public health and safety needs, resource and neighborhood protection, and general city services. I appreciate all of the work that has gone into this plan from our city staff, our city residents, and the city council. This plan will help to guide us in to the future to plan for our city to meet the growing demands of a strong and vibrant community.
Mayor Richard Brunst 14 Contents
1 Introduction
2 Land Use
3 Urban Design
4 Housing
5 Economics
6 Transportation
7 Parks and Recreation
8 Public Services
Appendix
15 OREM GENERAL PLAN
16 INTRODUCTION
Introduction
1.1 About the General Plan
1.2 History of the City
1.3 Imagine Orem
17 OREM GENERAL PLAN
1.1 About the General Plan residential, industrial, and other land uses, as reflected in the State Street Corridor Master Plan adopted in 2015 and The Orem General Plan, referred to herein as the "Plan," various neighborhood level plans recently adopted. is the official comprehensive plan of the City. This plan • Urban Design - This chapter reviews the adopted policies outlines the current policies and goals of the City. The Plan that impact the design of the urban landscape in Orem. is "general" in that it does not attempt to designate where • Housing - This chapter examines the existing conditions individual businesses, homes, or industries will be located. and future trends of Orem's population, demographics, Rather, the General Plan acts as a guide, establishing and housing stock. This chapter also includes strategies for general policies and procedures for growth, development, maintaining and encouraging a variety of housing options conservation, and location of various land use activities. within the community, including options for moderate Decisions made by City leaders should be consistent with income residents—as required by State law. the Plan. • Economics - This chapter generates goals and strategies The previous Orem General Plan was adopted in 2011 and for attracting and maintaining beneficial economic activity amended in subsequent years. This 2018 update seeks to in the City. This chapter references the Orem Economic bring the Plan into greater alignment with various sub- Development Strategic Plan adopted in 2015. plans completed in recent years. • Transportation - This chapter details the existing and future transportation needs of the City. This chapter 1.1.1 State Law Governing General Plans references the Bike & Pedestrian Plan adopted in 2010 The Municipal Land Use, Development, and Management and the Transportation Master Plan adopted in 2015. Act (MLUDMA) requires all municipalities in Utah to • Parks and Recreation - This chapter presents the parks complete a general plan. At minimum, a general plan is plan for the City as reflected in the Parks, Recreation, required to contain a land use element, a transportation Trails, and Open Space Master Plan adopted in 2017. element, and a moderate income housing element. • Public Services - This chapter reviews the municipal Municipalities are permitted to include "any other services provided by Orem, including public works, the element the municipality considers appropriate" (§10-9a library, public safety, and other. Orem's newly adopted of the Utah State Code). impact fees are also explained. • Appendix - The appendix contains various supporting 1.1.2 Contents of the General Plan documents and maps, as well as the plans referenced in The Orem Plan contains the following sections: the various chapters.
• Introduction - This chapter explains the purpose ofa 1.1.3 Implementation general plan, lays out an outline of the Plan, and provides As the City works to implement the various elements a history of Orem. of the General Plan, the principle of sustainability is an • Land Use - This chapter offers strategies for developing land important concept and should be implemented where in a manner that complements existing uses. This chapter practical and appropriate. Although it is not mentioned also addresses the interaction between commercial, specifically in each chapter, principles of sustainability 18 INTRODUCTION
should be included and encouraged as the General Plan enacted ordinances, capital improvement programs, is developed and implemented throughout the City. To City budgets, and other legislative and administrative preserve the integrity of the Plan and to insure that it actions deemed appropriate by the City Council. reflects the changing needs of the community: 1.2 History of the City • It is encouraged that the Plan be reviewed and updated The City of Orem’s motto is “Family City USA.” Over approximately every five years the years, Orem has become just that. In 2010, Forbes • All rezones, improvement programs, and ordinance Magazine ranked the City as the fifth best place to changes concerning development are encouraged to be raise a family.1 Claudia Wallis, editor of TIME’s book in harmony with the Plan. Healthiest places to Live, called it one of the best places • The public may request amendments to the Plan. The in America for spiritual well-being.2 applicant must show that any amendment of the Plan is in
the best interest of the City, promotes the general welfare 1.2.1 Farming in Early Orem of the community, and does not decrease the quality of The City of Orem was organized in 1919 and named life for the citizens of Orem. after Walter C. Orem, President of the Salt Lake and Implementation of the Plan is realized through Utah Railroad.3 Prior to its incorporation, Orem was
Historic View of the "Provo Bench"
1. Francesca Levy. America’s Best Places to Raise a Family. http://www.forbes.com/2010/06/04/best-places-family-lifestyle-real-estate-cities-kids.html. 6/07/2010. 2. Sahaj Kohli. 10 of the Healthiest Places to Live in America. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/06/healthiest-places-to-live-in-america_n_5648452.html. 7/14/2014. 3. This section on the History of Orem was based on the following sources: Kenneth L. Cannon II,A Very Eligible Place: Provo and Orem, An Illustrated History(1987); 19 Orem Bicentennial History Committee,It Happened in Orem, A Bicentennial History of Orem, Utah (1976). OREM GENERAL PLAN
Historic View of the Stratton Orchard and Strawberry Fields in the 1920's
known as the “Provo Bench,” and its fertile orchards built their homes to live near their fields and orchards. and farmlands added to Provo’s early reputation as the This type of development, known in Utah as the “Gentile “Garden City of Utah.” manner,” differed from typical historical development by Mormons, who were often counseled by church Orem was incorporated separately from Provo because leaders to live in the city and cultivate farmland outside residents recognized the need to develop a water its limits. system for the area. Orem has little naturally occurring water, and local residents believed that Provo was 1.2.2 Geneva Steel and the West Side unlikely to provide the public financing necessary to In the early 1940s, the Geneva Steel plant was construct a water system. One of the first acts of the constructed by the federal government as part of the new town was to issue $110,000 in bonds to construct war effort. The plant influenced development on the the water system, which solved the area’s long-standing west side of Orem towards more industrial uses, shortage of water. some of which continue to this day. Many of the older Unlike many Utah towns and cities, Orem was not laid homes built in this area were constructed as housing out in regular city blocks with houses clustered closely for those who worked in the nearby industry. together. Instead, Orem’s origins are in homesteads In 1946 the Geneva Steel plant was sold to a private settled along the territorial highway (now State Street) company, and operated at varying levels of production and along other substantial arteries where area farmers 20 INTRODUCTION
until its closure in the early 2000's. The plant has since was once a primarily agricultural settlement became been demolished and the site is undergoing significant a bustling center of employment. While Orem's change as part of a master planned development in population increased in religious and cultural diversity, nearby Vineyard City. it remained a place where people shared a strong sense of community. With the change and growth in Vineyard, many wonder what the future holds for Orem's west side. One of the cohesive influences in Orem has been the Thanks in large part to a recently awarded grant Sharon Community Educational and Recreational by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Association, better known as SCERA. SCERA was created City is currently creating an area-wide plan for the in 1933 under the guidance of Arthur V. Watkins, then Geneva Road corridor. This plan will help address the president of the LDS Sharon Stake and later a United challenge of possible brownfield contamination and States Senator from Utah, as a substantial community create a vision for the potential of the corridor. While effort at “planned and organized recreation.” SCERA this has been and is expected to remain a job corridor has fulfilled much of its anticipated role in the city since for the City, there may be room for additional uses its birth in the depths of the Great Depression. It has that compliment the residential growth occurring in also inspired other cultural and artistic organizations in neighboring Vineyard. Orem, including the Hale Centre Theatre.
1.2.3 SCERA and Orem's Culture 1.2.4 Commercial Activity and State Street The construction of the Geneva Steel plant brought Over the latter half of the 20th century, Orem became significant growth and change to City of Orem. What the commercial center of Utah County. This happened
Historic View of Geneva Steel in the 1940's
21 OREM GENERAL PLAN
for two primary reasons: the State Street retail corridor to benefit from the central location within Utah County. and population growth. In 1950, Orem had 8,351 residents and represented Orem's first zoning ordinance was adopted on April roughly one tenth of the population in Utah County. By 10th, 1946. Previous to the adoption, there was a 2000, Orem had grown to 84,324 residents and made discussion about creating a central business zone for a up nearly one quarter of the County's population. With future Orem downtown. Due to competing commercial such a large share of the County's population, many interests at multiple locations along the State Highway businesses located in Orem to serve the local population (State Street), it was decided that instead of creating a and also to attract patrons from surrounding Cities. central business zone, the entire State Highway corridor in Orem would be zoned C-2 (general) commercial. Although the City has continued to grow, since 1990, Orem's share of the County's population has decreased. Having one long commercial corridor rather than Most cities in the County are now large enough to have a downtown gave Orem an advantage in attracting their own local retail, and a few have become regional auto-oriented retail businesses. As well, it provided retail hubs that compete directly with Orem. This, a relatively large area of commercially zoned land for combined with the trends of increased online sales and businesses to develop. experiential shopping (where shoppers prefer to spend more money in places that are engaging, pedestrian As explained previously, with the construction of the friendly, and have amenities) has led to a decline in Geneva Steel plant, Orem began a transformation from some parts along State Street. an agricultural community to an employment center. Other industries, business, and institutions also located in Orem to take advantage of the existing labor pool and
Figure 1.1 Orem's PopulationOrem Population as a Share as a Shareof Utah of Utah County County from from 1900 1900 to to 20162016 30.0% Orem's Total Population 97,499 100,171 100 K 25.6% Orem's Share of Utah County Population 24.0% 88,328 84,324 25.0% 22.9% 80 K 18.7% 17.2% 67,561 17.1% 20.0% 16.5% 60 K 52,399 15.0% 10.2% 40 K 10.0% Orem'sPopulaiton 25,729 5.1% 4.1% 3.9% 18,394 20 K 2.8% 5.0% 2.1% 8,351 1,664 1,915 2,914 692 1,064 Ore m's Share of Utah County Population 0 K 0.0% 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 2018
Source: US Census / American Community Survey, complied by Kirby Snideman, AICP, Orem Long Range City Planner 22 INTRODUCTION
Figure 1.2 Orem's First Zoning Ordinance was Adopted in 1946
23 OREM GENERAL PLAN
1.3 Imagine Orem with local government processes and functions. Those who are less informed can often feel confused and discouraged As Orem continues to grow, the City has been working from being involved. Providing a means for residents to on plans to address future development. These plans become better educated on how local government works have culminated in the “Imagine Orem” campaign—an will increase residents' confidence in the process and effort to reach thousands of residents for input on the willingness to participate. creation of downtown districts, changes to the Geneva • Fit the Process to the Residents: Create opportunities for Road corridor, and other future planning projects. participation that are more welcoming to all residents. Unique from previous outreach efforts, the “Imagine For example, providing food, entertainment, and activities Orem” campaign will be testing new fun and innovative for children, will make it easier for busy young families to ways to reach a broader population of residents. attend and contribute. Involving residents is nothing new in Orem. The City • Be Flexible: Hold public meetings or other public has a long history of civic engagement, with over 100 engagement events at times and in locations that are residents currently volunteering on various committees convenient and accessible for all residents. and over 35,000 reached online through Facebook, • Partner with Community Organizations: Identify and Twitter, Instagram, and an electronic newsletter. In collaborate with local community organizations such as addition, the City’s recent plans were all created with faith-based organizations, civic groups, volunteer groups, resident input, utilizing door-to-door questionnaires, and others that can encourage and facilitate greater online surveys, public meetings, and other outreach communication between local officials and residents. tools. • Communicate Effectively: Information that is given to the public should be easy to understand, engaging, and easily 1.3.1 Renewed Commitment to Public Engagement accessible. As Orem becomes more diverse, recognize The foundation of the Imagine Orem campaign isa the importance of communicating with residents in their renewed commitment by the City of Orem to effectively first language to ensure their maximum understanding of engage the public. The following list of best practices will issues. Utilize social media to reach people where they guide current and future public outreach efforts by the accustomed to accessing information. City: • Say Thank You and Follow-Up: Express appreciation for those who become involved. Let participants know how • Develop Relationships: Developing meaningful relationships their input was considered and impacted decisions. with the community can lead to better plans and better • Stay Committed to Public Engagement: Public engagement outcomes. Time should be taken to engage with residents is not only a tool to be used when major plans are being in their neighborhoods, understanding their unique created. Information sharing and communication should challenges and ideas for improvements. be an ongoing activity. • Increase the Community's Capacity to Participate: Community members have varying degrees of familiarity 24 INTRODUCTION
25
Imagine Orem: State Street OREM GENERAL PLANPLAN
"While some see any growth as negative, most current residents recognize that growth has been an overall positive part of Orem’s history. Feedback from recent public outreach indicates that the majority of residents are supportive of additional growth as long as it is well planned and strategically located."
26
University Parkway and State Street INTRODUCTION
27 OREM GENERAL PLAN
28 LAND USE
Land Use
2.1 Land Use Classifications
2.2 Annexation Declaration
2.3 Land Use Patterns and Goals
29 OREM GENERAL PLAN
2.1 Land Use Classifications Rural Density Residential - The Rural Density Residential (RDR) classification is established to The Land Use chapter provides policy guidelines for provide for residential uses in a rural atmosphere Orem City council, commissions, boards, and staff to where open space preservation and agriculture uses use when dealing with land use decisions that require are encouraged. The appropriate housing density shall review, recommendations and approval. The purpose be up to 1 unit per gross acre. Continued agricultural of this chapter is to focus on: uses within the open space are encouraged. • General land use classifications, • Planning sufficient land for residential, industrial, Low Density Residential - The Low Density Residential commercial, and public uses, (LDR) classification is established to provide the • Establishing guidelines for locating land uses, and majority of the housing stock within Orem. Typical • Providing land use policies that manage growth. suburban neighborhoods with single family homes on individual building lots should comprise the majority Land use is divided into four major categories of of development within the LDR classification. Low residential, commercial, industrial, and mixed-use. density planned residential developments should be Figure 2.1 displays the designated land uses of the scattered evenly throughout the city subordinate to City. A more detailed regularly updated land use map the single family home. (and zoning map) is located in the appendix. Medium Density Residential - The Medium Density 2.1.1 Residential Land Use Classifications Residential (MDR) classification is established to The following classifications are used to describe provide for transitional areas where a higher density residential land uses: than the LDR classification is justified. An overall housing density between four (4) units per gross acre • Rural Density Residential - Consisting of the Rural Open and seven (7) units per gross acre is acceptable within Space (ROS) and OS-5 zones. the MDR classification. • Low Density Residential - Consisting of the low density Planned Residential Development (PRD), R-8, R-12, and High Density Residential - The High Density Residential R-20 zones (R- zones are residential zones specifying the (HDR) classification is established to provide areas minimum lot size). for apartment and condominium buildings. These • Medium Density Residential - Consisting of the high include student housing complexes near Utah density PRD (no new high density PRD zones will be Valley University, and apartment and condominium allowed), R-6, R-6.5, and R-7.5 zones. complexes typically located along major corridors such • High Density Residential - Consisting of the Student as State Street, University Parkway, Center Street, 800 Housing (SH) and PRD zones, and also Planned North, 1600 North, I-15, and others. It is the intent Development (PD) zones that contain residential (No of the City to focus high density housing along State new PD zones will be allowed in residential zones). Street in accordance with the adoption of the State Street Corridor Master Plan. 30 LAND USE
31 Figure 2.1 Land Use Map OREM GENERAL PLAN
2.1.2 Commercial Land Use Classifications shops and facilities serving a wide range of goods and The following classifications are used to describe services. The typical uses allowed in this classification commercial land uses: will include virtually the whole range of retail and service establishments which can be attractively • Professional Services - Consisting of the Professional accommodated within a unified shopping center Office (PO) zone and the office PD zones. complex. The Regional Commercial will generally be • Community Commercial - Consisting of the Commercial- implemented through C3 and PD zones. Non-Retail (C-1), Commercial-Local (C-2), Business Park (BP), and commercial PD zones. 2.1.3 Industrial Land Use Classifications • Regional Commercial - Consisting of the C-2, C-3, Highway The following classifications are used to describe Services (HS), BP, and commercial PD zones. industrial land uses:
Professional Services - The Professional Services • Light Industrial - Consisting of the Controlled classification is established as a low-impact, Manufacturing (CM), Light Manufacturing (M-1), BP, and professional office use for buffering between collector industrial PD zones. or arterial-class roads and residential development. • Industrial - Consisting of the Light Manufacturing (M-1), Non-retail professional and service uses characterize Heavy Manufacturing (M-2), and industrial PD zones. this classification. Light Industrial - The Light Industrial classification Community Commercial - The Community Commercial is intended to provide for clean and less intensive classification is intended to provide areas for general industrial and manufacturing uses within Orem. shopping facilities to satisfy the specialty shopping The intensity of the manufacturing uses and needs of a community or group of neighbors. corresponding zoning depends on surrounding uses, The intensity of the commercial zone applied will existing infrastructures, and the ability to buffer and depend on such factors as the nature and location of protect adjacent residential uses. Any assembly or surrounding uses, the ability to buffer surrounding manufacturing activities within this classification uses, and the availability of necessary infrastructure. are characterized by low intensity and absence of emissions outside of the facility. High-tech jobs should Regional Commercial - The Regional Commercial be the main focus of development and a reduction of classification is established to provide locations in heavy industrial uses should be encouraged. which the primary use of the land is for commercial and service uses to serve the needs of people Industrial - The Industrial classification is intended living in an entire region and to serve as a place of to provide a range of industrial and manufacturing employment in pleasant surroundings close to the uses, including heavy industry. The intensity of the center of the regional population it is intended to manufacturing uses and corresponding zoning depend serve. Uses characteristic within this designation on surrounding uses, existing infrastructure and will be large chain department stores with satellite the ability to buffer and protect adjacent residential 32 LAND USE
Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential
Professional Services Community Commercial
Regional Commercial Light Industrial Industrial
33 OREM GENERAL PLAN
uses. Heavy industrial uses should be reduced in There is no single General Plan classification that is the future by developing more light and controlled applicable to all Planned Development zones since PD manufacturing areas to encourage high-tech jobs, as zones may be designed to accommodate commercial recommended by the Geneva Road Area-Wide Plan or mixed-use developments. However, the uses currently being created. allowed in any PD zone should be complimentary and appropriate with the surrounding uses. 2.1.4 Mixed-Use Districts Mixed-Use Districts were added as a land use It should be noted that in 2018 the City Council recently classification to accommodate the State Street adopted a new ordinance which no longer allows new Districts. The first of these Districts, the City Center residential PD zones in areas currently zoned for low zone was adopted in 2018. It is anticipated that four density residential. additional State Street District zones will be adopted in 2018, as well. These Districts allow for the strategic 2.2 Annexation Declaration growth of the City, as outlined in the State Street Annexation is a process by which the boundaries are Corridor Master Plan. extended to incorporate additional lands into the City. Residents of newly annexed areas become citizens of 2.1.5 Planned Development Zones the City and share in the benefits and responsibilities Planned Development (PD) zones are permitted of that citizenship. Certain unincorporated areas within several land use classifications and are adjoining Orem’s current boundaries are identified in intended to allow freedom of design in order to obtain Figure 2.2 for possible future annexation. development which will be an asset to the City. They should only be approved when all other zoning options 2.2.1 Annexation Policy Plan do not address and solve the specific circumstances This Annexation Policy Plan for the City of Orem is and problems of the site, or when the PD meets an intended to satisfy the requirements of Utah Code articulated need of the City. Articulated needs of the Section 10-2-401.5. City which may require the need for a PD zone include: The City of Orem is bordered by the Town of Vineyard • The development or enlargement of planned commercial to the west, the City of Lindon, and U.S. Forest Service development in close proximity to residential areas with land to the north and northeast, City of Provo to the protection for the character and quality of adjacent east and south, and unincorporated Utah County to residential uses. the southeast. Future annexation to the City of Orem • The development of sites where topography or site will likely occur primarily in unincorporated areas of configuration makes it difficult to develop under Utah County. standard zoning regulations. In deciding whether to approve an annexation petition, • Student Housing complexes strategically located near the City will consider several factors including the Utah Valley University. 34 LAND USE
Southwest Orem Southeast Orem
Figure 2.2 Annexation Areas character of the community, extension of City services, is located adjacent to Interstate 15. The third area is financing of services, property tax implications to known as the Carterville area and is located between landowners, the interest of all affected parties, and the municipal boundaries of Orem and Provo generally the guidelines provided in the General Plan. at 1040 East 1630 South.
The annexation expansion areas are expected to occur 2.2.2 Character of the Community in three locations. The first is located southwest of The Lakeview area is characterized by low-lying lands Orem’s municipal boundary, east of Utah Lake, and with a high ground water table, wetlands, and existing west of Interstate 15. This area is referred to as the farming operations. Housing units are sparsely Lakeview area. The southern boundary of the Lakeview scattered with most being located on existing farms. area is 2000 South Street which is also anticipated to Several of these homes are historic in nature. be the future northern boundary of the City of Provo. The second area is known as the Sandhill area and The Sandhill area is adjacent to Interstate 15 in a gap 35 OREM GENERAL PLAN
located on Orem's southern boundary and is made up It is the objective of the City of Orem to ensure that primarily of the freeway, the associated right of way, adequate water facilities, sanitary sewer and storm existing industrial properties, and a small amount of drainage are provided to serve the needs of new undeveloped land. development in the Lakeview area. New development should not impede the pre-existing agricultural The Carterville area is adjacent to residential activities and water drainage used by adjacent development and BYU’s motion picture studios. agricultural properties. Potential for development exists and is limited on the acreage available. Development can be serviced The Sandhill area contains nearly forty parcels that by existing utility services. However, the jurisdictional are within unincorporated Utah County. These parcels boundary between Utah County and the City of Orem have access to adjacent utilities and will need to crosses several of the parcels in this area. Because of connect to existing lines. Utility upgrades may be the zoning in place, once this area is annexed into the needed to provide service to these lots. City of Orem, several lots will not be able to develop beyond what exists at the present time. The Carterville area is comprised of seven parcels that are within unincorporated Utah County. These parcels 2.2.3 Extension and Financing of City Services have access to adjacent utilities and will only need Development within the Lakeview area will require to connect to existing lines. Utility upgrades may be the installation of new utility lines and services. The needed to provide service to these lots. capacity of utilities serving the area needs tobe 2.2.4 Financing of Services analyzed and improved to meet service requirements created by future development. Expansion of utilities Developers will be expected to pay the cost of new will benefit existing and future residences in the utility lines as land is annexed and developed. The City Lakeview area, eliminating the need for wells and of Orem may participate in a portion of the costs of septic systems. installation of utility lines and upgrades. Cost sharing, if any, will be determined as the Lakeview, Sandhill, Other utility services such as power, telephone, cable and Carterville areas are developed. television, natural gas, and fiber optics are in the area or are in proximity such that extension of these 2.2.5 Property Tax Implications services should pose little difficulty. City services such It is projected that annexation will have little, if any, as police and fire protection are already provided to effect on property taxes. The County Auditor has some extent through City contracts with Utah County. indicated that the property tax on an existing home All utilities should be installed within public right-of- valued at $150,000 would be approximately $50 ways or in public utility easements. Installation of cheaper in Orem than in unincorporated Utah County. utilities should be performed at or before the time of The City does not anticipate raising taxes to cover construction of street improvements. costs of infrastructure in the Lakeview, Sandhill, or 36 LAND USE
Carterville areas. Developers or landowners will pay in development layout to preserve views, create for these costs as land is developed. pedestrian-friendly and attractive streets, and maintain the distinct opens space character of the 2.2.6 Interest of All Affected Parties Lakeview area. The City believes that annexation of areas within the Lakeview, Sandhill, and Carterville areas will generally The Sandhill and Carterville areas will be expected be in the best interest of the City of Orem provided to maintain the standards of nearby and comparable that such annexations result in orderly development areas of development within the City. and boundaries. The health, safety, and welfare 2.2.7 Other Considerations of the citizens of Orem will always be the primary consideration in deciding whether to grant any The Lakeview Area has several development issues annexation petition. The City will also consider the and constraints associated with it, including high interests of other affected entities in determining groundwater, infrastructure needs, environmentally whether to grant an annexation petition. sensitive areas, and the fluctuating level of Utah Lake. High potential for liquefaction during an earthquake 2.2.6 Guidelines for Granting Petitions is also a concern to consider. All of these factors will In the Lakeview area, the City will require excellence have to be thoroughly studied prior to the approval of any development within the Lakeview area.
A View of the Parcels in the Lakeveiw Annexation Area, Looking North 37 OREM GENERAL PLAN
2.3 Land Use Patterns and Goals gave Orem an advantage in attracting auto-oriented retail businesses. As well, it provided a relatively large 2.3.1 Orem's Early History area of commercially zoned land for businesses to As noted previously, Orem was primarily an agricultural spread out. The University mall opened for business community throughout its early history. Farms, in 1973, further solidifying Orem as a retail hub. Major orchards, and open fields dominated the landscape, institutional uses such as schools and hospitals also consisting of large-acre homesteads and a few small located in the City, taking advantage of Orem's central businesses supported by local trade. To facilitate the location within the County. movement of people and agricultural products, train tracks were laid down through what is now Orem The economic growth experienced during this period Boulevard, connecting Utah Valley with Salt Lake was an engine for additional housing construction. Valley, and by extension, the rest of the country. However, new single family homes built during this time tended to be larger, on larger lots, and 2.3.2 1940's to the 1970's in larger subdivisions. As a result, much of Orem's The completion of Geneva Steel in the mid 1940's agricultural land was sold and developed into low marked a turning point for the City. Orem began to see density residential during this period. Unlike older significant growth fueled by the proximity of new jobs neighborhoods that contained a wider mix of uses and and industry. Contrary to popular perception, Orem types of housing, these newer subdivisions tended did not develop as an exclusive "bedroom community" to be more homogeneous and strictly single family for a certain class of people or a narrow set of uses. detached. As a consequence, the demand and supply The City's first zoning ordinance was adopted in 1946, for multifamily housing was concentrated in larger, creating zones within the City for multiple and varied higher density complexes. uses with a range of densities. 2.3.4 2000's to The Future With new jobs came an increase in home building As can be seen in Figure 2.3 there is very little activity. Fields and farms were sold into mostly small undeveloped land remaining in Orem. As of 2018, homes on small lots for working class residents. undeveloped land is estimated at 889 acres and Multifamily homes were also built during this time, accounts for less than 8% of the total land area in with duplexes, quadplexes, and medium density Orem. Of that amount, an estimated 378 acres, or 3% complexes mixed throughout the community, offering of the Orem total, is currently zoned residential. It is more affordable options. expected that most or all of this remaining residential land will develop as low density residential. Under 2.3.3 1970's to the 2000's average occupancy rates, this would only allow for As the population in the larger region increased, Orem roughly 5,000 new residents. became the commercial center of Utah County. Having In contrast, over the next 40 years, Utah County is one long commercial corridor rather than a downtown 38 LAND USE
39 Figure 2.3 Undeveloped Land OREM GENERAL PLAN
expected to add roughly one million new residents (see 2.3.5 The State Street Corridor Master Plan Figure 2.4). The majority of this growth is expected to The State Street Corridor Master Plan, which involved come from the natural increase of Utah residents. thousands of Orem residents through meetings and With the supply of housing constrained in the City and outreach, proposed five districts along State Street where also in the County, Orem’s property values have continued future high density development could be concentrated. to increase year over year. Currently the median home Doing so would also preserve single family neighborhoods price in Orem is estimated at just under $250K and the by discouraging high density development in other areas median list price of homes for sale at roughly $330K. of the City. The goals of the State Street Corridor Master Plan are as follows: Due to the decreasing availability of undeveloped land, • Protect Neighborhoods - Concentrate high density and in response to demand for more affordable housing development in the districts where the impacts such options, developers and homebuilders have showed as parking and sight obstruction can be more easily increasing interest in recent years for higher density mitigated developments. Like the new single family subdivisions • Transportation - Locate the districts along major corridors of the 1970’s, the higher density developments of today resulting in a more efficient use of existing and future have some concerned, despite making up less than 5% of transportation infrastructure and transit the housing units in Orem. • Retail - Create pockets of walkability and increased
While some see any growth as negative, most current activity to help revitalize areas of State Street and keep residents recognize that growth has been an overall the City's commercial core competitive positive part of Orem’s history. Feedback from recent • Safety - Create more pedestrian and bicycle friendly public outreach indicates that the majority of residents streets as redevelopment occurs are supportive of additional growth as long as it is well • Design - Create higher standards of design and planned and strategically located. construction for new development along State Street
Figure 2.4 Utah County Growth and Projections from 1900 to 2060 1.6 M
1.4 M
1.2 M
1.0 M
.8 M
.6 M
.4 M
.2 M
.0 M 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 40 State of Utah, University of Utah Ken C. Gardner Institute LAND USE
41 Figure 2.5 Proposed State Street Districts OREM GENERAL PLANPLAN
42 LAND USE
"The State Street Corridor Master Plan, which involved thousands of Orem residents through meetings and outreach, proposed five districts along State Street where future high density development could be concentrated. Doing so would also preserve single family neighborhoods by discouraging high density development in other areas of the City."
43
State Street & Center Street OREM GENERAL PLAN
44 URBAN DESIGN
Urban Design
3.1 Public Space
3.2 Streetscape
3.3 Signage
3.4 Architectural Standards
45 OREM GENERAL PLAN
3.1 Public Space Access to these types of spaces has been associated Urban design is the process of designing and with better perceived general health, reduced stress regulating the physical structure and layout of land levels, reduced depression, and other benefits. and buildings with the goal of making urban areas According to research, people who use public open functional, attractive, and sustainable. This chapter spaces are three times more likely to achieve the deals with several important aspects of urban design, recommended levels of physical activity. which include public space, streetscape, signage, and Understanding how important parks and open spaces architectural standards. are to Orem residents, the City has gone into greater When you add up the amount of land dedicated to detail on plans for these amenities in Chapter 7 Parks streets, sidewalks, trails, parks, open space, and other and Recreation. This chapter presents excerpts from public spaces in Orem, it accounts for a sizable share the recently adopted Orem Parks, Recreation, Trails of all land in the City. The way this land is used has a and Open Space Master Plan (2016-2026). This plan significant impact on the character of the City. addresses existing conditions, priorities, levels of service and other considerations of a comprehensive 3.1.1 Public Right of Way parks, recreation and trail system. The plan also analyzes and assesses the full range of facilities required A right-of-way (ROW) is a right to make a way over a to meet future needs, and presents goals, objectives piece of land, usually to and from another piece of and policies that reflect the City’s commitment to land. A right of way can be purchased, dedicated, or improving the quality of life for residents as it relates granted to the public. A right of way can be used for to parks and open spaces. transportation purposes, for the placement of utilities, to preserve environmentally unstable land (such as 3.1.3 Outdoor Public Art steep slopes), or for other purposes. Outdoor public art, such as statues, art structures In the past, right of way dedicated for transportation and other design features, can benefit a community was seen almost exclusively as the domain of in many ways. Well-placed and well-designed automobile traffic. In recent years, it has become public art can create cohesion in the urban design important to plan for other forms of traffic such as of a community, provide a sense of community for pedestrians, bicyclists, and mass transit. individual neighborhoods and the City at large, have a positive impact on the image of the community, and 3.1.2 Parks and Open Space assist with community historical preservation efforts. The City of Orem recognizes the need to provide for Public art in Orem should be placed, where possible parks and open space to enhance the quality of life of and practical, near commercial centers, along major Orem residents. There are numerous health benefits corridors, in parks, near recreational facilities and at associated with access to parks and opens space. 46
Figure 3.1 Current Land Use URBAN DESIGN
other locations where it can be seen by many people. trees on city property with a value of approximately In addition to publicly funded art, privately funded art $15.2 million. A winter tree inventory is performed will be encouraged within the State Street Districts about every five years, with the most recent being as streetscape and landscape elements. This will add initiated over the 2017/18 winter. At the completion interest, uniqueness, and character to each of the of the next survey, it is estimated the number of trees Districts. maintained by the City will be nearly 7000 trees.
3.1.4 Urban Forestry Some accomplishments in regards to the Orem City Trees within a city create patterns that are irrevocably forestry program: woven into the fabric of that city just as dramatically as • The National Arbor Day Foundation has designated its designed buildings and public spaces. A city cannot Orem City as a Tree City USA for the last 25 years and has solely rely on the diversity of architectural forms to presented the City the Growth Award several times. give it unity and a sense of place. Trees in the urban • Approximately 200 trees are planted every year in our landscape, planted with a sense of continuity and existing parks. repetition, are the most prominent design element • Several hundred trees per year are pruned with some capable of creating a sense of place. removals when necessary. • Information and questions are regularly answered for A Tree Planting Plan, which will become an important the citizens of Orem concerning tree questions. element in the Urban Forestry Plan, has been adopted • A digital inventory of trees is maintained with location to ensure the continued use of trees as a positive and type of tree. symbol of the vitality and richness of the City’s character. Some of the elements of the Tree Planting 3.1.5 Natural Resources Management Plan include: In traditional accounting, the "bottom line" refers to • The use of planter strips is encouraged and recommended either the "profit" or "loss" which is usually recorded widths and mature heights of trees are outlined. at the very bottom line on a statement of revenue and • Guidelines are given to prevent obstruction of sidewalks, expenses. While this is often used as way to determine streets, intersections, and overhead utility lines. if a private or public enterprise is successful, it • Guidelines for installation of plants and trees and doesn't account for the full cost and consequences minimum sizes at planting. of the decisions made. For example, many of vehicles • Instructions for the care of trees in the urban landscape, and appliances we buy, sale, and use in Utah have a including pruning and fertilization of plants. negative impact to our public health, tourism, and • A partial list of varieties of trees endorsed for use in the general economic development that the State of Utah City by the Urban Forester. estimates in the billions of dollars annually.
The current Orem City tree inventory has about 6,100 An alternative approach is to consider the triple 47 OREM GENERAL PLAN
bottom line when evaluating the decisions we make commissioned committee, they build on the values of as a community. Orem can do this by considering how Utah's early inhabitants: innovation, conservative self- policies and actions will not only impact the City's reliance, and community spirit. The areas of focus for economic strength, but also our social integrity and the committee include recycling, water conservation, environmental stewardship. Orem City can encourage bicycling, gardening, and promoting improved air triple bottom line considerations by: quality.
• Adopting ordinances to encourage low impact 3.2 Streetscape development and encourage more efficient usage of As explained previously, the City supports a Complete utilities such as water and power Streets Policy that will encourage multiple forms of • Creating and adopting plans that encourage social equity traffic. Although roads and streets were designed in and environmental health the past primarily for automobile traffic, in recent • Providing incentives to develop initiatives that meet years it has become important to plan for other forms triple bottom line goals of traffic such as pedestrians, bicyclists, and mass To assist City staff in the development and evaluation transit. of policies and plans that consider a triple bottom line, the Orem’s Natural Resources Stewardship 3.2.1 Streetscape Improvements Committee (NRSC) was formed in 2017. The NRSC Streetscape improvements can invite pedestrian consists of five resident volunteers appointed to three traffic and other modes of traffic by adding human- year terms by the Mayor. While the NRSC is a recently scaled elements which make streets safer and more comfortable. Several options exist for designing streetscapes on Orem’s main corridors, which include various improvements. These include trees, benches, design lighting standards, landscaped medians, special surface sidewalks and crosswalks, bollards, water features and fountains, flower baskets, planter boxes, decorative garbage cans, outdoor clocks, themed signage, monuments, statues, public art, banners on light poles, holiday decorations, and miscellaneous architectural elements.
Successful streetscape projects can maintain the necessary vehicle access and traffic flow for commercial needs, while also creating a safer, more pedestrian friendly urban experience. Benefits to streetscapes on 48 URBAN DESIGN
Figure 3.1 Ideal Sub-Local Public Street Design
busy streets include: is also encouraged for use on all residential streets. The planting of trees near streets is recognized as an • Vehicular traffic is calmed as the street feels more like a important and effective method of softening streets corridor to move people and not just vehicles. and giving the community a nicer, prettier and family- • Investment appeal and quality development expand in a friendly atmosphere. spruced-up commercial corridor.
• Business activity increases in areas previously deemed 3.2.3 Major Corridors harsh and unsightly. Major transportation corridors in Orem include • Increased pedestrian traffic is encouraged in a State Street, University Parkway, Center Street, 800 comfortable environment with shade trees, benches, North, 1600 North, and Geneva Road. While many of and water fountains. these roads are currently designed for high vehicle • Property values and community pride increase. traffic volumes and speeds, it is the goal of the City • A sense of community core and cohesion is created. to make design improvements in the future that 3.2.2 Residential Streets will accommodate other modes of traffic such as As new residential streets are developed and old ones pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit. are improved, it is the objective of the City of Orem that In 2018, the City adopted new design standards for wherever possible, streetscapes and street softening State Street. These new standards included updated approaches be used. The sub-local street design has setback requirements for new construction within been adopted by the City specifically for this purpose, close proximity of State Street. Buildings will be to be used on smaller, less busy streets. The buffered constructed closer to the street, and within the sidewalk design, used in the sub-local street design, required setback there will be buffered sidewalks, 49 OREM GENERAL PLAN
Figure 3.2 Updated State Street Design
trees, and spaces open to the public. It is anticipated major corridors, and industrial zones shall follow the that similar standards will be adopted for the other approved street lighting plan. major corridors in Orem. Street lighting can enhance the character of a street 3.2.4 Street Lighting in many ways. Fixtures that are decorative, dark sky Citizens in all areas of the city and in every aspect sensitive, and bring to mind a traditional city can add of their daily lives expect a certain level of personal an element of interest to the night time streetscape. security. Street lighting has become a vital tool in Fixtures that are more modern in style and are assuring every citizen that feeling of personal safety primarily functional, give light to public places while for themselves their families and their property. Orem blending into the background. Orem City’s General City is near completion for replacement of street Plan supports a citywide program of installing street lights. All new development in residential zones, lighting in every neighborhood. 50 URBAN DESIGN
3.3 Signage allowable building materials for certain zones. Signs can enhance or detract from the overall 3.4.1 Architectural Standards in Commercial Zones impression of a city’s character. Signs allow businesses One of the goals outlined in the State Street Corridor to identify their premises and products for motorists Master Plan is to “develop districts that will have and pedestrians alike. Signs that are too large for their unique, yet complementary characters”. This plan site, too bright, or cluttered, do not benefit businesses identifies five distinct Districts that require tailored or add to the beauty of the City. zoning ordinances to guide their future development. In the past, the City of Orem has had a liberal approach Basic design standards have been adopted for State to sign sizes, types, and locations. Feedback from Street and it is anticipated that additional, more residents has encouraged the City to adopt more detailed design standards will also be adopted for the conservative sign ordinances that continue to allow entire State Street corridor as well as the individual businesses to advertise, but have a more aesthetic State Street Districts. In the future, it is anticipated and site appropriate approach. that other commercial zones in the City will have updated design standards as well. The City has adopted new zoning and ordinances in areas along State Street that encourage blade signs, 3.4.2 Historic Preservation monument signs, and building signs while discouraging National and State Historic Registers consider a large pole signs. The intent of these new ordinances structure to be eligible for listing if that structure is is not to diminish the amount of space businesses at least 50 years old, has a high degree of physical can use to advertise, only to adjust the location and integrity, or meets certain criteria concerning style of signs to create a more aesthetically pleasant association with historic events, persons, architectural commercial corridor. It is anticipated that these new or archaeological significance, or construction sign ordinances will be adopted, over time, in other techniques. commercial areas of the City. Historic houses and buildings add to the character of 3.4 Architecture a city. Although, the major portion of the structures in Orem are currently not in an historical classification, Zoning regulations have always addressed aspects of yearly, some structures will become eligible. The the design of new development. Orem's first zoning long range goal for the City of Orem is to inventory, laws, adopted in the 1940's, regulated which land uses preserve, and protect these significant structures could be located in particular zones, set the maximum thereby minimizing the loss of these integral buildings. height for buildings in different areas, and required differing setbacks from the street and property lines depending on the zone. Over the years, the City has added additional design requirements, such as 51 OREM GENERAL PLANPLAN
"Urban design is the process of designing and regulating the physical structure and layout of land and buildings with the goal of making urban areas functional, attractive, and sustainable."
52
Future Orem State Street Corridor URBAN DESIGN
53 OREM GENERAL PLAN
54 HOUSING
Housing
4.1 Population Demographics
4.2 Existing Conditions
4.3 Housing Market Trends
4.4 Median-Income Housing Study
55 OREM GENERAL PLAN
4.1 Population Demographics significant new growth. Understanding the demographic trends for the City is It is interesting to note that households in Orem and an important element in assessing the housing market Utah County have generally grown at a rate faster in Orem. than the population. Gaining more households than population occurs when there is an overall decrease in 4.1.1 Population and Households the number of persons per household—which is the Figure 4.1 provides population and household counts trend in most places across the country. Couples are for 1990, 2000, 2010, as well as estimates for 2018, having fewer children than in previous decades, and covering Orem, Utah County, Utah State, and the there are more single person households. United States. The first four columns with data provide 4.1.2 Population and Age the population and household counts and estimates. The last three columns provide a relative comparison Figure 4.2 contains a breakdown of the 2000 and 2018 for how much each geography has grown—looking at populations for Orem and Utah County by age range. the annual average growth rate (AAGR). Total population, median age, and the percentage change from 2000 to 2018 are also presented. The As can be seen in Figure 4.1, Orem has grown at a rate accompanying chart displays the 2018 percentages for slower than Utah County for the last few decades. This age ranges and includes data for the State of Utah and is due to the fact there is little remaining undeveloped the United States, as well. Orem and Utah County had land in Orem, whereas other parts of Utah County, a similar age profile in 2000. particularly the northern part, have large tracts of undeveloped land that are currently experiencing In 2018, Orem showed a an increase in the share
Figure 4.1 Population and Households, 1990 to 2018
56 HOUSING
of residents aged 25 to 34 while the County saw a the County. This is a trend that is occurring in many decrease. This can likely be explained by growth in areas of the country as Americans are living longer Utah Valley University and an increase in the young and more often aging in place rather than relocating single professionals who have congregated in the more to retirement communities. Compared to the County, urban areas of the County. Another interesting trend Orem saw a greater increase in the share of share of is the increase in the median age for both the City and residents in all age ranges 55+.
Figure 4.2 Population by Age, 2000 to 2018
Figure 4.3 Population by Age, 2000 to 2018
57 OREM GENERAL PLAN
For a more detailed demographic examination of away. Designated areas in proximity to Utah Valley Orem, see the Orem Moderate-Income Housing Study University have been established for student housing. in the appendix. These designated areas will reduce car trips, make student life more affordable, and discourage demand 4.2 Existing Conditions for family housing in residential neighborhoods to be The City has eleven zoning classifications which can be converted into student housing (and adversely impact used for residential development which range from housing affordability). The accommodation for student 5,000 square foot lots to five acre lots. They are R5 housing development has been made in Orem utilizing (5,000 sq. ft. residential); R6 (6,000 sq. ft. residential); planned development zones and the Student Housing R6.5 (6,500 sq. ft. residential); R7.5 (7,500 sq. ft. Overlay zone. The zones allow for more increased residential); R8 (8,000 sq. ft. residential); R12 (12,000 occupancy and greater density, which has encouraged sq. ft. residential); R20 (20,000 sq. ft. residential); affordability for the student population. OS1 (1 acre residential); OS5 (5 acre residential); PRD 4.2.2 Multifamily in Orem (Planned Residential Development); and PD (Planned Development). Under past zoning ordinances the City allowed multi- family units in zones such as the C2 (commercial) or These zones are designed to meet the wide range of the R-2 and R-3 which are no longer in use. The ‘R’ housing needs of the residents of the City. Each of the zones under the current Code do not permit multi- zones is intended to provide well-designed residential family units unless approved as a Special Exception development with compatible uses as outlined in for Multifamily Dwelling as outlined in Article 22-21 of the zoning ordinance. Residential uses that may be the Orem Code. A house with an accessory apartment permitted in each zone include single-family dwellings, is not considered to be a multi-family unit. The PRD accessory apartments, duplexes, multi-family units, zone, PD zone, and accessory apartments are now condominiums, and townhomes. The OS1 and OS5 used to provide opportunities for multi-family housing zones are large lot compatible but are only typically which help to meet the housing needs of moderate used as a holding zone upon annexation. The bulk of income families. The City currently has an estimated the residential zoning is the City is classified as the R8 800 legal accessory apartments. zone which encompasses 5,247 acres of the City’s 11, 678 acres or 45% of the City.. The City recently approved an overlay zone to assists income restricted seniors. The Affordable Senior 4.2.1 Student Housing in Orem Housing (ASH) overlay allows up to four units to be One of the growing housing needs in Orem is for constructed on a single parcel. The tenancy of each students. Utah Valley University is continuing to grow, unit is restricted to those over age 60 and at or less and a larger share of students are desiring to live than 80% of the median income of the Orem/Provo near campus as opposed to commuting from further MSA. After the Code was amended to include this zone, three ASH developments (12 units) have been 58 HOUSING
approved for development since the ordinance was approved in 2012.
4.2.3 Senior Overlay Zone
In 2012 the City approved an overlay zone to assists income restricted seniors. The Affordable Senior Housing (ASH) overlay allows up to four units to be constructed on a single parcel. The tenancy of each unit is restricted to those over age 60 and at or less than 80% of the median income of the Orem/Provo MSA. Through this ordinance, the City has added roughly 100 new affordable senior housing units, some of which are owned and operated by the Utah County Housing Authority.
4.2.4 The State Street Mixed-Use Districts
The State Street Corridor Master Plan, which involved thousands of Orem residents through meetings and age, their definition of family may change. outreach, proposed five mixed-use districts along Orem seeks to be a city that is friendly for families at all State Street where future high-density development of life’s stages. To accomplish this, a variety of housing could be concentrated. Creating this Districts will options need to be supplied. When a young individual allow for new investment and redevelopment along leaves home to study at Utah Valley University, they State Street while also allowing for strategically need to find student housing. If that individual decides located high density development. This will allow to get married, they will seek an affordable place for a the City to continue to grow and help alleviate the young couple. If that couple decides to have children, demand for new housing in Orem. Another benefit is a larger home will be sought. When those children that single family neighborhoods will be preserved by leave, that couple may wish to downsize. And if a discouraging high density development in those areas partner dies, a widow or widower would be greatly of the City. benefited to find a senior community where they can 4.2.5 Housing for All Life Stages find support.
Orem has adopted the slogan of Family City, USA. Orem is greatly benefited by the contribution of its When some envision a family, they think of a father long-term residents. To ensure these residents can and mother with children. But today’s families come in stay long-term, it is important that the City make plans many shapes and sizes, and as individuals and couples to allow for a variety of housing for all life stages. 59 OREM GENERAL PLAN
4.3 Housing Market Trends under $200,000. As of the summer of 2018, Only 14% of homes sold in Orem and 8% of homes sold in Utah This section examines the latest housing market trends County were under $200,000. in Orem and the surrounding area, which includes single-family detached units as well as attached units As a broad generalization, most households can such as twin homes, townhomes, condos, and other afford to purchase a home that is 2.5 to 3 times their multifamily units. household income. With the median household income in Orem estimated at $64,822, a median 4.3.1 For-Sale Units household could afford a home in the $160,000 to Overall, the market for for-sale units in Orem and $200,000 price range. While many more homes were Utah County has increased significantly in the last within this price range a decade ago, in 2018 very decade since the recession. Figure 4.4 illustrates few homes are in this price range. The homes that just how unaffordable home ownership has become. are in this range regularly require additional needed In 2010, 65% of all homes sold in Orem and 55% of investment for repairs such as new roofs or corrected all homes sold in Utah County were sold at a price plumbing, compounding the affordability issue.
Figure 4.4 Total Housing Units Sold by Price Range, 2010 to 2018 YTD
60 HOUSING
Figure 4.5 Share of Total Rented Units Based on Occupancy of the Complex
4.3.2 Multifamily Occupancy demand. Rental increases in the amount of $50-$100 over the last year were not uncommon. According to the Census related housing type estimates, there are currently 12,641 multifamily The average rental rate for all types of rental units in units in Orem. The vast majority of these are rentals. Orem is estimated at $1,142, which represents a 7.9% Through an extensive survey conducted by City, increase from the previous year. Overall, the market 122 multifamily complexes were identified in Orem has an average rate per square foot of $1.17 and an accounting for 9,761 rental units. average size of 978 square feet per unit.
Based on the survey, the average occupancy rate for 4.4 Median-Income Housing Study multifamily rentals in the City is estimated to beat 97%. As illustrated in the chart below, roughly 40% of In 2018 the City conducted a Median-Income the complexes surveyed reported 100% occupancy, Housing Study. The purpose of this study was to 40% reported an occupancy rate between 95-99%, understand the current challenges in the housing and 20% reported an occupancy rate between 90- market and examine the options available to provide 94%. a reasonable opportunity for a variety of housing, including moderate income housing. Strategies Several of the complexes have a waiting list that is that will encourage affordable housing in Orem are dozens of people long. When vacancies occur, they call recommended, and this plan will be the basis for individuals from this list. Vacancies are usually filled ongoing discussions by the City Council to develop immediately for most complexes. This suggests that a moderate-income housing plan and ensure that not all renters are satisfied with their current rental Orem remains a City where everyone is welcome. and are waiting for a vacancy at a more preferred In addition, this study will be a general resource for location. the latest information related to population growth and housing needs for the City of Orem. This plan is Several property owners and managers have reported contained in the appendix of the General Plan. increasing rents as a response to the recent rise in 61 OREM GENERAL PLAN
4.4.1 What is Affordable Housing According to the data, Orem has a greater share of households than the County that are below the The term affordable housing is used to describe poverty level but their housing costs are not more housing, rental or owner-occupied, that is affordable than 30% of their income. This is due, in large part, no matter what one's income is. to older market-rate homes and apartments, rather Generally, housing costs at or below 30% of one's than subsidized or public housing. In other words, income is deemed be affordable. Moderate income because a larger share of Orem’s overall housing stock housing is defined by Utah Code Section 10-9a-103(21) is older, the cost of this housing is generally lower as “housing occupied or reserved for occupancy by when compared to Utah County. Orem is on par with households with a gross household income equal to the average for the State of Utah. or less than 80% of the median income of the county 4.4.2 Recommendations in which the city is located.” Figure 4.6 displays the households in Orem based on their HAMFI – HUD Area The Moderate-Income Housing Plan contains Median Family Income. recommendations that will guide the City in the development of a more robust Moderate- The HAMFI is calculated according to percentages of Income Housing Plan in the years to come. These median incomes by family size and location based recommendations include: on the census’s American Community Survey. The limits fall into three categories: low (80 percent of the • Explore Public/Private Partnerships for Affordable median income), very low (50 percent), and extremely Housing. low (30 percent of the median income or the federal • Studying Lot Size and Housing Unit Size Minimums poverty line, whichever is greater). In Orem 5,055 • Rediscover the Missing Middle households are considered low income, 3,345 are • Educate Residents considered very low income, and 3,095 households • Explore a Community Land Trust are considered extremely low income. • Re-Invest in Orem's Older Neighborhoods
Figure 4.6 Orem Households Income Distribution Overview
62 HOUSING
Italian Villages in Orem
Orem seeks to be a city that is friendly for families at all of life’s stages. To accomplish this, a variety of housing options need to be supplied.
63 OREM GENERAL PLAN
64 ECONOMICS
Economics
5.1 Economic Opportunities and goals
5.2 Economic Development Strategic Plan
65 OREM GENERAL PLAN
5.1 Economic Opportunities and 5.1.2 Orem's Economic Development Division Goals In 1983, the Commission for Economic Dev- The City of Orem is well-known and highly respected elopment in Orem (CEDO) was founded as a non- in the State of Utah as a great place to do business. profit organization with a primary function to It is additionally known for its entrepreneurship, help build Orem's economy. At the time, steel was especially in technology-oriented companies. Orem's main industry and the City's economy was greatly affected by the ups and downs of the steel Orem is the regional retail hub of Utah County. market. This economic vitality is exciting to businesses and attractive to employers who are drawn to the In addition to an unstable economy, jobs were strong workforce from area universities, the low scarce and Orem was losing its large base of local cost of living, and the recreational opportunities in college graduates to other areas. CEDO's original the City’s backyard. focus was on attraction and retention of businesses in areas not currently represented in the City. 5.1.1 Economic Challenges and Opportunities In order to meet today’s economic challenges, Even with all these advantages, Orem, like all cities, capitalize on the economic strengths of the City, grow has its challenges. The City’s regional market share the City’s economic base, and increase coordination of sales is declining, and growth in the City has and collaboration between economic development slowed and is projected to be modest through 2040. staff and City staff, CEDO was integrated into the Cities to the north, such as Lehi are rapidly growing, City of Orem as the Economic Development Division creating strong competition in Utah Valley to attract in 2012. employers and new retail. Vineyard to the west is One of the first major tasks of the Economic beginning to show signs of growth and may present Development Division was to develop an Economic significant commercial competition in the future. Development Strategic Plan to guide the City’s These areas have a substantial advantage for economic development and growth into the future. development that Orem lacks: abundant vacant land. However, while vacant land allows easy, 5.2 Economic Development straightforward development, Orem has the Strategic Plan opportunity to take economic growth and The purpose of the Economic Development Strategic development to the next level by creating a more Plan is to provide the City with a sustainable vision sophisticated urban environment that establishes for economic growth and to provide a plan to Orem as not only the retail hub of the County, but implement and encourage this vision. Sustainable the employment and entertainment hub as well. growth is a means of providing a balanced, vibrant 66 ECONOMICS
economy in Orem. Additionally, it is a means of strengths and weaknesses were identified and a expanding the tax base and increasing assessed path forward was envisioned. values. Public services and schools will benefit, enhanced employment opportunities will develop, 5.2.1 Implementation and Action Plan and citizens will benefit from a higher quality of life. As the City moves forward, economic development should follow the recommendations in the Economic The Orem Economic Development Strategic Plan Development Strategic Plan, and more specifically, was adopted in 2015 and was based participation the Implementation and Action Plan (see Figure with residents and community experts from various 5.1). The EDSP should be consulted on a regular professional backgrounds including local retail, basis to ensure that ongoing land development and marketing, real estate, transportation, housing, and business development in the City of Orem meets finance. Numerous workshops and public meetings not only land-use goals, but also meets economic brought together a wide variety of perspectives development goals. and depth of experience in the various aspects of economic development. Through this process,
Figure 5.1 Implementation and Action Plan GOAL STRATEGY TIME ACTION Pursue Class A office development at Adjust zoning to allow for greater building heights in key University Place; assist with incentives as 1. Increase the 1-10 Years economic areas. Pursue CDA funding for Class A office and required to gain height, a City skyline and sustainability high property value business park development. of the City’s tax sense of a “Downtown.” base through Complete annexation process for southwest area. Ensure increased Encourage business park development at 1-5 Years utilities are in place in this area through impact fees, property values southwest annexation area. developer contributions, and potentially a CDA.
Concentrate Class A development in the Adjust zoning to allow for greater building heights. Pursue University Place downtown area in order to 1-10 Years greater public transit options to and from University Place. cluster office development. Pursue CDA funding for Class A office.
Pro-actively contact startup businesses and Conduct one-on-one meetings with existing, expanding 2. Establish major employers in the area to determine 1-2 Years businesses. Provide quarterly “business breakfast” meetings Orem as the their interest in relocating “Downtown.” and updates . employment hub Work with EDCUtah to recruit technology of Utah County companies to Orem; local incentives, such as Meet with EDCUtah’s representatives on a regular basis to 1 Year a CDA, will be required if State EDTIF funds assess opportunities. are used.
City staff to review policies from other communities and Develop a City policy regarding the use of 1 Year devise a policy for Orem. Coordinate with County and Alpine economic incentives School District.
67 OREM GENERAL PLAN
Figure 5.1 Implementation and Action Plan (continued) GOAL STRATEGY TIME ACTION
Establish a revolving low- interest General Fund revenues could be used to establish a fund; if loan fund for façade renovations and 1-10 years in a CDA area, then tax increment monies could capitalize the exterior improvements for properties fund. located on State Street . 3. Improve Increase the connectivity with Orem Blvd the visual Develop small area master plans for key areas in the City. through street connections that make places 5-10 Years and physical Center Street should be a priority. appearance of of a walkable scale. State Street General Fund revenues could be used to establish a revolving Retrofit the exteriors of shopping centers to 1-20 Years loan fund; if in a CDA area, then tax increment monies could have a more urban street frontage. capitalize the fund.
Make streetscape improvements to State 1-10 Years B & C Road Funds Special Assessment Area. Street. Develop a form-based code to transform 3-4 Develop architectural standards to improve the quality of new blocks of Center Street into a walkable Main 5-10 Years development. Street.
Retrofit exteriors of big box stores to keep General Fund revenues could be used to establish a revolving 4. Create a Civic sales tax base from large-scale retail, yet 5-10 Years loan fund; if in a CDA area, then tax increment monies could Center at Center bring a more urban environment to the area. capitalize the fund. Street Prioritize and focus initial incentives and 1-20 Years Strategically create CDA areas to clean up blight and make City assistance at key economic nodes along improvements along State Street. Use CDA increment to the State Street Corridor in order to obtain promote development at key sites. Focus improvements at a “cluster” of improvements that will spur key economic nodes. further improvements.
Pursue light rail alignment along Geneva Lobby UTA to align light rail along Geneva Road; demonstrate Road rather than through the interior 1-2 Years that it is a key focus of the City’s Economic Plan. o f V i n eya rd .
5. Redevelop and increase the Promote retail development on the east Contact grocery stores that do business in Utah to determine viability of the side of Geneva Road, neighborhood scale, “what it would take” to locate on Geneva Road. Provide Geneva Road such as a grocery store to draw from the 3-5 Years necessary public infrastructure Increase code enforcement “Wedge” area of increased buying power of the Geneva along Geneva Road. Assist in the aggregation of properties at Orem development key sites along Geneva Road.
Promote office and retail development at Assist in the aggregation of properties at the I-15 the I-15 interchanges where visibility is high 5-10 Years interchanges; contact existing property owners. and access is good.
Increase the reputation and image of Orem 6. Develop a new City through a new and vibrant marketing 1-2 years Prepare a marketing plan for the City image for Orem strategy.
68 ECONOMICS
Figure 5.1 Implementation and Action Plan (continued)
GOAL STRATEGY TIME ACTION Encourage development of a variety of cultural activities in the SCERA district, thereby creating an arts and entertainment 2-5 Years Contact existing arts and entertainment organizations 7. Increase cultural and district for the City; advertise the area as arts activity in the City the City’s “Arts District.” Add senior housing in the arts district, as Adjust zoning to allow for increased residential well as higher-density housing to increase 5-10 Years densities vitality in this district. Develop a small area master plan for this area; work 8. Increase connectivity Develop small-scale, walkable retail near with MAG to provide planning funds just as WFRC with Utah Valley UVU with a distinct sense of place–such as 2-5 Years does. Work with UVU to integrate campus with City University “Wolverine Hill.” and retail.
Pursue “one-of-a-kind: retail destinations, 9. Maintain Orem as the or highly popular retail outlets, such as Work closely with brokers such as Commerce to regional retail hub of Trader Joe’s or Field & Stream that will set 1-5 Years keep current on retail trends. Attend ICSC and bring Utah County Orem apart and add to the City’s image as marketing materials. “the place to be.”
10. Recapture lost sales Pursue development of a hotel either near Work with a hotel consultant to pursue hotel 1-2 Years tax leakage category UVU or at University Place. development.
Allow for higher-density housing and taller Strategically create CDA areas to clean up blight and 11. Develop and buildings at key intersections – Center make improvements along State Street. Use CDA strengthen key economic 1-20 Years Street, 800 North, etc., in order to create a increment to promote development at key sites. Focus nodes along State Street destination. improvements at key economic nodes.
Work with UTA, UDOT, and MAG to 12. Proactively pursue ensure Orem has a strong voice in transit development and decisions regarding transit planning and 1-5 Years Create CDAs at key sites to encourage TOD. alignment to benefit the alignment. Stay competitive with Vineyard City in providing regional transit within the City along economic nodes.
69 OREM GENERAL PLAN
"Orem is the regional retail hub of Utah County. This economic vitality is exciting to businesses and attractive to employers who are drawn to the strong workforce from area universities, the low cost of living, and the recreational opportunities in the City’s backyard."
70
The Orchard, University Place Mall ECONOMICS
71 OREM GENERAL PLAN
72 TRANSPORTATION
Transportation
6.1 Transportation Master Plan
6.2 Street Classification & 2040 Proposed Roadway Network
6.3 Access Management
6.4 Complete Streets
6.5 Transit
6.6 Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
6.7 Street Connection Master Plan
73 OREM GENERAL PLAN
6.1 Transportation Master Plan The performance of an existing street system can be quantified by assigning Levels of Service (LOS) Although population growth in Orem is expected to major roadways and intersections. LOS serves as to be moderate compared to other cities in Utah the traditional form of measurement of a roadway’s County, Orem will continue to be a regional attraction functionality. throughout the County. In 2040, it is expected that an average of 74% of all vehicles from outside the city LOS is determined by elements, such as: the number using the roadway network will stop somewhere in of lanes assigned to a roadway, the amount of traffic Orem. Utah Valley State University is another regional using the roadway, and the time of delay per vehicle attraction for college students, and as growth within traveling on the roadway and at intersections. Levels the University continues it will have an impact on the of service range from A (free flow where users are roadway network. virtually unimpeded by other traffic on the roadway) to F (traffic exceeds the operating capacity of the Due to growth within the City and the large roadway). In Orem, LOS D is the minimum standard for growth throughout the County, a comprehensive roadways and intersections (meaning 80% of capacity transportation plan was adopted in 2015. This plan is used during rush hour). incorporated the goals of the City regarding the transportation systems within our jurisdiction as Large development proposals should provide traffic well as those regional facilities maintained by UDOT, impact studies that identify existing LOS conditions UTA, Utah County, and neighboring communities. The and future projections on streets that will be impacted Orem Transportation Master Plan has been included by their proposal. This information will aid in reviewing in the appendix of this General Plan. Highlights from zoning requests and placing conditions on site plan this plan have also been included in this section. approvals. Figure 6.1 displays the 2040 Proposed Roadway Network, showing the street classifications 6.2 Street Classification & 2040 planned for the future. Proposed Roadway Network Street facilities in Orem are classified by the relative 6.3 Access Management amounts of through and land-access service they Mobility and land access should share an inverse provide. There are five main functional classifications relationship; meaning, as mobility increases land for roads: access decreases. The degree of allowable access for
• Principal Arterial (6-7 Lanes) properties is strongly related to the classification of • Major Arterial (4-5 Lanes) the street a property is located on. • Minor Arterial (2-3 Lanes) Local streets provide maximum access to private • Urban Collector (2-3 Lanes) property. Collector streets should have some access • Local (2 Lanes) 74 TRANSPORTATION
Figure 6.1 2040 Proposed Roadway Network
75 OREM GENERAL PLAN
restrictions to provide for efficient movement of more A complete street is comprised of many different traffic. Arterial streets should have significant access elements; these elements may include, but are not restrictions. For example, University Parkway restricts limited to: sidewalks, bike lanes, crosswalks, wide access to encourage increased east/west traffic flow shoulders, medians, bus pullouts, special bus lanes, and decrease the frequency of unsafe traffic incidents. raised crosswalks, audible pedestrian signals, sidewalk bulb-outs, and more. The elements that are used can 6.3.1 Access Management Agreements vary from project to project, but the end result is When access is being determined for properties still to achieve a connected network that is safe and located on Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) effective for all modes of travel. controlled roads, such as Geneva Road and State Street, it is important that the City work with UDOT to 6.5 Transit meet their access requirements. Alternative transportation modes play an integral role in alleviating traffic congestion. As Orem continues The City of Orem has entered into access management to develop and the population increases, these agreements with UDOT for Geneva Road and 800 alternative modes of transportation will have an North. The City is also working with UDOT on an access increasing role in the transportation system in Orem. management agreement for State Street, pending completion of the State Street Mobility Study. Orem should be actively involved in supporting transit as a viable and attractive alternative transportation 6.4 Complete Streets mode in the city. These planning and lobbying As part of the 2010 Orem City Bicycle and Pedestrian, efforts will assist in procuring the necessary funding the City adopted a Complete Streets policy. A and support to develop, implement, and maintain complete street is one that is designed and operated a sustainable transit system. The UTA bus system to safely accommodate all users, including: motorists, is versatile as routes and stops can be adjusted pedestrians, bicyclists, transit, and people of all ages as the demand and other factors require it. Close and abilities. coordination with UTA will improve bus service as well as reduce congestion along major roadways such as A Complete Streets policy causes transportation University Parkway and State Street. agencies to design and operate the entire right of way to encompass users of all types and to promote 6.5.1 Transit in Orem safe access and travel for the users. A complete street In 2018, The Utah Transit Authority opened Utah policy is put in place to ensure that the streets are County's first Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) line, known as safe for bicyclists, children, persons with disabilities, UVX (see Figure 6.2). This BRT line has large portions motorists, movers of commercial goods, pedestrians, of the route with dedicated bus lanes and platform users of public transportation, and seniors. 76 TRANSPORTATION
Figure 6.2 UVX, Utah County's FIrst BRT Line
77 OREM GENERAL PLAN
stations. In Orem, this route starts at the Frontrunner 1. Implement a Complete Streets Policy Station, which provides commuter rail service along 2. Complete a non-motorized transportation system the Wasatch Front. From the Frontrunner Station, network UVX travels along University Parkway through one of 3. Monitor the implementation of the Orem Bicycle and Orem's major commercial corridors, and heads into Pedestrian Plan Provo. 4. Reduce the vehicle miles traveled by single occupancy vehicles in the City of Orem In addition to BRT, there are plans to enhance bus 5. Integrate bicycling and walking into the transit system service on State Street. With the large amount of 6. Ensure citywide bicycle and pedestrian facilities are commercial development along the corridor as well clean, safe, accessible as the growing residential development, light rail is 7. Implement comprehensive education and another possibility in the future as the demand for encouragement programs targeted at all populations in greater transit services are warranted. the City 8. Increase enforcement on City streets and bikeways If light rail were to develop, the City would strongly 9. Provide safe and accessible routes for bicyclists and favor an alignment down State Street from the pedestrians of all ages and abilities. northern border south to University Parkway to connect with UVX. There are currently funds available Figure 6.3 shows the existing and future pedestrian to analyze the State Street corridor from American and bike paths in Orem identified in the Orem Bicycle Fork to Provo and determine the preferred alignment. and Pedestrian Plan and the Orem Parks, Recreation, Trails, and Open Space Master Plan. All updates since 6.6 Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan these plans were adopted are included on the map with The Orem Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan was adopted in the exception of a pedestrian bridge across I-15 that 2010 and represents a citizen driven plan to increase connects the inter-modal center to UVU. Although not the walkability and bike-ability of Orem. The plan can shown, a groundbreaking for this pedestrian bridge be found in the appendix of this General Plan. took place in 2018 and is expected to be completed in 2019. The vision of the plan is that Orem will eventually be one of the most bicycle and pedestrian friendly cities 6.7 Street Connection Plan in the State of Utah, and will be rated a "Platinum" One of the recommendations from the State Street Bicycle Friendly Community by the League of American Corridor Master Plan was to increase connectivity Bicyclists. Progress has been made as Orem was rated along State Street. Connectivity refers to the a "Bronze" Bicycle Friendly Community in 2018. The directness of links and the density of connections in a plan outlines a path forward based on the following transportation network. goals:
78 TRANSPORTATION
Figure 6.3 Pedestrian and Bike Path Plan
79 OREM GENERAL PLAN
One mile walk in two neighborhoods; the one on the left with more connectivity, the one on the right with less connectivity
A highly connective network has many short links, which is a series of more detailed maps depicting where numerous intersections, and minimal dead-ends. street connections will be added as redevelopment Connectivity is important in all of Orem for the occurs. following reason: While these maps currently reflect new street • Connectivity reduces travel time and creates shorter connections within proximity of State Street, routes, which ultimately reduces vehicle traffic additional planned street connections may be added • Connectivity lowers speeds and reduces accident in the future with the approval of the City Council. severity When new development occurs, site plans will be • Connectivity creates more highly valued street frontage required to preserve these planned connections as for retail and other commercial properties future right of way. • Connectivity provides greater emergency vehicle access and reduce emergency response times • Connectivity provides improved utility connections, easier maintenance, and more efficient trash and recycling pick up • Connectivity better accommodates transit use
For these reasons, the City Council adopted the Street Connection Plan, which is reflected inFigure 6.4. The appendix contains the full Street Connection Plan, 80 TRANSPORTATION
81 Figure 6.3 Street Connection Plan OREM GENERAL PLANPLAN
82 TRANSPORTATION
"Alternative transportation modes play an integral role in alleviating traffic congestion. As Orem continues to develop and the population increases, these alternative modes of transportation will have an increasing role in the transportation system in Orem."
83
Geneva Road & the Orem Front Runner Station OREM GENERAL PLAN
84 PARKS AND RECREATION
Parks & Recreation
7.1 Parks and Recreation Master Plan
7.2 Parks and Recreation Facilities
7.3 Future Planned Parks
85 OREM GENERAL PLAN
7.1 Parks and Recreation Master 7.2.1 Orem's Regional Parks Plan The largest types of parks are regional parks, which The City of Orem recognizes the need to provide parks serve the City and region with special amenities and and open space to enhance the quality of life for all features. The following are an inventory of regional Orem residents. There are numerous health benefits parks in Orem: associated with access to parks and opens space. • City Center Park - a 23.1-acre park in the heart of the Access to these types of spaces has been associated City that includes the recently-completed All-Together with better perceived general health, reduced stress Playground, the Orem Senior Friendship Center, an levels, reduced depression, and other benefits. arboretum, an outdoor stage, a number of baseball According to research, people who use public open and softball fields and a variety of passive recreation spaces are three times more likely to achieve the opportunities. recommended levels of physical activity. • Orem Community Park – a 43.7-acre park that includes In 2017, The City adopted the Orem Parks, Recreation, the Orem Fitness Center and a variety of active (sports- Trails and Open Space Master Plan (2016-2026). This oriented) and passive (non- sport focused) recreation plan addresses existing conditions, priorities, levels of opportunities (Alpine School District owns an additional service and other considerations of a comprehensive 6.4 acres here, which Orem maintains). parks, recreation and trail system. • Lakeside Sports Park- a 54.3-acre park near Utah Lake with a complex of multipurpose sport fields, and The plan also analyzes and assesses the full range of baseball/softball fields that serve the community and facilities required to meet future needs, and presents region (Vineyard owns an additional 9.9 acres here, goals, objectives and policies that reflect the City’s which Orem maintains). commitment to improving the quality of life for • Mt. Timpanogos Park – a 11.5-acre park located at the residents as it relates to parks and open spaces. This mouth of Provo Canyon which includes a large hosting plan can be found in the appendix. center for receptions and events, numerous pavilions and access to the Provo River Trail. A new dog park was 7.2 Parks and Recreation Facilities recently built in one of the park’s natural open areas, The City of Orem is fortunate to have a wide range which is the only dedicated dog park in the City. of parks dispersed throughout the community. • Nielsen’s Grove – a 20.6-acre park located in the Established in 1961 with the construction of Scera southwestern portion of the City on the site ofthe Park, the Orem parks system has grown to encompass original homestead of Danish immigrant Jorgen Nielson. nearly 25 parks today. Figure 7.1 identifies the City’s This unique park includes replicas of historic buildings, existing parks and open spaces, including existing a pond, a reflective pool and fountain, formal gardens, school fields. picnic pavilions, and a variety of open lawn areas and passive recreation zones. 86 PARKS AND RECREATION
Figure 7.1 Existing Parks and Recreation Facilities
87 OREM GENERAL PLAN
• Palisade Park – a 21.4-acre park located in the These thirteen neighborhood parks encompass 64 northeastern portion of the City with a variety of active acres of land in total. They range from 2.8 to 11 acres and passive recreation amenities. It also includes a in extent, and average just under 5 acres in size. splash pad, which was completed in 2017. • SCERA Park – a 25.0 acre park in the southeastern 7.2.3 Mini Parks portion of the City. The park includes the SCERA Outdoor Mini parks are typically less than 1.5 acres in size and Pool, SCERA Shell (an outdoor amphitheater), a disc golf usually have some improved amenities. They do not course and a variety of active and passive recreation typically include restrooms. This type of park usually amenities. serves a small residential area, often helping to fill a service gap not provide by larger parks. Cherapple Together these seven regional parks owned by the City Park, which is 0.2 acres in extent, is the only mini park encompass 199.6 acres. It should be noted that an in the City. additional 6.4-acres of park land owned by the Alpine School District is located at Community Park, and 9.9 7.2.4 Special Use Parks acres owned by the City of Vineyard are at Lakeside Special use parks vary greatly in extent and tend to Sports Park. Although some of this land is maintained serve a special interest or have a non-traditional by the City of Orem and is used by Orem residents, it park focus. Orem has two of these parks. The first is is not under the control of the City and the future use Cemetery Field (16.0-acres), a portion of which has cannot be guaranteed. As a result, the acreage was been used for informal recreation in the past, but not included in the total above. is slated to be utilized for interments by the Orem 7.2.2 Neighborhood Parks Cemetery within the next year. The area will still likely continue to be used for passive recreation like walking Neighborhood parks are smaller than regional parks, and jogging along the pathways in the future. typically 1.5 to 10 acres in size, and provide large amenities that are focused on the needs and interests The second special use park is Orchard Park. Composed of the surrounding neighborhood. Typical amenities solely of a single small pavilion maintained by the include grassy play areas, restrooms, pavilions, City, the park is located on the grounds of Orchard playgrounds, sport courts, sports fields, picnic areas Elementary, which is owned by the Alpine School and seating, walking paths and perimeter trails. District, and is closed during school hours.
The neighborhood parks in the City include: Bonneville 7.2.5 Other Parks and Open Space Park, Cascade Park, Cherryhill Park, Foothill Park, There are two private recreation sites that Orem Geneva Park, Hillcrest Park, Northridge Park, Sharon maintains which offer some athletics opportunities: Park, Skate Park, Springwater Park, Timpanogos IHC Field (5.3 acres) and US Synthetic Field (2.9 acres). Detention Field, Westmore Park and Windsor Park. While the City programs some activities on the IHC 88 PARKS AND RECREATION
Field, it does not program US Synthetic Field. acres, making it a future Mini Park. The preliminary concept enhances the site as a more formal entry to The other major park/recreation facility in the City the Murdock Canal Trail with improved landscaping is the Sleepy Ridge Golf Course (163.2 acres). The and amenities for trail users. property is owned by Orem but leased to a private company for operation. The most recent proposed park for the City is a bike skills park near Mt. Timpanogos Park (approximately The City maintains approximately 42.8 acres of 4.6 acres). The City anticipates significant volunteer parkways, roundabouts, freeway interchanges and participation with this effort. welcome sign areas. While these provide a level of openness and beautification, and in some cases, 7.3.1 Future Needs are part of flood control infrastructure, they are not With limited available vacant land and the primary programmed for recreation activities and include no opportunities to develop significant parks limited park amenities. to the Southwest Annexation Area (where there is only limited need), a new vision is required to meet 7.3 Future Park Space the future needs for parks. While the development The City recently acquired additional land at Lakeside of a large regional park is certainly one possible Park (1.3 acres) just west of the existing park. The land component, a range of small urban parks should be will be used to expand the existing park. considered for meeting the bulk of needs. This model supports incremental park development as part of The southwest area of Orem is slated to add a 3.5 acre urban redevelopment and infill, providing a finer grain neighborhood park in the future, though no master of mini parks, community gardens and plaza parks plan has been developed yet. The site is located in an to complement the large active parks that currently area of the City that is well-served by existing parks, prevail. with Nielsen’s Grove, Westmore, and Cherryhill parks located within a mile. However, the City already owns As described in the State Street Corridor Master Plan, the site, and it is a beautiful piece of open space in one of the plan objectives is to “Develop a Strong an existing residential neighborhood. Formalizing Open Space Network Along State Street.” The plan development of this park land would enhance the specifically mentions plazas, pocket parks (classified neighborhood, contribute to an increase in the quality as Mini Parks in this plan), event venues and signature of life for residents and ensure this space remains as gathering spaces, utilizing a combination of public and publicly-accessible park land. privately-owned open space.
The City has been moving forward with master planning for the 800 North Trailhead Park, where the Murdock Trail begins. This small site is only 0.05 89 OREM GENERAL PLANPLAN
90 PARKS AND RECREATION
"The City of Orem recognizes the need to provide parks and open space to enhance the quality of life or all Orem residents. There are numerous health benefits associated with access to parks and opens space. Access to these types of spaces has been associated with better perceived general health, reduced stress levels, reduced depression, and other benefits."
91
Orem All-Together Playground OREM GENERAL PLAN
92 PUBLIC SERVICES
Public Services
8.1 Facilities and Services
8.2 Impact Fees
8.3 Educational Support
93 OREM GENERAL PLAN
8.1 Facilities and Services as well as programs for those with special needs. Public services includes basic facilities and municipal 8.1.3 Public Works services that residents expect the City of Orem to Located at 1450 West, 550 North, the Public Works provide in exchange for the taxes and fees which Facility houses the Public Works Department, are collected. The City provides a range of services which includes Traffic Coordination, Traffic Signs, including sewer, water, street maintenance, snow Cemetery, Fleet Services, Facility Maintenance, removal, the public library, fire and EMS, police, and Parks, Storm Water, Streets, Water Supply, Water other services. Distribution, Blue Stakes, Waste Water Collection, 8.1.1 City Administration Water Reclamation, and Volunteer Services. The Public Works Department is committed to providing The City of Orem’s Administration is located at the the highest quality and lowest cost infrastructure City Center complex at 56 North State Street. The for the citizens of Orem. complex is comprised of four buildings, including the City Center Administration building, the Orem Water sources from the City include two springs, City Library, the State Court and City of Orem nine wells, and surface water from the Provo River, Justice Court buildings, and the Public Safety Deer Creek, and Jordanelle Reservoir. Each year a building. Departments located in the City Center Water Quality Report is delivered to all residents. Administration Building are the City Management, Water crews maintain over 450 miles of water main Administrative Services, Development Services, and service lines. The Water Reclamation Facility is and Legal Services. responsible for the daily operation and maintenance of the Water Reclamation Plant. They also maintain 8.1.2 City Library over 270 miles of lines, transporting wastewater to Located at 58 N. State Street in the north end of the plant. the City Center complex, the Library has approximately 366,000 items including all types 8.1.4 Public Safety of resources, with a circulation of over 1.5 million. The Department of Public Safety, headquartered Orem also has a reciprocal borrowing program with at 95 East Center Street, provides police, fire and the Provo City Library, allowing residents from both emergency medical services. The Department cities to use their library card in either library. Many strives to inspire confidence in community safety, programs and events are held at or sponsored by security, and well-being. The mission statement the Library including weekly children’s story-time, reads: “In partnership with the community, provide cultural programs, music events, plays, lectures, and professional, quality and caring public safety a range of other events and activities for youth and services to create a safe environment and high adults. Spanish speaking programs are also offered quality of life for the citizens of Orem.” 94 PUBLIC SERVICES
The Orem Police Department serves Orem through newly annexed area of the City known as the Southwest the dedicated work of 82 sworn police officers, 41 Annexation Area). These fees were developed in civilian employees, and 20 citizen volunteers. The accordance with Utah law and with the input of the department is made up of three separate divisions: public and in consultation with representatives of Patrol, Investigations, and Support Services. the development community. These impact fees will be charged on new construction and will allow the The Fire Division staffs four stations to provide City to keep overall tax rates lower while maintaining coverage to the citizens of Orem. Station #1 is the level of service we currently enjoy in our parks, located at 300 East 1000 South, Station #2 is located recreation, water, sewer, storm drainage, police, fire, at 911 North Main Street, and Station #3 is at 225 and transportation systems. North 1200 West. The fourth station is located in Lindon where we partnership with Lindon for fire 8.3 Educational Support and emergency medical services. Lindon City is currently building a new Public Safety Building that will It is the objective of the City of Orem to support, also serve as a fully staffed and functioning fire station where possible, the educational institutions within for the residents of Lindon City and north Orem. the community, to emphasize the importance of education for all citizens.
8.2 Impact Fees A close working relationship needs to be maintained An impact fee is a one-time fee charged by local with the Alpine School District to encourage and governments to mitigate the impact on local facilitate the improvement of elementary and infrastructure caused by new development. Growth secondary education in Orem. The City also needs to in the form of new homes and businesses requires actively participate in and support the growth and expansion or enlargement of public facilities to development of Utah Valley University, to understand maintain the same level and quality of public services the needs and impacts of this continually growing for all residents of a community. Impact fees help campus. fund expansion of public facilities necessary to accommodate new growth.
Impact fees are determined through a complex analysis of a local government’s existing level of public services, future needs due to growth, and the anticipated cost to maintain the existing level of service.
In 2018, the Mayor and City Council adopted impact fees for new development city-wide (previously, the Mayor and City Council had adopted impact fees for a 95 OREM GENERAL PLANPLAN
"The Public Works Department is committed to providing the highest quality and lowest cost infrastructure for the citizens of Orem."
96
Orem Public Works Building PUBLIC SERVICES
97 OREM GENERAL PLAN
98 APPENDIX
Appendix
Appendix A: Orem Land Use Map
Appendix B: Orem Zoning Map
Appendix C: Orem Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
Appendix D: Orem State Street Corridor Master Plan
Appendix E: Orem Economic Development Strategic Plan
Appendix F: Orem Transportation Master Plan
Appendix G Orem Parks, Recreation, Trails, and Open Space Master Plan
Appendix H: Orem Street Connection Plan
Appendix I: Orem Moderate-Income Housing Plan
Appendix Z: Neighborhood Plans
1. Canyon View, Orchard, & Cascade Neighborhood Plan
2. Orem North & Sharon Park Neighborhood Plan
3. Northridge, Heatheridge, & Windsor Neighborhood Plan
4. Aspen & Timpview Neighborhood Plan
5. Geneva Heights, Orem Park, & Suncrest Neighborhood Plan
99
OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY 100 2018
OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
AUGUST 2018
Prepared for: The City of Orem
56 North State Street Orem, Utah
Prepared by: Orem City Planning Division
J. Kirby Snideman, AICP - Long Range City Planner Jason Bench, AICP - Planning Division Manager Bill Bell - Community Development Director
101
2 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction ...... 5 The Purpose of this Study ...... 5 What is Affordable Housing? ...... 5 The City of Orem ...... 5 Orem’s Early History ...... 6 1940's to the 1970's ...... 6 1970's to the 2000's ...... 7 2000's to The Future...... 7 Commercial Activity and State Street ...... 9 Residential Zoning in Orem ...... 10 Student Housing in Orem ...... 10 Multifamily in Orem ...... 10 Senior Overlay Zone ...... 11 The State Street Mixed-Use Districts ...... 11 Housing for All Life Stages ...... 11 Demographic Trends ...... 12 Population and Households ...... 12 Population and Age ...... 12 Educational Attainment and School Enrollment ...... 14 Income Trends ...... 16 Housing Trends ...... 17 Housing Type Trends ...... 17 Age of Existing Housing ...... 18 Housing Occupancy Trends ...... 19 Owner Occupied Housing Value Trends ...... 19 Employment Trends ...... 21 Unemployment Rates ...... 21 Employment and Labor Force ...... 22 Wage and Employment Trends by Private Industries Tracked ...... 22 Local Employers ...... 24 Housing Market Trends – For-Sale Homes ...... 25 Sales Trends - Single Family Homes ...... 27 Sales Trends - Condos, Townhomes, Other ...... 28 Housing Market Trends – Rentals ...... 29 Multifamily Occupancy ...... 29 Rental Rates ...... 29 New Construction Trends ...... 30 Construction Underway, Planned, or In Application ...... 31 Measuring Affordability ...... 32 Conclusions and Recommendations ...... 34 Explore Public/Private Partnerships for Affordable Housing ...... 34 Inclusionary Zoning ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. Studying Lot Size and Housing Unit Size Minimums ...... 34 Rediscover the Missing Middle ...... 34 Educate Residents ...... 35 Explore a Community Land Trust ...... 35 Re-Invest in Orem’s Older Neighborhoods ...... 35 Appendix A: ...... 37 Multifamily Occupancy in Orem ...... 37 102
3 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
FIGURES
Figure 2: Historic View of the Stratton Orchard and Strawberry Fields in the 1920's ...... 6 Figure 3: Historic View of Geneva Steel in the 1940's ...... 7 Figure 4: Undeveloped Land in Orem ...... 8 Figure 5: Orem Population as a Share of Utah County from 1900 to 2016 ...... 9 Figure 6: Percent of Population by Age, 2018 ...... 13 Figure 7: Population and Householders Age 55 and Older, 2018 ...... 14 Figure 8: Household Income Trends, 2000 to 2018 ...... 16 Figure 9: Age of Existing Housing Stock, 2000 to 2018 ...... 18 Figure 10: Owner Occupied Housing Values, 2016 ...... 20 Figure 11: Unemployment Rates, 2010 to June 2016 ...... 22 Figure 12: Orem Employment and Labor Force, 2010 to 2018 ...... 22 Figure 13: Orem Employment Totals by Industries Tracked, 2015 ...... 23 Figure 14: Orem Total Housing Units Sold by Price Range, 2010 to 2018 YTD ...... 26 Figure 15: Utah County Total Housing Units Sold by Price Range, 2010 to 2018 YTD ...... 26 Figure 16: Orem Single Family Sales Volume and Median Price, 2000 to 2018 YTD ...... 27 Figure 17: Utah County Single Family Sales Volume and Median Price, 2000 to 2018 YTD ...... 27 Figure 18: Orem Condo, Townhome, Other Sales Volume and Median Price, 2000 to 2018 YTD...... 28 Figure 19: Utah County Condo, Townhome, Other Sales Volume and Median Price, 2000 to 2018 YTD ...... 28 Figure 20: Share of Total Rented Units Based on Occupancy of the Complex ...... 29 Figure 21: Single Family and Multifamily Permits Issued, 2000 to 2018 YTD ...... 30
TABLES
Table 1: Orem Households Income Distribution Overview ...... 5 Table 2: Population and Households, 1990 to 2018 ...... 12 Table 3: Population by Age, 2000 to 2018 ...... 13 Table 4: Households where the Householder is Age 55 Years and Older, 2018 ...... 14 Table 5: Educational Attainment in Orem, 2000 to 2018 ...... 14 Table 6: School District Enrollment in Orem Public Schools ...... 15 Table 7: Household Income Trends, 2000 to 2018 ...... 17 Table 8: Housing Type Trends, 2000 to 2018 ...... 18 Table 9: Age of Existing Housing Stock, 2000 to 2018 ...... 19 Table 10: Housing Occupancy Trends, 2000 to 2018 ...... 19 Table 11: Housing Value Trends, 2000 to 2018 ...... 20 Table 12: Unemployment Rates, 2010 to June 2018 ...... 21 Table 13: Orem Employment Trends by Industries Tracked, 2005 to 2015 ...... 22 Table 14: Major Employers in Orem, 2018 ...... 24 Table 15: Total Housing Units Sold by Price Range, 2010 to 2018 YTD ...... 25 Table 16: Single Family and Multifamily Permits Issued, 2000 to 2018 YTD ...... 30 Table 17: Residential Units, Construction Underway, Planned, or In Application...... 31
103
4 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
INTRODUCTION
The Purpose of this Study The purpose of this study is to understand the current challenges in the housing market and examine the options available to provide a reasonable opportunity for a variety of housing, including moderate income housing. Strategies that will encourage affordable housing in Orem are recommended, and this plan will be the basis for ongoing discussions by the City Council to develop a moderate-income housing plan and ensure that Orem remains a City where everyone is welcome. In addition, this study will be a general resource for the latest information related to population growth and housing needs for the City of Orem.
What is Affordable Housing? The term affordable housing is used to describe housing, rental or owner-occupied, that is affordable no matter what one's income is. Generally, housing costs at or below 30% of one's income is deemed be affordable. Moderate income housing is defined by Utah Code Section 10-9a-103(21) as “housing occupied or reserved for occupancy by households with a gross household income equal to or less than 80% of the median income of the county in which the city is located.” The following table displays the households in Orem based on their HAMFI – HUD Area Median Family Income.
Table 1: Orem Households Income Distribution Overview
Orem Income Distribution Overview Owner Renter Total Total Households 15,870 10,280 26,150 Household Income <= 30% HAMFI 885 2,210 3,095 Household Income >30% to <=50% HAMFI 1,270 2,075 3,345 Household Income >50% to <=80% HAMFI 2,495 2,560 5,055 Household Income >80% to <=100% HAMFI 1,825 1,130 2,955 Household Income >100% HAMFI 9,395 2,305 11,700
Source: U.S. Dept. of Housing & Urban Development. (2018). Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, 2011-2015
The HAMFI is calculated according to percentages of median incomes by family size and location based on the census’s American Community Survey. The limits fall into three categories: low (80 percent of the median income), very low (50 percent), and extremely low (30 percent of the median income or the federal poverty line, whichever is greater). In Orem 5,055 households are considered low income, 3,345 are considered very low income, and 3,095 households are considered extremely low income.
The City of Orem Orem is the fifth largest city in Utah, with an estimated 2018 population of 100,171. Orem is located at the heart of Utah County and the Provo-Orem Metropolitan Area (consisting of both Utah and Juab Counties), one of the fastest growing metro areas in the Nation. Although the area is experiencing considerable growth, particularly in the northern end of the County, Orem’s growth is rather moderate. Over the last decade and a half, Orem has grown at roughly a 1% annual average growth rate, compared to over 3% for Utah County. 104
5 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
Orem’s Early History The City of Orem was organized in 1919 and named after Walter C. Orem, President of the Salt Lake and Utah Railroad. Prior to its incorporation, Orem was known as the “Provo Bench,” and its fertile orchards and farmlands added to Provo’s early reputation as the “Garden City of Utah.” Farms, orchards, and open fields dominated the landscape, consisting of large-acre homesteads and a few small businesses supported by local trade. To facilitate the movement of people and agricultural products, train tracks were laid down through what is now Orem Boulevard, connecting Utah Valley with Salt Lake Valley, and by extension, the rest of the country.
Figure 1: Historic View of the Stratton Orchard and Strawberry Fields in the 1920's
1940's to the 1970's The completion of Geneva Steel in the mid 1940's marked a turning point for the City. Orem began to see significant growth fueled by the proximity of new jobs and industry. Contrary to popular perception, Orem did not develop as an exclusive "bedroom community" for a certain class of people or a narrow set of uses. The City's first zoning ordinance was adopted in 1946, creating zones within the City for multiple and varied uses with a range of densities.
With new jobs came an increase in home building activity. Fields and farms were sold into mostly small homes on small lots for working class residents. Multifamily homes were also built during this time, with duplexes, quadplexes, and medium density complexes mixed throughout the community, offering more affordable options. 105
6 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
Figure 2: Historic View of Geneva Steel in the 1940's
1970's to the 2000's As the population in the larger region increased, Orem became the commercial center of Utah County. Having one long commercial corridor rather than a downtown gave Orem an advantage in attracting auto-oriented retail businesses. As well, it provided a relatively large area of commercially zoned land for businesses to spread out. The University mall opened for business in 1973, further solidifying Orem as a retail hub. Major institutional uses such as schools and hospitals also located in the City, taking advantage of Orem's central location within the County.
The economic growth experienced during this period was an engine for additional housing construction. However, new single-family homes built during this time tended to be larger, on larger lots, and in larger subdivisions. As a result, much of Orem's agricultural land was sold and developed into low density residential during this period. Unlike older neighborhoods that contained a wider mix of uses and types of housing, these newer subdivisions tended to be more homogeneous and strictly single family detached. As a consequence, the demand and supply for multifamily housing was concentrated in larger, higher density complexes.
2000's to The Future
There is very little undeveloped land remaining in Orem. As of 2018, undeveloped land is estimated at 889 acres and accounts for less than 8% of the total land area in Orem. Of that amount, an estimated 378 acres, or 3% of the Orem total, is currently zoned residential. It is expected that most or all of this remaining residential land will develop as low density residential. Under average occupancy rates, this would only allow for roughly 5,000 new
106
7 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY residents. In contrast, over the next 40 years, Utah County is expected to add roughly one million new residents. The majority of this growth is expected to come from the natural increase of Utah residents.
Figure 3: Undeveloped Land in Orem
Source: Orem City Planning Division
With the supply of housing constrained in the City and also in the County, Orem’s property values have continued to increase year over year. Currently the median home price in Orem is estimated at just under $250K and the median list price of homes for sale at roughly $330K.
Due to the decreasing availability of undeveloped land, and in response to demand for more affordable housing options, developers and homebuilders have showed increasing interest in recent years for higher density developments. Like the new single-family subdivisions of the 1970’s, the higher density developments of today have some concerned, despite making up less than 5% of the housing units in Orem.
107
8 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
While some see any growth as negative, most current residents recognize that growth has been an overall positive part of Orem’s history. Feedback from recent public outreach indicates that the majority of residents are supportive of additional growth as long as it is well planned and strategically located.
Commercial Activity and State Street Over the latter half of the 20th century, Orem became the commercial center of Utah County. This happened for two primary reasons: the State Street retail corridor and population growth.
Orem's first zoning ordinance was adopted on April 10th, 1946. Previous to the adoption, there was a discussion about creating a central business zone for a future Orem downtown. Due to competing commercial interests at multiple locations along the State Highway (State Street), it was decided that instead of creating a central business zone, the entire State Highway corridor in Orem would be zoned C-2 (general) commercial. Having one long commercial corridor rather than a downtown gave Orem an advantage in attracting auto-oriented retail businesses. As well, it provided a relatively large area of commercially zoned land for businesses to develop.
As explained previously, with the construction of the Geneva Steel plant, Orem began a transformation from an agricultural community to an employment center. Other industries, business, and institutions also located in Orem to take advantage of the existing labor pool and to benefit from the central location within Utah County.
Figure 4: Orem Population as a Share of Utah County from 1900 to 2016
30.0% Orem's Total Population 100,171 97,499 100 K 25.6% 24.0% 22.9% 88,328 Orem's Share of Utah County Population 84,324 25.0% 80 K 18.7% 67,561 20.0% 17.2% 17.1% 16.5% 60 K 52,399 15.0% 10.2% 40 K 10.0% Orem's Populaiton Orem's 25,729 5.1% 4.1% 3.9% 18,394 20 K 2.8% 5.0% 2.1% 8,351
692 1,064 1,664 1,915 2,914 Population County ofShare Orem's Utah 0 K 0.0% 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 2018 Source: US Census / American Community Survey, Orem City Planning Division
In 1950, Orem had 8,351 residents and represented roughly one tenth of the population in Utah County. By 2000, Orem had grown to 84,324 residents and made up nearly one quarter of the County's population. With such a large share of the County's population, many businesses located in Orem to serve the local population and also to attract patrons from surrounding Cities.
Although the City has continued to grow, since 1990, Orem's share of the County's population has decreased. Most cities in the County are now large enough to have their own local retail, and a few have become regional retail hubs that compete directly with Orem. This, combined with the trends of increased online sales and 108
9 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY experiential shopping (where shoppers prefer to spend more money in places that are engaging, pedestrian friendly, and have amenities) has led to a decline in some parts along State Street.
Residential Zoning in Orem The City has eleven zoning classifications which can be used for residential development which range from 5,000 square foot lots to five acre lots. They are R5 (5,000 sq. ft. residential); R6 (6,000 sq. ft. residential); R6.5 (6,500 sq. ft. residential); R7.5 (7,500 sq. ft. residential); R8 (8,000 sq. ft. residential); R12 (12,000 sq. ft. residential); R20 (20,000 sq. ft. residential); OS1 (1 acre residential); OS5 (5 acre residential); PRD (Planned Residential Development); and PD (Planned Development).
These zones are designed to meet the wide range of housing needs of the residents of the City. Each of the zones is intended to provide well-designed residential development with compatible uses as outlined in the zoning ordinance. Residential uses that may be permitted in each zone include single-family dwellings, accessory apartments, duplexes, multi-family units, condominiums, and townhomes. The OS1 and OS5 zones are large lot compatible but are only typically used as a holding zone upon annexation. The bulk of the residential zoning is the City is classified as the R8 zone which encompasses 5,247 acres of the City’s 11, 678 acres or 45% of the City.
Student Housing in Orem One of the growing housing needs in Orem is for students. Utah Valley University is continuing to grow, and a larger share of students are desiring to live near campus as opposed to commuting from further away. Designated areas in proximity to Utah Valley University have been established for student housing. These designated areas will reduce car trips, make student life more affordable, and discourage demand for family housing in residential neighborhoods to be converted into student housing (and adversely impact housing affordability). The accommodation for student housing development has been made in Orem utilizing planned development zones and the Student Housing Overlay zone. The zones allow for more increased occupancy and greater density, which has encouraged affordability for the student population.
Multifamily in Orem Under past zoning ordinances the City allowed multi-family units in zones such as the C2 (commercial) or the R-2 and R-3 which are no longer in use. The ‘R’ zones under the current Code do not permit multi-family units unless approved as a Special Exception for Multifamily Dwelling as outlined in Article 22-21 of the Orem Code. A house with an accessory apartment is not considered to be a multi-family unit. The PRD zone, PD zone, and accessory apartments are now used to provide opportunities for multi-family housing which help to meet the housing needs of moderate income families. The City currently has an estimated 800 legal accessory apartments.
The City recently approved an overlay zone to assists income restricted seniors. The Affordable Senior Housing (ASH) overlay allows up to four units to be constructed on a single parcel. The tenancy of each unit is restricted to those over age 60 and at or less than 80% of the median income of the Orem/Provo MSA. After the Code was amended to include this zone, three ASH developments (12 units) have been approved for development since the ordinance was approved in 2012.
109
10 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
Senior Overlay Zone In 2012 the City approved an overlay zone to assists income restricted seniors. The Affordable Senior Housing (ASH) overlay allows up to four units to be constructed on a single parcel. The tenancy of each unit is restricted to those over age 60 and at or less than 80% of the median income of the Orem/Provo MSA. Through this ordinance, the City has added roughly 100 new affordable senior housing units, some of which are owned and operated by the Utah County Housing Authority.
The State Street Mixed-Use Districts The State Street Corridor Master Plan, which involved thousands of Orem residents through meetings and outreach, proposed five mixed-use districts along State Street where future high-density development could be concentrated. Creating this Districts will allow for new investment and redevelopment along State Street while also allowing for strategically located high density development. This will allow the City to continue to grow and help alleviate the demand for new housing in Orem. Another benefit is that single family neighborhoods will be preserved by discouraging high density development in those areas of the City.
Housing for All Life Stages Orem has adopted the slogan of Family City, USA. When some envision a family, they think of a father and mother with children. But today’s families come in many shapes and sizes, and as individuals and couples age, their definition of family may change.
Orem seeks to be a city that is friendly for families at all of life’s stages. To accomplish this, a variety of housing options need to be supplied. When a young individual leaves home to study at Utah Valley University, they need to find student housing. If that individual decides to get married, they will seek an affordable place for a young couple. If that couple decides to have children, a larger home will be sought. When those children leave, that couple may wish to downsize. And if a partner dies, a widow or widower may prefer to live in a senior community or assisted living facility where they can find support.
Orem is greatly benefited by the contribution of its long-term residents. These are the residents that often donate countless hours and make meaningful contributions. To ensure these residents can stay long-term, it is important that the City make plans to allow for a variety of housing for all life stages.
110
11 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS
Understanding the demographic trends for the area is an important element in assessing the market demand for new housing. Past, present and future demographic figures were collected and estimated by utilizing data from the following sources: US Census, American Community Survey, Nielsen/Claritas 2016 Estimates – PCensus for ArcView (hereafter referred to as “PCensus”), Bureau of Labor Statistics, and data collected by the Orem Planning Division.
Population and Households The table below provides population and household counts for 1990, 2000, 2010, as well as estimates for 2018, covering Orem, Utah County, Utah State, and the United States. The first four columns with data provide the population and household counts and estimates. The last three columns provide a relative comparison for how much each geography has grown—looking at the annual average growth rate (AAGR).
Table 2: Population and Households, 1990 to 2018
Population 1990 Census 2000 Census 2010 Census 2018 Estimate AAGR '90-'00 AAGR '00-'10 AAGR '10-'18
Orem 67,821 84,324 88,328 100,181 2.2% 0.5% 1.6%
Utah County 263,590 368,536 516,564 613,211 3.4% 3.4% 2.2% Utah State 1,722,850 2,233,169 2,763,885 3,127,752 2.6% 2.2% 1.6% United States 248,709,873 281,421,906 308,745,538 326,533,070 1.2% 0.9% 0.7%
Households 1990 Census 2000 Census 2010 Census 2018 Estimate AAGR '90-'00 AAGR '00-'10 AAGR '10-'18
Orem 17,660 23,382 25,822 28,605 2.8% 1.00% 1.29%
Utah County 70,168 99,937 140,602 168,210 3.6% 3.47% 2.27% Utah State 537,273 701,281 877,692 999,462 2.7% 2.27% 1.64% United States 91,947,410 105,480,101 116,716,292 123,942,960 1.4% 1.02% 0.75%
AAGR = Annual Average Growth Rate ((FV/PV)^(1/n)) – 1) Source: US Census, ACS, Nielsen/Claritas 2018 Estimates – PCensus for ArcView (hereafter referred to as PCensus), Orem Planning Division
As can be seen, Orem has grown at a rate slower than Utah County for the last few decades. This is due to the fact there is little remaining undeveloped land in Orem, whereas other parts of Utah County, particularly the northern part, have large tracts of undeveloped land that are currently experiencing significant new growth.
It is interesting to note that households in Orem and Utah County have generally grown at a rate faster than the population. Gaining more households than population occurs when there is an overall decrease in the number of persons per household—which is the trend in most places across the country. Couples are having fewer children than in previous decades, and there are more single person households.
Population and Age The following table contains a breakdown of the 2000 and 2018 populations for Orem and Utah County by age range. Total population, median age, and the percentage change from 2000 to 2018 are also presented. The
111
12 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY accompanying chart displays the 2018 percentages for age ranges and includes data for the State of Utah and the United States, as well. Orem and Utah County had a similar age profile in 2000.
In 2018, Orem showed a an increase in the share of residents aged 25 to 34 while the County saw a decrease. This can likely be explained by growth in Utah Valley University and an increase in the young single professionals who have congregated in the more urban areas of the County. Another interesting trend is the increase in the median age for both the City and the County. This is a trend that is occurring in many areas of the country as Americans are living longer and more often aging in place rather than relocating to retirement communities. Compared to the County, Orem saw a greater increase in the share of share of residents in all age ranges 55+.
Table 3: Population by Age, 2000 to 2018
Orem Utah County Population By Age 2000 2018 Change 2000 2018 Change Total Population 84,324 100,181 18.8% 368,536 613,211 66.4% Age 0 to 4 10.6% 8.9% -1.7% 11.0% 9.9% 0.0% Age 5 to 9 9.2% 8.1% -1.1% 9.2% 9.7% -0.5% Age 10 to 14 9.3% 8.2% -1.2% 8.5% 9.1% -0.3% Age 15 to 17 6.3% 5.0% -1.3% 5.4% 5.1% -1.0% Age 18 to 20 6.9% 5.9% -1.0% 8.6% 6.4% -1.0% Age 21 to 24 10.6% 9.2% -1.4% 12.4% 9.8% 0.1% Age 25 to 34 14.8% 16.2% 1.4% 15.2% 14.0% 1.0% Age 35 to 44 11.0% 12.9% 1.9% 10.6% 12.8% -1.9% Age 45 to 54 9.2% 7.9% -1.3% 8.0% 8.7% -0.9% Age 55 to 64 5.3% 7.9% 2.6% 4.8% 6.7% 3.2% Age 65 to 74 3.6% 5.8% 2.2% 3.4% 4.6% 2.1% Age 75 to 84 2.4% 2.9% 0.5% 2.2% 2.3% -0.7% Age 85 and over 0.9% 1.2% 0.3% 0.8% 0.8% -0.1% Median Age 24.0 28.0 16.7% 23.4 25.0 6.9%
Source: US Census, American Community Survey, PCensus, Orem Planning Division
Figure 5: Percent of Population by Age, 2018 20.0% Orem Utah County Utah State United States 15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0% 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-17 18-20 21-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75-84 85+
Source: US Census, American Community Survey, PCensus, Orem Planning Division 112
13 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
The following table provides the number and share of households where the householder is age 55 years or older. In Orem, householders 55+ make up over a third of all households. The chart below the table shows that despite being over a third of all householders in Orem, 55+ residents make up less than 20% of the total population. This is due to the fact that most 55+ households are made up of one or two members, while many younger households usually have more (due to children living at home).
Table 4: Households where the Householder is Age 55 Years and Older, 2018
Orem Utah County Utah State United States Total households 28,605 168,210 999,462 123,942,960 Householder Age 55+ 9,969 50,581 375,598 56,592,356 Percent of Total 34.9% 30.1% 37.6% 45.7%
Source: US Census, American Community Survey, PCensus, Orem Planning Division
Figure 6: Population and Householders Age 55 and Older, 2018 50.0% Population 55+ Households 55+ 40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0% Orem Utah County Utah State United States
Source: US Census, American Community Survey, PCensus Educational Attainment and School Enrollment The following table provides information regarding educational attainment in Orem. The total number and share of residents age 25 and older by educational attainment is displayed for both 2000 and 2018. Noteworthy observations include the following: • Educational attainment has generally increased from 2000 to 2018. • The number of individuals with a bachelor’s degree increased by 3,949 and the number with a graduate or professional degree increased by 3,295. These typically represent residents with higher incomes. This also demonstrates that much of the new growth in Orem is from young educated professionals.
Table 5: Educational Attainment in Orem, 2000 to 2018
% 2000 2018 Estimate Educational Attainment Change Number % Share Number % Share '00 - '18 Population 25 Years and Older 39,795 100.0% 54,879 100.0% 37.9% Less than 9th Grade 994 2.5% 1,849 3.4% 86.1% Some High School, No Diploma 2,408 6.1% 3,293 6.0% 36.7% High School Graduate (or GED) 6,154 15.5% 8,852 16.1% 43.8% 113
14 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
% 2000 2018 Estimate Educational Attainment Change Number % Share Number % Share '00 - '18 Some College, No Degree 12,322 31.0% 14,966 27.3% 21.5% Associate Degree 3,989 10.0% 5,806 10.6% 45.6% Bachelor's Degree 9,645 24.2% 13,594 24.8% 40.9% Graduate or Professional Degree 2,868 11.9% 6,163 11.2% 114.9% High School Graduate or Higher 34,978 87.9% 49,380 90.0% 41.2% Bachelor's Degree or Higher 12,513 31.4% 19,756 36.0% 57.9%
Source: US Census, American Community Survey, PCensus, Orem Planning Division
The following table provides enrollment figures for all Orem public schools elementary through high school, all of which are within the Alpine School District. The bottom of the table contains rows that add up the schools based on elementary, junior high, and high schools.
Overall, the Orem has seen a 16% decline in public K-12 enrollment from 2000 to 2018. Some of the individual schools have seen enrollment decline by much more. The elementary schools highlighted in red have experienced the largest declines in enrollment. These are schools located in the older neighborhoods of Orem, where many of the homes have been converted into rental units.
This has happened in large part due to increase in demand for rental housing in Orem and the lack of supply. While Orem is building some multifamily and rental housing, the supply has not kept up with the demand. In addition, some Orem residents have actively opposed rental housing developments in an effort to stop Orem from changing. Ironically, not building enough rental housing has actually had a more profound impact on Orem, particularly in the older neighborhoods where the price investors can pay to turn homes into rentals has outstripped the buying power of potential home-owners.
Table 6: School District Enrollment in Orem Public Schools
Enrollment Schools 2000 2017 Change % Change Mountain View HS 1,562 1,278 -284 -22% Orem HS 1,510 1,214 -296 -24% Timpanogos HS 1,631 1,506 -125 -8% Canyon View JH 1,247 1,162 -85 -7% Lakeridge JH 1,279 1,235 -44 -4% Oak Canyon JH 1,432 1,416 -16 -1% Orem JH 1,095 915 -180 -20% Aspen ES 639 469 -170 -36% Bonneville ES 906 570 -336 -59% Cascade ES 698 739 41 6% Cherry Hill ES 740 766 26 3% Foothill ES 607 673 66 10% 114
15 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
Enrollment Schools 2000 2017 Change % Change Geneva ES 578 373 -205 -55% Hillcrest ES 488 353 -135 -38% Northridge ES 891 737 -154 -21% Orchard ES 787 743 -44 -6% Orem ES 823 587 -236 -40% Scera Park ES 447 444 -3 -1% Sharon ES 461 401 -60 -15% Suncrest ES 588 394 -194 -49% Westmore ES 468 369 -99 -27% Windsor ES 642 510 -132 -26% Total HS Enrollment 4,703 3,998 -705 -18% Total JH Enrollment 5,053 4,728 -325 -7% Total ES Enrollment 9,763 8,128 -1635 -20% Total Enrollment 19,519 16,854 -2665 -16%
Source: Alpine School District
Note: HS = High School, JH = Junior High, ES = Elementary School
Income Trends The following charts and table reveal the household income trends for Orem, Utah County, and Utah State— with a comparison to the United States in the chart.
Figure 7: Household Income Trends, 2000 to 2018 25% % of Households, 2018 Orem Utah County Utah State United States 20%
15%
10%
5%
0% <15K 15-25K 25-35K 35-50K 50-75K 75-100K 100-150K 150-250K 250-500K >500K 15% % Change 2000 to 2018 10%
5%
0%
-5% Orem Utah County Utah State United States -10% <15K 15-25K 25-35K 35-50K 50-75K 75-100K 100-150K 150-250K 250-500K >500K Source: US Census, American Community Survey, PCensus, Orem Planning Division
115
16 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
Table 7: Household Income Trends, 2000 to 2018
Location Orem Utah County Utah State Year 2000 2018 % Change 2000 2018 % Change 2000 2018 % Change Total Households 23,382 28,605 22.3% 99,937 168,210 68.3% 701,281 999,462 42.5%
Less than $15,000 8.7% 8.0% -0.8% 9.9% 6.7% -3.2% 10.8% 7.3% -3.6% $15,000 to $24,999 11.4% 8.0% -3.5% 12.3% 6.6% -5.7% 11.9% 6.9% -4.9% $25,000 to $34,999 13.4% 8.3% -5.2% 13.3% 6.7% -6.6% 13.3% 7.9% -5.3% $35,000 to $49,999 19.0% 14.7% -4.3% 19.3% 12.6% -6.8% 19.0% 12.6% -6.5% $50,000 to $74,999 22.8% 18.7% -4.1% 22.9% 18.8% -4.1% 22.6% 19.4% -3.2% $75,000 to $99,999 11.7% 14.4% 2.7% 11.4% 15.7% 4.3% 11.4% 15.1% 3.7% $100,000 to $149,999 9.2% 16.8% 7.6% 7.6% 19.2% 11.6% 7.5% 17.8% 10.3% $150,000 to $249,999 3.3% 7.9% 4.6% 2.7% 10.1% 7.4% 2.7% 9.3% 6.6% $250,000 to $499,999 0.7% 2.4% 1.7% 0.6% 2.6% 2.1% 0.7% 2.6% 1.9% $500,000 or more 0.2% 1.0% 0.8% 0.2% 1.0% 0.8% 0.3% 1.1% 0.8% Median HH Income $48,112 $64,822 34.7% $46,345 $73,097 57.7% $46,109 $69,694 51.2% Inflation Adjusted Median $70,648 $64,822 -8.2% $68,053 $73,097 7.4% $67,707 $69,694 2.9%
Source: US Census, American Community Survey, PCensus, Orem City Planning Division * Note: Inflation adjustment is based on Bureau of Labor Statistics CPI Inflation Calculator ($100 in 2000 = $146.84 in 2018)
Noteworthy observations include the following: • Although incomes have risen nominally in Orem, when adjusted for inflation the median household income estimate has actually decreased. This trend is not uncommon. Many areas of the country have not seen significant, inflation adjusted income growth in recent years. • In Orem, 52.6% of all households make below $50,000, which is below the area median income for Utah County. The growing student population associated with UVU and BYU does play a part in the number of households who make below the area median income.
Housing Trends The following tables and figures present information regarding the housing characteristics and trends in the area. The majority of this information is derived from the US Census and the American Community Survey, and in some cases is self-reported data. While this can generate minor anomalies, the information presented in this section still provides a valuable overview of the housing situation in the area.
Housing Type Trends The following table contains an estimate of the number and type of housing units in Orem, Utah County, and Utah State for 2000 and 2018. Notable observations include the following:
• Total housing units in Orem increased by 25% from 2000 to 2018. While this is positive, it is significantly less than the number of units added in Utah County and Utah State, where the total grew by 69% and 44% respectively. 116
17 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
• The main driver for new housing is primarily job growth. As employment data presented later in the report will show, all three geographies have seen positive job growth over the last several years. • Single family detached units make up the vast majority of all housing types in all geographies, accounting for 58%-69% of the housing stock.
Table 8: Housing Type Trends, 2000 to 2018
Location Orem Utah County Utah State Year 2000 2018 Change 2000 2018 Change 2000 2018 Change Total Housing Units 24,166 30,279 25.3% 104,315 176,268 69.0% 768,594 1,103,846 43.6%
1 Unit Attached 1,968 2,834 866 6,471 15,952 9481 37,902 67,685 29783 1 Unit Detached 14,911 17,638 2727 68,002 118,571 50569 520,101 757,853 237752 2 Units 1,250 1,587 337 5,879 7,687 1808 29,243 34,721 5478 3 to 19 Units 4,505 6,241 1736 15,370 23,751 8381 95,032 135,517 40485 20 to 49 Units 463 787 324 3,255 4,387 1132 22,720 35,019 12299 50 or More Units 393 606 213 2,388 2,756 368 22,128 31,307 9179 Mobile Home or Trailer 666 587 -79 2,900 3,029 129 39,267 40,860 1593 Boat, RV, Van, etc. 8 0 -8 50 135 85 2,201 884 -1317
Source: US Census, American Community Survey, PCensus, Orem Planning Division
Age of Existing Housing The following chart and table display estimates for the age of the existing housing stock in the area, with a comparison to the United States for reference. This information is based on self-reported data gathered by the Census. Notable observations include the following:
• The housing stock in Orem is significantly older than the County and the State with a large share of the housing stock having been constructed in the 1970’s when Orem experienced significant growth. • Residents who are surveyed often have a tendency to underestimate the age of their dwelling, particularly if they are renters. Therefore, the numbers presented should be viewed with caution (especially when comparing the number of units added since 2000 with other estimates in this study).
Figure 8: Age of Existing Housing Stock, 2000 to 2018 30% Orem Utah County Utah State United States 25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0% 1939 or Earlier 1940 to 1949 1950 to 1959 1960 to 1969 1970 to 1979 1980 to 1989 1990 to 1999 2000 to 2009 2010 to 2013 2014 or later Source: US Census, American Community Survey, PCensus, Orem Planning Division
117
18 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
Table 9: Age of Existing Housing Stock, 2000 to 2018
2018 Estimate Orem Utah County Utah State United States Total Housing Units 30,279 176,268 1,103,846 10,891,364 Built 2014 or later 2,643 8.7% 21,062 12.0% 97,187 8.8% 7,361,466 5.3% Built 2010 to 2013 375 1.2% 5,585 3.2% 28,337 2.6% 2,008,798 1.4% Built 2000 to 2009 3,267 10.8% 46,990 26.7% 236,014 21.4% 20,639,146 14.8% Built 1990 to 1999 6,004 19.8% 32,550 18.5% 182,057 16.5% 18,749,543 13.4% Built 1980 to 1989 4,772 15.8% 14,880 8.4% 129,360 11.7% 18,212,928 13.0% Built 1970 to 1979 7,437 24.6% 24,331 13.8% 171,653 15.6% 20,643,858 14.8% Built 1960 to 1969 2,123 7.0% 8,464 4.8% 72,103 6.5% 14,317,203 10.2% Built 1950 to 1959 2,371 7.8% 9,001 5.1% 74,237 6.7% 13,981,348 10.0% Built 1940 to 1949 766 2.5% 5,340 3.0% 37,123 3.4% 6,864,669 4.9% Built 1939 or Earlier 521 1.7% 8,065 4.6% 75,775 6.9% 17,059,857 12.2%
Source: US Census, American Community Survey, PCensus, Orem Planning Division
Housing Occupancy Trends The following table provides estimates for housing occupancy in the area. Overall, rates have remained relatively unchanged. The most notable difference is a slight rise in the share of renter occupied units in Orem, as well as a slight rise in the vacancy rates for all geographies. Despite this increase, Orem and Utah County both have an occupancy rate below 6%. This is extremely low given that vacancy rates consider all types of vacant housing (including temporarily unoccupied housing, uninhabitable homes, second homes, etc.). Having vacancy rates this low has an upward pressure on housing prices, particularly on rental prices. This has been this case in Utah in general, where median rental rates have increased hundreds of dollars over the last decade.
Table 10: Housing Occupancy Trends, 2000 to 2018
Location Orem Utah County Utah State Year 2000 2018 Change 2000 2018 Change 2000 2018 Change Total Housing Units 24,166 30,279 25.3% 104,315 176,268 69.0% 768,594 1,103,846 43.6% Occupied Housing Units 96.8% 94.5% -2.3% 95.8% 95.4% -0.4% 91.2% 90.5% -0.7% Owner Occupied 64.9% 58.8% -6.1% 64.0% 66.2% 2.2% 65.3% 63.9% -1.3% Renter Occupied 31.9% 35.6% 3.8% 31.8% 29.2% -2.5% 26.0% 26.6% 0.6% Vacant Housing Units 3.2% 5.5% 2.3% 4.2% 4.6% 0.4% 8.8% 9.5% 0.7%
Source: US Census, American Community Survey, PCensus, Orem Planning Division
Owner Occupied Housing Value Trends The following figure and table display owner occupied housing units grouped into self-reported value ranges for Orem, Utah, and the United States. Homes in all geographies have seen inflation adjusted prices increase significantly. This data corroborates the market data that is presented later in this report. 118
19 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
Figure 9: Owner Occupied Housing Values, 2016
45% Orem Utah State United States 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%
Source: US Census, American Community Survey, PCensus, Orem Planning Division
Table 11: Housing Value Trends, 2000 to 2018
Location Orem Utah State United States Year 2000 2018 Change 2000 2018 Change 2000 2018 Change Owner-Occupied Housing 23,382 28,605 22.3% 99,937 168,210 68.3% 918,174 1,022,814 11.4%
Less than $60K 3.5% 4.1% 0.5% 6.2% 4.2% -2.0% 19.7% 9.2% -10.5% $60K to $80K 1.2% 0.1% -1.0% 4.4% 0.8% -3.7% 11.6% 4.6% -7.0% $80K to $100K 5.4% 0.4% -5.0% 10.1% 1.4% -8.8% 13.2% 5.9% -7.3% $100K to $150K 39.2% 5.0% -34.2% 34.7% 8.8% -25.9% 21.8% 14.1% -7.6% $150K to $200K 30.9% 16.7% -14.1% 22.3% 16.5% -5.8% 13.4% 14.3% 0.8% $200K to $300K 13.1% 39.2% 26.0% 14.3% 29.7% 15.3% 11.2% 18.6% 7.4% $300K to $400K 3.8% 15.5% 11.8% 4.2% 17.0% 12.8% 4.2% 11.3% 7.1% $400K to $500K 1.0% 8.7% 7.7% 1.7% 9.9% 8.2% 2.0% 7.3% 5.3% $500K to $750K 1.1% 6.4% 5.3% 1.3% 7.3% 6.0% 1.7% 7.6% 5.9% $750K to $1,000K 0.3% 2.5% 2.2% 0.4% 2.7% 2.3% 0.6% 3.5% 2.9% $1,000K or more 0.4% 1.4% 1.0% 0.4% 1.9% 1.5% 0.6% 3.6% 3.0%
Median Value $151,069 $258,658 71.2% $142,187 $258,692 81.9% $112,467 $200,102 77.9%
Inflation Adjusted* $221,831 $258,658 16.6% $208,788 $258,692 23.9% $165,147 $200,102 21.2%
Source: US Census, American Community Survey, PCensus, Orem Planning Division * Note: Inflation adjustment is based on Bureau of Labor Statistics CPI Inflation Calculator ($100 in 2000 = $146.84 in 2018)
119
20 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
Employment Trends In most locations, local employment is a key indicator used in determining the demand for housing in a community, as well as a principal driver of population and household growth. The information in this section provides general and detailed employment statistics for Orem.
Unemployment Rates The table below displays unemployment rates for Orem, Utah County, Utah, and the United States from 2000 to June 2018. According to the BLS, the “unemployed” are defined as all persons who had no employment during the reference period, were available for work, except for temporary illness, and had made specific efforts to find employment. Table 12: Unemployment Rates, 2010 to June 2018
Time Period Orem Utah County Utah United States 2000 3.2% 2.9% 3.3% 4.0% 2001 4.5% 4.1% 4.4% 4.7% 2002 6.3% 5.8% 5.8% 5.8% 2003 5.8% 5.3% 5.6% 6.0% 2004 5.2% 4.8% 5.0% 5.5% 2005 4.2% 3.9% 4.1% 5.1% 2006 3.1% 2.9% 3.0% 4.6% 2007 2.6% 2.4% 2.6% 4.6% 2008 3.8% 3.5% 3.6% 5.8% 2009 7.6% 7.0% 7.3% 9.3% 2010 7.5% 7.4% 7.8% 9.6% 2011 6.4% 6.3% 6.7% 8.9% 2012 5.0% 5.0% 5.4% 8.1% 2013 4.2% 4.2% 4.6% 7.4% 2014 3.4% 3.5% 3.8% 6.2% 2015 3.2% 3.3% 3.6% 5.3% 2016 3.1% 3.1% 3.4% 4.9% 2017 3.0% 2.9% 3.2% 4.4% June 2018 3.3% 3.4% 3.5% 3.9%
Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics, LAUS; Numbers are not seasonally adjusted
The overall unemployment rate for Orem has remained lower than the Nation and the State for some time, roughly similar to the rate observed for Utah County. This speaks to the economic health of the area and has had an impact on wages of certain industries in the local economy. This has played a part in the affordability issue as the gap between pay has widened and created a competitive environment for the more desirable housing options in Orem and Utah County.
120
21 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
Figure 10: Unemployment Rates, 2010 to June 2016 10% Orem United States 8%
6%
4%
2% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 June 2018 Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics, LAUS; County numbers are not seasonally adjusted
Employment and Labor Force The table below presents estimated annual employment and labor force numbers for Orem. Prior to 2010 Orem did experience a decline in employment due to the recession. However, since 2010, every year has seen a significant increase in the number of individuals employed. From 2010 to 2018, Orem has added over 12,000 jobs and nearly 11,000 to the workforce.
Figure 11: Orem Employment and Labor Force, 2010 to 2018
Year Employed Labor Force 2010 38,460 41,565 2011 38,798 41,429 2012 40,376 42,481 2013 41,906 43,724 2014 42,704 44,203 2015 44,877 46,378 2016 47,323 48,835 2017 49,519 51,035 2018 50,743 52,474 Change 2010 to 2018 12,283 10,909
Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics, LAUS; County numbers are not seasonally adjusted
Wage and Employment Trends by Private Industries Tracked The following table and figure take a closer look at the employed residents in Orem, with data on each tracked NAICS coded private industry sector—comparing annual averages from 2005 with 2015 (the most recent industry specific data available). These numbers exclude public employees.
Table 13: Orem Employment Trends by Industries Tracked, 2005 to 2015
Employment NAICS Industry (Private) 2005 2015 % Change
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 42 55 31.0% Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction 7 2 -71.4% 121
22 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
Employment NAICS Industry (Private) 2005 2015 % Change Utilities 78 133 70.5% Construction 2,423 1,772 -26.9% Manufacturing 3,937 3,745 -4.9% Wholesale Trade 1,021 1,613 58.0% Retail Trade 7,136 6,928 -2.9% Transportation and Warehousing 632 625 -1.1% Information 1,968 1,385 -29.6% Finance and Insurance 1,172 1,177 0.4% Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 538 886 64.7% Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 3,462 3,609 4.2% Management of Companies and Enterprises 92 497 440.2% Admin. & Support, Waste Mgt. and Remediation 4,373 4,629 5.9% Educational Services 4,225 6,273 48.5% Health Care and Social Assistance 3,572 5,300 48.4% Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 604 644 6.6% Accommodation and Food Services 3,038 3,374 11.1% Other Services (excluding Public Administration) 845 1,199 41.9% Public Administration 526 555 5.5%
TOTAL / AVERAGE 39,691 44,401 11.9%
Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
Figure 12: Orem Employment Totals by Industries Tracked, 2015 Mining, Oil and Gas Agriculture, Forestry, etc. Utilities Management of Companies Public Administration Transportation and Warehousing Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation Real Estate and Rental and Leasing Finance and Insurance Other Services Information Wholesale Trade Construction Accommodation and Food Services Professional, Scientific, and Tech. Services Manufacturing Admin. & Support, Waste Mgt. Health Care and Social Assistance Educational Services Retail Trade
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics 122
23 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
The industries which saw the largest numerical gains in Orem from 2005 to 2015 were educational services and health care, both of which saw around 2,000 jobs added. Also noteworthy is the number of jobs in manufacturing, which is the fifth largest industry in Orem. This is related in large part to the industrial uses located along the Geneva Road corridor, which have played an important role in Orem’s economy for most of its history.
Local Employers The following table displays the major employers in Orem. These businesses represent jobs in many industries, including public services, manufacturing, retail, healthcare, and others. Combined, these employers account for nearly half of all employees in Orem.
Table 14: Major Employers in Orem, 2018
Company Employees Company Employees Company Employees
Utah Valley University 4000-5999 Employee Benefits Leasing 100-249 City of Orem 100-249 Nexeo Staffing, Llc 2000-2999 Express Services Inc 100-249 Orem Community Hospital 100-249 Timpanogos Regional Medical 500-999 First Colony Mortgage 100-249 Orem High School 100-249 Us Synthetic Corporation 500-999 Fishbowl Inventory 100-249 Orem Public Safety Dept 100-249 Bluehost.Com 250-499 Geneva Rock Products 100-249 Orem Public Works 100-249 Costco Wholesale Corp 250-499 Golden Landscaping & Lawn 100-249 Orem Recreation Center 100-249 Mity-Lite, Inc. 250-499 Harmons 100-249 Orem Rehabilitation Nursing 100-249 Securitymetrics, Inc. 250-499 Home Care Specialists 100-249 R C Willey Home Furnishings 100-249 Target 250-499 Infotrax Systems, L.C. 100-249 Rsi-Residential Services Inc 100-249 United Parcel Service 250-499 Intermountain Temp Svc 100-249 Silverback Network, Inc. 100-249 Wal Mart 250-499 Jive Communications 100-249 Smiths Food And Drug Ctrs 100-249 Wayfair Llc 250-499 Jive Communications, Inc. 100-249 Solcius Llc 100-249 Alder 100-249 Ken Garff Motors 100-249 Spherion Pacific Enterprises 100-249 Alliance Medical Admin. 100-249 Kenny Seng Construction 100-249 Squire And Co 100-249 American Crafts, L.C. 100-249 Kids On The Move Inc 100-249 Strategic Staffing 100-249 Ancestry.Com 100-249 Klas Enterprises, L.L.C 100-249 Studies Weekly 100-249 Any Hour 100-249 Legato Systems Inc 100-249 Telos Residential Treatment 100-249 Blendtec 100-249 Maceys Inc 100-249 Texas Roadhouse 100-249 Boostability 100-249 Matc Orem Campus 100-249 Timpanogos High 100-249 Brent Brown Toyota 100-249 Mobile Productivity, Llc 100-249 Trimed, Llc 100-249 Cirque Lodge, Inc. 100-249 Mountainland Supply Co 100-249 Uhs Of Timpanogos Inc 100-249 Clear Satellite 100-249 Moxtek, Inc. 100-249 Unicity Network 100-249 Clyde Companies Inc 100-249 Mt View High 100-249 Utah Transit Authority 100-249 Edge Construction Llc 100-249 North Eastern Services 100-249 Winco Foods 100-249 Elwood Staffing 100-249 Northstar Alarm Services 100-249 Total Estimated ~ 23,000 Source: Utah Department of Workforce Services, Orem Planning Division
123
24 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
HOUSING MARKET TRENDS – FOR-SALE HOMES
This section examines the latest market trends related to for-sale homes, which includes single-family detached units as well as attached units such as twin homes, townhomes, condos, and other multifamily units. Overall, the market for for-sale units in Orem and Utah County has increased significantly in the last decade since the recession. The following table and charts illustrate just how unaffordable home ownership has become. In 2010, 65% of all homes sold in Orem and 55% of all homes sold in Utah County were sold at a price under $200,000. As of the summer of 2018, Only 14% of homes sold in Orem and 8% of homes sold in Utah County were under $200,000.
As a broad generalization, most households can afford to purchase a home that is 2.5 to 3 times their household income. With the median household income in Orem estimated at $64,822, a median household could afford a home in the $160,000 to $200,000 price range. While many more homes were within this price range a decade ago, in 2018 very few homes are in this price range. The homes that are in this range regularly require additional needed investment for repairs such as new roofs or corrected plumbing.
Table 15: Total Housing Units Sold by Price Range, 2010 to 2018 YTD
$0 - $200k $200k - $300k $300k + Total Year # % # % # % # % Orem 2010 417 65% 148 23% 75 12% 640 100% 2011 532 72% 140 19% 63 9% 735 100% 2012 494 71% 144 21% 61 9% 699 100% 2013 412 57% 237 33% 71 10% 720 100% 2014 426 49% 344 39% 105 12% 875 100% 2015 381 37% 472 46% 172 17% 1025 100% 2016 244 26% 515 56% 168 18% 927 100% 2017 189 20% 501 53% 255 27% 945 100% 2018 YTD 78 14% 261 46% 225 40% 564 100% Utah County 2010 2689 55% 1444 29% 778 16% 4911 100% 2011 3322 61% 1440 26% 725 13% 5487 100% 2012 3418 57% 1735 29% 845 14% 5998 100% 2013 3041 45% 2363 35% 1299 19% 6703 100% 2014 2773 39% 2802 39% 1619 23% 7194 100% 2015 2711 32% 3419 40% 2365 28% 8495 100% 2016 2041 23% 3784 43% 3016 34% 8841 100% 2017 1542 17% 4011 44% 3653 40% 9206 100% 2018 YTD 471 8% 2210 39% 2948 52% 5629 100% Source: Multiple Listing Service, Orem Planning Division, 2018 YTD includes data to July 31st
124
25 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
Figure 13: Orem Total Housing Units Sold by Price Range, 2010 to 2018 YTD 100% $0 - $200k $200k - $300k $300k + 75%
50%
25%
0% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 YTD
Multiple Listing Service, Orem Planning Division, 2018 YTD includes data to July 31st
Figure 14: Utah County Total Housing Units Sold by Price Range, 2010 to 2018 YTD 100% $0 - $200k $200k - $300k $300k + 75%
50%
25%
0% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 YTD
Multiple Listing Service, Orem Planning Division, 2018 YTD includes data to July 31st
The previous charts visually illustrate the significant change in affordability that has taken place in the for-sale housing market in the last decade. The blue bar represents the percentage of for-sale housing units that are sold for under $200,000. The green bar represents units sold ranging from $200,000 to $300,000. The red bar represents units sold over $300,00k. In both Orem (top chart) and Utah Count (bottom chart), the blue bar has decreased steadily since 2011.
125
26 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
Sales Trends - Single Family Homes The following charts depict volume and median sale price trends for single family homes from 2000 to 2018 YTD in Orem (top chart) and Utah County (bottom chart). Volume in Orem has fluctuated but generally not increased from historic levels. In contrast, the volume of sales in Utah County has increased several thousand from 2000 to 2017. In both Orem and Utah County, the median sale price for single family homes has increased rapidly since 2011.
Figure 15: Orem Single Family Sales Volume and Median Price, 2000 to 2018 YTD
800 $350,000 # Sold Median Sale $ 700 $300,000 600
500 $250,000 400
300 $200,000
200 $150,000 100
0 $100,000 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 YTD
Source: Multiple Listing Service, Orem Planning Division
Figure 16: Utah County Single Family Sales Volume and Median Price, 2000 to 2018 YTD
8000 $350,000 # Sold Median Sale $ 7000 $300,000 6000
5000 $250,000
4000
$200,000 3000
2000 $150,000 1000
0 $100,000 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 YTD
Source: Multiple Listing Service, Orem Planning Division
126
27 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
Sales Trends - Condos, Townhomes, Other The following charts depict volume and median sale price trends for condos, townhomes, and other multifamily homes from 2000 to 2018 YTD in Orem (top chart) and Utah County (bottom chart). Volume in Orem has fluctuated but generally not increased from historic levels. In contrast, the volume of sales in Utah County has increased over 1,500 from 2000 to 2017. In both Orem and Utah County, the median sale price for single family homes has increased rapidly since 2011.
Figure 17: Orem Condo, Townhome, Other Sales Volume and Median Price, 2000 to 2018 YTD
450 $350,000 # Sold Median Sale $ 400
350 $300,000
300 $250,000 250
200 $200,000 150
100 $150,000 50
0 $100,000 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 YTD
Source: Multiple Listing Service, Orem Planning Division
Figure 18: Utah County Condo, Townhome, Other Sales Volume and Median Price, 2000 to 2018 YTD
3000 $350,000 # Sold Median Sale $ 2500 $300,000
2000 $250,000 1500 $200,000 1000
$150,000 500
0 $100,000 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 YTD
Source: Multiple Listing Service, Orem Planning Division
127
28 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
HOUSING MARKET TRENDS – RENTALS
According to the Census related housing type estimates presented earlier in this report, there are currently 12,641 multifamily units in Orem. The vast majority of these are rentals. Through an extensive survey conducted by City, 122 multifamily complexes were identified in Orem accounting for 9,761 rental units. The data from this survey is provided in full in the appendix.
Multifamily Occupancy Based on the survey completed by the City, the average occupancy rate for multifamily rentals in the City is estimated to be at 97%. As illustrated in the chart below, roughly 40% of the complexes surveyed reported 100% occupancy, 40% reported an occupancy rate between 95-99%, and 20% reported an occupancy rate between 90-94%.
Figure 19: Share of Total Rented Units Based on Occupancy of the Complex
50% 40% 30% 20%
10% Multifamily Units
Shareof TotalRented 0% 100% Occupied 95-99% Occupied 90-94% Occupied
Source: Sample based on 9,761 units reporting data in Spring 2018, Orem Planning Division
In addition to data in the table, the following insight was also obtained interviews with property managers:
• Several of the complexes have a waiting list that is dozens of people long. When vacancies occur, they call individuals from this list. Vacancies are usually filled immediately for most complexes. This suggests that not all renters are satisfied with their current rental and are waiting for a vacancy at a more preferred location. • Several property owners and managers have reported increasing rents as a response to the recent rise in demand. Rental increases in the amount of $50-$100 over the last year were not uncommon. • Even though many of the complexes were full or close to full, they continued to advertise their properties for lease. It was explained that it is easier to leave the signs and ads up, rather than taking them down and then replacing them back up as soon as a vacancy opens up. In addition, complexes desire to have a waiting list where they can screen tenants and be more selective for tenants who will be long term and low maintenance.
Rental Rates The average rental rate for all types of rental units in Orem is estimated at $1,142, which represents a 7.9% increase from the previous year. Overall, the market has an average rate per square foot of $1.17 and an average size of 978 square feet per unit.
128
29 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
NEW CONSTRUCTION TRENDS
The following chart and table provide an accounting for the number of building permits issued in Orem and Utah County from 2000 to 2018. Assuming that these permits resulted in constructed units, Orem added 1,747 single family units and 4,906 multifamily units from 2000 to 2018. This accounts for 8.8% of the units assumed to have been added by Utah County. In Orem, some have made the claim that the City is taking too much growth from the rest of the County. This data demonstrates otherwise. While Orem represents 16.3% of the County’s population (100,181 of 613,211 in 2018), it has only added 8.8% of the new housing stock since the year 2000 (when Orem made up 22.9% of the County’s population).
Figure 20: Single Family and Multifamily Permits Issued, 2000 to 2018 YTD 7,500 Orem Utah County 6,000 4,500 3,000 1,500 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Source: Utah Bureau of Economic and Business Research, Orem Planning Division
Table 16: Single Family and Multifamily Permits Issued, 2000 to 2018 YTD
Location Orem Utah County Orem Share Year SF MF Total SF MF Total of County 2000 142 238 380 3,139 759 3,898 9.7% 2001 101 91 192 3,287 985 4,272 4.5% 2002 85 310 395 3,213 1,113 4,326 9.1% 2003 119 218 337 3,375 1,302 4,677 7.2% 2004 170 178 348 3,404 1,324 4,728 7.4% 2005 171 191 362 4,319 1,500 5,819 6.2% 2006 156 302 458 5,329 1,573 6,902 6.6% 2007 101 232 333 3,506 1,465 4,971 6.7% 2008 28 98 126 871 544 1,415 8.9% 2009 44 26 70 1,129 357 1,486 4.7% 2010 60 47 107 1,315 578 1,893 5.7% 2011 46 145 191 1,255 795 2,050 9.3% 2012 54 75 129 1,704 760 2,464 5.2% 2013 71 34 105 2,181 1,066 3,247 3.2% 2014 94 962 1,056 1,976 3,232 5,208 20.3% 2015 105 893 998 2,500 1,976 4,476 22.3% 2016 73 284 357 2,708 1,278 3,986 9.0% 2017 75 324 399 3,506 3,327 6,833 5.8% 2018 52 258 310 2,001 1,369 3,370 9.2% Total 1,747 4,906 6,653 50,718 25,303 76,021 8.8% Source: Utah Bureau of Economic and Business Research, Orem Planning Division
129
30 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
Construction Underway, Planned, or In Application There are currently over 2000 units underway, planned, or in application. These include the following:
Table 17: Residential Units, Construction Underway, Planned, or In Application
Under Construction Units Beds Type Address Under Construction Aston Court Building C 120 Market Rate Apartments 700 East 950 South Sun Canyon Villas Building 3 24 Market Rate Apartments 439 South State Street The Villas at Sleepy Ridge 74 For Sale Townhomes 700 South 1840 West Flying Horse 134 Condos 1800 South Sandhill Road Midtown 360 Phase 3 & 4 248 Market Rate Apartments 360 South State Street Lexington Towns 142 For Sale Townhomes 1430 South Sandhill Road Subtotal 742 Approved Hunter Town Homes 10 For Sale Townhomes 900 East 1400 South Lakeview Fields 271 Townhomes (unsure if rentals) 2000 South Geneva Road Subtotal 281 Application in Process The Hub 269 1,060 Student Housing 1420 West 800 South Lanihuli 4 Senior Housing 430 West 600 North Concord Heights 4 Townhomes 280 West 170 North Palos Verde Student Housing 453 1,578 Student Housing 1030 South 400 West Westmore Senior Housing 4 Senior Housing 1054 South Main Street University Downs 316 Student Housing 1240 West University Parkway The Aston North - Phase 1 114 Market Rate Apartments 700 East 900 South Parkside at University Place 70 Subtotal 1,234 2,638 Total 2,257 2,638
Source: Orem City Planning Division
130
31 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
MEASURING AFFORDABILITY
The following tables provide a breakdown of owner occupied and renter occupied housing costs according to income levels in Orem, Utah County, and Utah. According to the data, Orem has a greater share of households than the County that are below the poverty level but their housing costs are not more than 30% of their income. This is due, in large part, to older market-rate homes and apartments, rather than subsidized or public housing. In other words, because a larger share of Orem’s overall housing stock is older, the cost of this housing is generally lower when compared to Utah County. Orem is on par with the average for the State of Utah.
Table 18: Owner Occupied Housing Costs in Utah, Utah County, and Orem
Utah Utah County Orem Estimate Share Estimate Share Estimate Share Total: 918,367 151,342 26,620 Owner-occupied housing units: 638,767 69.6% 101,740 67.2% 15,973 60.0% Earn Less than $20,000: 38,947 4.2% 4,971 3.3% 1,078 4.0% Housing Costs < 20% 4,336 0.5% 520 0.3% 99 0.4% Housing Costs 20% - 29% 6,046 0.7% 726 0.5% 202 0.8% Housing Costs ≥ 30% 28,565 3.1% 3,725 2.5% 777 2.9% Earn $20,000 to $34,999: 61,222 6.7% 8,101 5.4% 1,631 6.1% Housing Costs < 20% 21,336 2.3% 2,569 1.7% 556 2.1% Housing Costs 20% - 29% 9,662 1.1% 1,278 0.8% 287 1.1% Housing Costs ≥ 30% 30,224 3.3% 4,254 2.8% 788 3.0% Earn $35,000 to $49,999: 75,439 8.2% 11,021 7.3% 1,828 6.9% Housing Costs < 20% 27,661 3.0% 3,540 2.3% 703 2.6% Housing Costs 20% - 29% 16,018 1.7% 2,077 1.4% 364 1.4% Housing Costs ≥ 30% 31,760 3.5% 5,404 3.6% 761 2.9% Earn $50,000 to $74,999: 139,336 15.2% 22,640 15.0% 3,604 13.5% Housing Costs < 20% 58,243 6.3% 7,589 5.0% 1,461 5.5% Housing Costs 20% - 29% 48,764 5.3% 8,911 5.9% 1,509 5.7% Housing Costs ≥ 30% 32,329 3.5% 6,140 4.1% 634 2.4% Earn $75,000 or more: 320,270 34.9% 54,385 35.9% 7,684 28.9% Housing Costs < 20% 234,171 25.5% 38,159 25.2% 6,026 22.6% Housing Costs 20% - 29% 70,939 7.7% 13,463 8.9% 1,382 5.2% Housing Costs ≥ 30% 15,160 1.7% 2,763 1.8% 276 1.0% Zero or negative income 3,553 0.4% 622 0.4% 148 0.6%
Source: U.S. Dept. of Housing & Urban Development. (2018). Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, 2011-2015
131
32 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
Table 19: Renter Occupied Housing Costs in Utah, Utah County, and Orem
Utah Utah County Orem Estimate Share Estimate Share Estimate Share Total: 918,367 151,342 26,620 Renter-occupied housing units: 279,600 30.4% 49,602 32.8% 10,647 40.0% Earn Less than $20,000: 57,887 6.3% 10,377 6.9% 2,085 7.8% Housing Costs < 20% 1,341 0.1% 156 0.1% 27 0.1% Housing Costs 20% - 29% 4,608 0.5% 591 0.4% 68 0.3% Housing Costs ≥ 30% 51,938 5.7% 9,630 6.4% 1,990 7.5% Earn $20,000 to $34,999: 58,028 6.3% 10,369 6.9% 2,060 7.7% Housing Costs < 20% 2,851 0.3% 706 0.5% 20 0.1% Housing Costs 20% - 29% 10,716 1.2% 1,657 1.1% 406 1.5% Housing Costs ≥ 30% 44,461 4.8% 8,006 5.3% 1,634 6.1% Earn $35,000 to $49,999: 46,498 5.1% 8,865 5.9% 2,153 8.1% Housing Costs < 20% 7,838 0.9% 1,785 1.2% 327 1.2% Housing Costs 20% - 29% 21,672 2.4% 3,848 2.5% 1,232 4.6% Housing Costs ≥ 30% 16,988 1.8% 3,232 2.1% 594 2.2% Earn $50,000 to $74,999: 51,168 5.6% 8,962 5.9% 2,017 7.6% Housing Costs < 20% 22,805 2.5% 3,823 2.5% 1,027 3.9% Housing Costs 20% - 29% 21,524 2.3% 3,508 2.3% 725 2.7% Housing Costs ≥ 30% 6,839 0.7% 1,631 1.1% 265 1.0% Earn $75,000 or more: 47,997 5.2% 8,199 5.4% 1,680 6.3% Housing Costs < 20% 38,265 4.2% 6,049 4.0% 1,273 4.8% Housing Costs 20% - 29% 8,669 0.9% 1,870 1.2% 386 1.5% Housing Costs ≥ 30% 1,063 0.1% 280 0.2% 21 0.1% Zero or negative income 4,406 0.5% 584 0.4% 203 0.8% No cash rent 13,616 1.5% 2,246 1.5% 449 1.7%
Source: U.S. Dept. of Housing & Urban Development. (2018). Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, 2011-2015
132
33 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This section contains the conclusions and recommendations that will guide the City in the development of a more robust Moderate-Income Housing Plan in the years to come. These conclusions and recommendations were formulated by consulting the data contained in this report as well as discussions with housing advocates, realtors, developers, community members, and other stakeholders.
Explore Public/Private Partnerships for Affordable Housing Collaboration is a key component of mitigating the housing crisis, as such the need for ongoing community leadership and guidance is critical to arriving at locally-relevant solutions. In 2019, an Orem Housing Summit will be convened, providing an opportunity for housing industry leaders, Orem staff, and the general public to come together, learn more about the conditions of housing in Orem and Utah County, and evaluate possible solutions to the challenges faced.
Studying Lot Size and Housing Unit Size Minimums Many governments have minimum size requirements for primary structures in residential zones, often imposed to maintain the consistency in neighborhoods (both in size of buildings and people who choose to live there). It may be beneficial for Orem to study whether these size requirements for both lots and housing units can be relaxed if certain conditions are met. The intent would be to allow creative developers and homebuilders to apply creative solutions to housing affordability that otherwise may not be permitted under current zoning requirements.
Rediscover the Missing Middle Missing Middle Housing consists of multi-unit housing types such as duplexes, fourplexes, bungalow courts, and mansion apartments that are not bigger than a large house, that are integrated throughout most walkable pre- 1940s neighborhoods, often integrated into blocks with primarily single-family homes, and that provide diverse housing choices and generate enough density to support transit and locally-serving commercial amenities. Although many of these are a common feature in pre-war building stocks, these housing types have become much less common (hence the “missing”).
Orem’s creation of the Affordable Senior Housing (ASH) Overlay zone allowed for the first time in many years small, multi-unit developments to be built on smaller infill lots in Orem. These projects have been popular, and the majority have been designed and built in a way that adds value to the existing neighborhoods, while providing affordable options for low income seniors.
It is recommended that the City build on the success of the ASH Overlay zone and explore other zoning changes that would allow for small, multi-unit developments. As with the ASH Overlay zone, it is important that design standards be required to ensure that these developments fit in with the existing neighborhoods.
133
34 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
Educate Residents It is recommended that Orem continue to connect underserved populations, including seniors, veterans, disabled persons, and those with low to moderate incomes with housing and assistance providers, homebuyer programs, mortgage and rental assistance programs or other resources. There are multiple organizations active in Utah County who would benefit from the City’s continued sponsorship and participation.
In addition to educating underserved residents regarding the opportunities that are available, it would be beneficial for the City to partner with housing advocacy groups to educate residents who are not underserved. There are many misconceptions about population growth in Orem, the cost of housing, and the impacts of new development. Housing advocacy groups would be a willing and helpful partner to take the data to all Orem residents to help them understand the challenges and opportunities that currently exist related to housing and growth. Neighborhood meetings would be an appropriate venue for this outreach. As residents participate in creating a neighborhood plan, the City could invite housing advocates from various organizations to participate.
Explore a Community Land Trust In order to preserve the ability to develop affordable housing in the future, the City could create a Community Land Trust and work with its institutional partners to purchase land and entrust it for future development. This would ensure that as property values continue to rise, there will still be land available to build new affordable housing as the City grows. This mechanism preserves affordability into the future. There are examples of successful land trusts in Utah that would provide opportunities for Orem to learn and explore this option. The Moab Area Community Land Trust is one such organization.
Re-Invest in Orem’s Older Neighborhoods While the supply of affordable housing in Orem is a challenge, one of the major reasons Orem is in a better position than most other cities in Utah County is because of the its supply of older housing stock. These homes are generally more affordable because they are older, but they are also more affordable because they smaller, on smaller lots, and have a mix of housing types in the neighborhood. These are benefits in that they provide the City with a greater variety of housing to meet the needs of residents with a range of incomes.
As these older homes continue to age, it is important that the City recognize the value of these older neighborhoods and continue to invest in these areas. There are a variety of strategies that can be used to bring value to these neighborhoods. They include:
• Adopt a Block: Adopt-a-block programs are created to help reduce litter in targeted areas within a neighborhood while building resident connections. These programs require an ongoing commitment to keep a targeted area litter-free. The goals of the program are to address neighborhood aesthetics and build neighborhood capacity. Adopt-a-blocks are often one of the first steps towards community organizing. • Increased Code Enforcement: Code Enforcement is the act of enforcing a variety of applicable codes, ordinances, rules, and regulations related to zoning, land use, nuisance housing, building codes, health and safety, blight, waste, etc. When homes are blighted or poorly maintained, it can create a vicious cycle that makes surrounding homeowners less likely to maintain their properties, spreading blight and harming the
134
35 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
entire community. Code enforcement can be used to proactively prevent decline or address existing maintenance issues. • Complete Streets: Complete streets are planned and designed with all users in mind, as opposed to only moving automobiles. By treating people equally, the vitality of the street and local businesses are often improved, among other environmental, health, and social benefits. Complete Streets should be targeted in areas that need to remain regionally competitive, in specific locations that are poised for revitalization, or in areas with low automobile ownership rates. • Consider Participating in Programs that Encourage Home Ownership: Orem has become an increasingly difficult market in which to purchase a home, quickly becoming out of reach for anyone making less than area median income. Orem could partner with other organizations that currently offer incentives to first time homebuyers or returning residents, or initiate a new Orem based program. These incentives could target public employees, such as teachers or public safety, or open to a broader group of low- and moderate-income Orem households who would otherwise not be able to purchase a home.
135
36 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
APPENDIX A:
Multifamily Occupancy in Orem
Complex Address Type Built Units Occ University Village 1270 Sandhill Rd Apartment 1976 83 100% Mountain Run Apartments 1219 S 620 W Apartment 2000 115 100% Sun Canyon Villas 464 S State St Apartment 2015 37 100% Canyon Trail 761 N 235 E St Apartment 2003 20 100% Promenade Place 865 South Geneva Road Apartment 2013 96 100% Wolverine Crossing 1111 S 1350 W Apartment 2009 258 100% Legacy Apartments 609 N Main St Apartment 1971 166 100% Northview Apartments 700 N Main St Apartment 1971 24 100% Village on the Parkway 1181 W 1230 S Apartment 2000 72 100% Ventana 1386 S 400 W Apartment 2002 105 100% Villa d'Este 1040 W 950 N Apartment 2015 116 99% Courtland Ridge 855 N 820 W Apartment 1994 144 99% Sienna Villas 1847 S Columbia Ln Apartment 2011 81 98% Country Springs Apartments 625 S Orem Blvd Apartment 1994 164 96% Canyon View Apartments 1401 Sandhill Rd Apartment 1998 288 95% Oakhurst Apts 1110 W 1315 S Apartment 1998 128 95% Summertree Subdivision 309 S 150 W Apartment 1976 32 94% Parkway Lofts 1300 S Geneva Rd Apartment 2016 332 92% Village Park Apts 1080 N State St Apartment 1995 192 92% The Alloy 100 S Geneva Rd Apartment 2010 324 92% The Boulevard 40 N. Orem Blvd Apartment 2015 110 92% Boulevard Centennial Plaza 63 N Orem Blvd Apartment 2014 110 92% Midtown 360 360 S State St Apartment 2002 284 90% University Gateway 643 W 1200 S Apartment 1976 60 90% Monteval 355 W 920 N Apartment 2015 131 95% University Towers 640 S 1200 W Apartment 2001 32 90% Halladay Apartments 1420 S 400 E Apartment 1995 28 100% Columbia Lane Apartments 1930 S Columbia Ln Apartment 1976 20 100% 900 North Apartments 362 E 900 N Apartment 1976 8 100% 100 East Apartments 433 N 100 E Apartment 1976 21 100% Monterey Drive Apartments 553 N Monterey Dr Apartment 1976 18 100% 1550 South Apartments 840 E 1550 S Apartment 1976 28 100% Adrienne Acres 371 N 300 W Apartment 1974 18 100% 136
37 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
Complex Address Type Built Units Occ Bekearian Apartments 648 N 360 W Apartment 1992 47 100% Clayton Apts 110 W 710 N Apartment 1996 24 100% Graff Estates Graff Cir 1100 S Apartment 1976 48 100% Kingswood Estates 440 W 700 N Apartment 1976-78 12 100% Orem Oaks 270 N 400 W Apartment 1976 18 100% Orlean Terrace 1900 S Columbia Ln Apartment 2011 16 100% Pyne Acres Subd 1100 S Anne Circle Apartment 1973 197 96% Royal Gem Sub 181 N 130 E Apartment 1969 28 100% Sandy Brooke Subd 70 E 1450 S Apartment 1995 12 100% Tanner Subd 211 E 1100 S Apartment 1976 16 100% Wasatch 1102 W Center St Apartment 2014 168 100% Westmore Park Sub 50 E 1200 S Apartment 1964 22 100% University Place 575 E University Pkwy Apartment 2013 374 96% Cortland 855 N 820 W Apartments 1990 144 99% Cherry Hill Apartments 1757 S Village Lane Apartments 1970 170 94% The Aston 730 East 950 South Apartments 1980 374 84% Courtside Place 530 S 1200 W Apts/Condo 1999 167 98% Starcrest 197 S Starcrest Dr Apts/Condo 1975 52 100% Evergreen Court 23 N Evergreen Ct Condo 1994 77 100% South Pointe Condominiums 560 W 1725 S Condo 2015 30 100% Summerwood 720 S 1200 W Condo 2002 68 100% Garden Park East 299 Birchwood Dr. Condo 1975 40 100% Orchard Creek Condos 127 E 600 S Condo 1979 136 96% Chase Lane Condos 100 W 870 N Condo 2007 15 100% Scera View Condos 600 S Main St Condo 1979 116 100% Waterlefe 480 N 1235 W Condo 2004 50 100% Heatherbrook Subd 350 N 375 W Condo 1994-95 12 100% Granite Village 1105 W 420 N Condo 1997 12 100% Regent Court Condos 1160 Regent Ct Condo 1983 17 100% Carol's Cove 439 E 750 S Condo 2007 4 100% Ridgecrest 225 S Ridgeview Dr Condo 1996 24 100% Country Cottages 730 N 400 E Condo 2003 16 100% Garden Park 219 Garden Park Dr. Condo 1973 144 97% Peach Haven 893 W 20 N Condo 2005 36 100% Cobblestone Condo 341 S 250 E Condo 1986-88 18 100% Timpview Village 11 E 180 N Condo 1996 88 100% 137
38 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
Complex Address Type Built Units Occ Hidden Acres 1178 W 560 N Condo 2007 32 100% Boulevard Condos Orem Blvd 469 N Condo 1992 46 100% Cannery Cove 693 N Orem Blvd Condo 1997 36 100% Charleston Heights Condominiums 1947 S Columbia Ln Condo 1993 20 100% North Abby 649 W 1870 N Condo 1994 66 100% North Main 902 N Main St Condo 1995 21 100% Evergreen East 37 N 420 E Condo 1996 69 100% Blackhorse Run 1555 W 700 S Condo 2006 64 100% Mountain View Village 631 W 20 N Condo 1995 16 100% Fleetwood Square Condos 426 E 1500 S Condo 1984 10 100% Fairway Village at Sleepy Ridge 627 s 1920 w Condo 1990 25 100% Millrun Condos 385 W 1100 N Condo 1998 24 100% Residence @ North Hampton 297 E 760 N Condo 1998 24 100% Eastview Condominiums 155 N 170 E Condo 1992 28 100% Sandhill Grove 529 W 1770 S Condo 2007 13 100% Amiron Village 1385 N Amiron Way Condo 1981 62 98% Rosecrest 530 S 70 E Condo 1991 34 97% East Abby 83 W 680 N Condo 1995 30 97% The Parc on Center 1042 West Center Street Condo 2015 168 95% Lakeview Fields 1600 S Geneva Rd. Condo 2015 271 98% Park Avenue Condominiums 125 E 1575 S Condo 1994 130 100% Tanglewood 1575 N 1180 W Condo 2004 50 100% Times Square Condos 1050 S 200 E Condo 1993 45 100% Countryside Square 44 N Garden Park Condo 1993 64 100% Condo Projects 1320 S 1260 W Condo 1996 461 98% Maple Place 383 E 30 S Condo 2004 18 100% Newport Village 203 N 1200 W Condo 2003 66 100% Kingston Apts 1221 W 160 N Condo 1999 24 100% Weston/Stonebrook Condos 1511 N 1200 W Condo 1993 168 96% Northgate 980 W 960 N Condo 2002 437 98% Lakecrest Condos 225 N 400 W Condo 1982 62 100% Lakecrest Estates Condominium 491 W 120 N Condo 1982 31 100% Lake Ridge 1434 S 430 W Condo 1999 92 100% Heather Cove 463 N 700 E Condo 1997 21 100% Hanover Condos 765 S Main St Condo 1985 56 100% April Condos 706 E 1500 S Condo 1997 12 100% 138
39 OREM MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING STUDY
Complex Address Type Built Units Occ Whistler Ridge 1586 S 705 E Condo 2007 30 100% Orchard View 435 E 2000 S Condo 1995 16 100% Milestone Condominiums 200 E 160 N Condo 1988 38 95% Northpointe Village 389 E 760 N Condo 2003 16 100% 400 E Condos 371 E 760 N Condo 2001 15 100% Aikens Grove 15 W 720 S Condo 2006 15 100% Eagle Condos 838 N 300 E Condo 1997 8 100% Heather Haven 561 E 320 N Condo 1998 10 100% Hidden Hollow 118 Hidden Hollow Cir Condo 2002 28 100% Meredith Manor 1117 N 800 E Condo 2012 14 100% Parkplace at Orem 166 S 70 W Condo 1983 37 100% Penni Lane 812 E 1140 N Condo 2009 14 100% South Rim 814 E 1740 S Condo 2002 24 100% Windsor Court 302 W 1380 N Condo 2013 26 96% Balsam Condos 16-34 E 1450 S Condo 1980 12 100% The Colonies 717 N 400 W Condo 1985 76 100% Ponds at Sleepy Ridge 875 S Pheasant Run Condo 2013 149 100% Total 9,761 97%
Source: Orem Planning Division
139
40 Agenda Item No: 5.1
Planning Commission Agenda Item Report Meeting Date: August 22, 2018 Submitted by: Cheryl Vargas Submitting Department: Development Services Item Type: Minutes Agenda Section: Minutes Review and Approval
Subject: August 1, 2018 Planning Commission Minutes
Suggested Action: Approval
Presenter:
Background:
Potentially Affected Area:
Attachments: 2018-08-01.pcmin DRAFT.docx
140 1 CITY OF OREM 2 DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES 3 August 1, 2018 4 5 The following items are discussed in these minutes: 6 Plat Amendment for Jones Swimming Pool – Approved 7 Plat Amendment for UPlace Office Building – Approved 8 Preliminary Plat for Victoria Park – Continued Indefinitely 9 Plat Amendment for Reza Subdivision - Approved 10 Rezone for Baxter Gardens – Positive Recommendation to City Council 11 12 STUDY SESSION 13 14 Place: Orem City Main Conference Room 15 16 At 3:30 p.m. Chair Cook called the Study Session to order. 17 18 Those present: Mickey Cochran, Carl Cook, Carlos Iglesias, Karen Jeffreys and David Moulton, Planning 19 Commission members; Kristina Haycock, Planner; J. Kirby Snideman, Long Range Planner; Sam 20 Kelly, City Engineer; Cliff Peterson, Private Development Engineer; Paul Goodrich, 21 Transportation Engineer; Mark Seastrand, City Council Liaison and Cheryl Vargas, Minutes 22 Secretary 23 24 Those excused: Mike Staker and Ross Spencer, Planning Commission members; Bill D. Bell, Development 25 Services Director; Jason W. Bench, Planning Director; Christian Kirkham, Long Range Planner 26 and Steve Earl, Legal Counsel 27 28 The Commission and staff briefly reviewed agenda items and minutes from the July 11, 2018 meeting and adjourned 29 at 4:25 p.m. to the City Council Chambers for the regular meeting. 30 31 REGULAR MEETING 32 33 Place: Orem City Council Chambers 34 35 At 4:30 p.m. Chair Cook called the Planning Commission meeting to order and offered the invocation. 36 37 Those present: Mickey Cochran, Carl Cook, Carlos Iglesias, Karen Jeffreys and David Moulton, Planning 38 Commission members; Kristina Haycock, Planner; J. Kirby Snideman, Long Range Planner; Sam 39 Kelly, City Engineer; Cliff Peterson, Private Development Engineer; Paul Goodrich, 40 Transportation Engineer; Mark Seastrand, City Council Liaison and Cheryl Vargas, Minutes 41 Secretary 42 43 Those excused: Mike Staker and Ross Spencer, Planning Commission members; Bill D. Bell, Development 44 Services Director; Jason W. Bench, Planning Director; Christian Kirkham, Long Range Planner 45 and Steve Earl, Legal Counsel 46 47 Chair Cook asked Ms. Haycock to introduce Agenda Item 3.1: 48 49 Agenda Item 3.1 is a request by Bob Salvo of Blue Haven Pools for the City 50 to approve the plat amendment for Plat “E” The Lakes at Sleepy Ridge 51 including the vacation of Lot 154, Plat “B” The Lakes at Sleepy Ridge Phase 1 52 located at 1999 West 475 South in the PD-15 Zone. 53 54 Staff Presentation: The applicant represents the owner of the home at 1999 55 West 475 South and works for a pool installation company. The owner of the 56 home would like to put a pool in the backyard, but to do so needs to reduce the 141
1 DRAFT Planning Commission minutes for August 1, 2018
1 rear easement from 10 feet down to 5 feet. Staff has received all necessary letters to support the vacation. 2 3 Recommendation: The Development Review Committee has determined this request complies with the Orem City 4 Code. Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the plat amendment for Plat “E” The Lakes at Sleepy 5 Ridge including the vacation of Lot 154, Plat “B” The Lakes at Sleepy Ridge Phase 1 located at 1999 West 475 6 South in the PD-15 Zone. 7 8 Chair Cook asked if the Planning Commission had any questions for Ms. Haycock. Mr. Iglesias asked if there were 9 any utilities there now. Ms. Haycock said no there were not. Mr. Cook asked if there were a public utility easement 10 (PUE) on the golf course side of the property line. Ms. Haycock said she was not sure of that. 11 12 Chair Cook invited the applicant to come forward. Bob Salvo introduced himself. Utilities have agreed to vacate 13 their easements, except for the power company who wanted to maintain a five-foot easement. If there were no 14 easement there, they could build right up to the property line. 15 16 Chair Cook opened the public hearing and invited those from the audience who had come to speak to this item to 17 come forward to the microphone. 18 19 When no one came forward, Chair Cook closed the public hearing and asked if the Planning Commission had any 20 more questions for the applicant or staff. When none did, he called for a motion on this item. 21 22 Planning Commission Action: Mr. Iglesias moved to approve the plat amendment for Plat “E” The Lakes at Sleepy 23 Ridge including the vacation of Lot 154, Plat “B” The Lakes at Sleepy Ridge Phase 1 located at 1999 West 475 24 South in the PD-15 Zone. Ms. Jeffreys seconded the motion. Those voting aye: Mickey Cochran, Carl Cook, Carlos 25 Iglesias, Karen Jeffreys and David Moulton. The motion passed unanimously. 26 27 Chair Cook asked Ms. Haycock to introduce Agenda Item 3.2: 28 29 Agenda Item 3.2 is a request by University Mall Shopping Center, LC for the City to approve the plat amendment 30 of Park Avenue West University Place Subdivision, amending Lot 6A of the University Mall Subdivision Plat ‘A’ 31 Lot 6 Amended and Amending Lots 11, 13, and 14 of the University Mall Subdivision Plat ‘A’ located at 625 East 32 1150 South in the PD-34 Zone. 33 34 Staff Presentation: The applicant has received site plan approval to build a 35 new office building on the site described. However, before they can receive 36 their building permit they need to amend their plat. 37 38 Recommendation: The Development Review Committee has determined 39 this request complies with the Orem City Code. Staff recommends the 40 Planning Commission approve the plat amendment of Park Avenue West 41 University Place Subdivision, amending Lot 6A of the University Mall 42 Subdivision Plat ‘A’ Lot 6 Amended and Amending Lots 11, 13, and 14 of 43 the University Mall Subdivision Plat ‘A’ located at 625 East 1150 South in 44 the PD-34 Zone. 45 46 Chair Cook asked if the Planning Commission had any questions for Ms. Haycock. Mr. Cook asked if the plat 47 amendment should have been done before the site plan or does it matter. Ms. Haycock said it does not matter but 48 they cannot build until both have been taken care of. 49 50 Chair Cook invited the applicant to come forward. Kathy Olson introduced herself. Lot 100 is the lot on which the 51 office building will be built. Financing a mixed-use project is very complex. Lot 100 is platted the way the office 52 lender would like it to be platted, but the retail lender is not so happy. There is a possibility this lot may be divided 53 into an office parcel and a parking parcel in the future. She asked if that were something that could be approved 54 tonight as a note, or if she needs to come back at a later date for another plat. Mr. Snideman said they could not 55 make a note to this plat. The Planning Division would need to see the new plat and review it. Mr. Iglesias asked if
142
2 DRAFT Planning Commission minutes for August 1, 2018
1 she had an idea of how it would be subdivided. Ms. Olson said they would subdivide around the office building 2 itself so there would be a building parcel and a parking parcel. 3 4 Chair Cook opened the public hearing and invited those from the audience who had come to speak to this item to 5 come forward to the microphone. 6 7 When no one came forward, Chair Cook closed the public hearing and asked if the Planning Commission had any 8 more questions for the applicant or staff. When none did, he called for a motion on this item. 9 10 Planning Commission Action: Mr. Moulton moved to approve the plat amendment of Park Avenue West 11 University Place Subdivision, amending Lot 6A of the University Mall Subdivision Plat ‘A’ Lot 6 Amended and 12 Amending Lots 11, 13, and 14 of the University Mall Subdivision Plat ‘A’ located at 625 East 1150 South in the 13 PD-34 Zone. Mr. Cook seconded the motion. Those voting aye: Mickey Cochran, Carl Cook, Carlos Iglesias, Karen 14 Jeffreys and David Moulton. The motion passed unanimously. 15 16 Chair Cook asked Ms. Haycock to introduce Agenda Item 3.3: 17 18 Agenda Item 3.3 is a request by Susan Harding for the City to approve the plat 19 amendment of Park Avenue West University Place Subdivision, amending Lot 6A 20 of the University Mall Subdivision Plat ‘A’ Lot 6 Amended and Amending Lots 21 11, 13, and 14 of the University Mall Subdivision Plat ‘A’ located at 625 East 22 1150 South in the PD-34 Zone; however, the applicant called today and asked that 23 the item be continued indefinitely so he can continue to work with the City and 24 find an alternative to installing the cul-de-sac. 25 26 Planning Commission Action: Mr. Cochran moved to continue indefinitely the plat amendment of Park Avenue 27 West University Place Subdivision, amending Lot 6A of the University Mall Subdivision Plat ‘A’ Lot 6 Amended 28 and Amending Lots 11, 13, and 14 of the University Mall Subdivision Plat ‘A’ located at 625 East 1150 South in the 29 PD-34 Zone. Ms. Jeffreys seconded the motion. Those voting aye: Mickey Cochran, Carl Cook, Carlos Iglesias, 30 Karen Jeffreys and David Moulton. The motion passed unanimously. 31 32 Chair Cook asked Ms. Haycock to introduce Agenda Item 3.4: 33 34 Agenda Item 3.4 is a request by Reza Sanati to request the City approve the preliminary plat of Reza Subdivision 35 Plat “A” located at 344 South 1200 West in the R8 zone. 36 37 Staff Presentation: The applicant owns the property at 344 South 1200 38 West and is requesting City approval to subdivide the property into two 39 lots. The deep lot will be 10,000 square feet while the front lot is 8,664 40 square feet. The existing home on the front lot will stay and a new home 41 will be built on the rear lot. 42 43 Recommendation: The Development Review Committee has determined 44 this request complies with the Orem City Code. Staff recommends the 45 Planning Commission approve the preliminary plat of Reza Subdivision Plat “A” located at 344 South 1200 West in 46 the R8 zone. 47 48 Chair Cook asked if the Planning Commission had any questions for Ms. Haycock. Mr. Cook asked if both lots meet 49 the zoning requirements. Ms. Haycock said that is correct. 50 51 Chair Cook invited the applicant to come forward. Roger Dudley, Dudley & Associates, introduced himself. He had 52 nothing to add. 53 54 Chair Cook opened the public hearing and invited those from the audience who had come to speak to this item to 55 come forward to the microphone. 56 143
3 DRAFT Planning Commission minutes for August 1, 2018
1 When no one came forward, Chair Cook closed the public hearing and asked if the Planning Commission had any 2 more questions for the applicant or staff. When none did, he called for a motion on this item. 3 4 Planning Commission Action: Ms. Jeffreys moved to approve the preliminary plat of Reza Subdivision Plat “A” 5 located at 344 South 1200 West in the R8 zone. Mr. Cochran seconded the motion. Those voting aye: Mickey 6 Cochran, Carl Cook, Carlos Iglesias, Karen Jeffreys and David Moulton. The motion passed unanimously. 7 8 Chair Cook asked Ms. Haycock to introduce Agenda Item 3.5: 9 10 Agenda Item 3.5 is a request by the Baxter Family Trust for the City to amend Section 22-5-3(A) and the zoning 11 map of Orem City by rezoning the property at 195 East 1600 North from the R8 zone the PRD zone and amending 12 Appendix KK by adding Baxter Gardens. 13 14 Staff Presentation: The property at 195 East 1600 North is a 1.65-acre property 15 owned by the Baxter Family Trust. The representatives of the trust are requesting 16 the property be rezoned from R8 to Planned Residential Development for the 17 development of six twin-homes that will be split between the trust. This translates 18 to a density of 3.64 units per acre. The PRD zone allows up to 8 units per acre. 19 20 A neighborhood meeting was held on June 7th with 30 neighbors in attendance. 21 Meeting minutes are attached. 22 23 Recommendation: Staff recommends the Planning Commission forward a 24 positive recommendation to the City Council to amend Section 22-5-3(A) and the 25 zoning map of Orem City by rezoning the property at 195 East 1600 North from 26 the R8 zone the PRD zone and amending Appendix KK by adding Baxter Gardens. 27 28 Chair Cook asked if the Planning Commission had any questions for Ms. Haycock. No one did. 29 30 Chair Cook invited the applicant to come forward. Cindy Baxter Cox introduced herself. She had nothing to add. 31 32 Chair Cook opened the public hearing and invited those from the audience who had come to speak to this item to 33 come forward to the microphone. 34 35 Gloria Gowans, her property is just west of the Baxter home. She would like to know if in the future, with that 36 zoning, they would take all their homes. 37 38 Jared Wilks, his lot is fifty feet from the parcel in question. He wants to make sure the neighborhood meeting was 39 represented correctly. The meeting notes stated that the neighbors’ comments were positive. He does not think that 40 the neighbors actually felt this was a full neighborhood meeting and notices were not properly sent out. With zoning 41 changes, what assurances do the current home owners have that these new homes will be built to a standard similar 42 to the current neighborhood standards. He asked what assurances the current home owners have that the proposed 43 property will be perpetually governed by an HOA. To encourage stability in the new development, they are 44 interested in having covenants in place for owner occupied homes only. He asked what assurances the current home 45 owners have that the zoning change will not allow anything else but the proposed twin homes with the limited 46 density. He asked what if a sale to a different developer would create the risk that they could develop the property 47 with something different than what is being proposed. He is concerned about the development, construction and 48 finance experience that the current owners have. The property should be developed responsibly, timely, completely. 49 It is common for developers to contribute to the community, as in large developments where a park is created. These 50 landowners inherited the property and they should make an investment up front in the community. 51 52 Martin Wright, his backyard borders the backyard of proposed property. He wanted to go back to what the zoning 53 commission did in March of 2017 for the neighborhood. He pulled something up that said, Land Use: Preserve the 54 single-family nature of the neighborhoods through similar low density residential development and infill. Careful 55 steps should be taken to insure preservation of existing single-family neighborhoods. His biggest concern is for 56 Floyd Gowans, who could not be at the meeting. He will have to tear out the trees that are currently there and there 144
4 DRAFT Planning Commission minutes for August 1, 2018
1 will be open access to his property. He will now have to put in a fence that will not be provided by the developer. He 2 is also worried about his own 10-foot wall to the right of the property. It is deteriorating in some places, and he 3 wonders what they are going to do about that. He asked if that is in the master plan to take care of that part of the 4 property or is he stuck with fixing the fence that currently exists there. 5 6 Julene Hansgen, 30 E 1700 North. She moved to Orem in 1979. It appealed to them that the zoning was for single 7 family dwellings. She has been in her home for forty years and it is paid for, and they are looking forward to the 8 future. This quadrant has no multi-family dwellings that she is aware of and they do not want any. She is strongly 9 opposed to the zone change. She is worried about future if they allow multiple units in. Visibility onto 1600 North, 10 by the canal road, is very difficult. There was a fatality of a boy close to this location. She is highly opposed to the 11 zone change, and she will fight for a single-family dwelling on this land. She does not want it to bother the Gowans 12 who are very close to this. 13 14 Nancy Jefferies, lives adjacent to Ms. Hansgen’s property. She said amen to everything Ms. Hansgen said. She 15 thought there would be four twin homes. Now it looks like six are present. The way they will arrange the street, with 16 a sidewalk on one side and not on the other, says to her the developer has in mind to take over the Gowans’ property 17 if they are willing to sell. Sounds like a camel wanting his nose in the tent. She is totally against anything other than 18 single family dwellings. She knew the little boy that was hit on the corner of Main Street at a stop light and killed. 19 There is more and more traffic. You may think older people will come and buy those twin homes, but that should be 20 kept down by Front Runner station, where they need public transportation. 21 22 Echo Baxter Hall, beneficiary of trust and trust property. From what she understands of the applicant, Cindy Cox, is 23 not the only applicant on this proposal. Tim Baxter lives in Kentucky. The way the property was left was it was to 24 be sold and divided. It does not say anywhere in the trust that it was to go in this direction. Not everyone in the trust 25 as a beneficiary agrees with this. She has asked if she could purchase the home and was refused. They are telling her 26 they are going to demolish the current home to put these twin homes in. From the legal advice that she has received, 27 it is illegal to put these twin homes in. There is a developer, the Wright Group, and she does not know who they are. 28 The trust money will pay for this development. She is very opposed, very confused and very saddened as this is not 29 what their father wanted. 30 31 Robert Farr, lives on 210 East. One of the biggest concerns almost everyone he talks to in that area of Orem has, is 32 the amount of high density housing in the City. Especially in residential areas or down State Street as opposed to 33 putting this high-density housing in an area with better flow of traffic. There is no street width called out on the 34 plans. When he talked to the Planning Commission, they said there were no plans to put in a sidewalk on the east 35 side, but they thought it would be equitable for the next developer to put in the sidewalk on the east side. Right off 36 the bat there is going to be a street that is not fully developed, as well as, a narrow street. Going along with the street 37 width, right now it takes quite a bit of time to turn out of 210 East onto 1600 North, and to have another street is a 38 high concern for safety. As Orem gets higher density, people are taking more chances in traffic. This will increase 39 the probability of potential accidents. On the plans they are already illustrating other homes. To him, he does not see 40 six units, he sees the potential of twelve families because so many are finishing their basements and renting them 41 out. Twelve families represent twenty-four cars, and with a narrow street, there is a parking issue. This needs to be 42 thought of as though people on this Commission lived there. 43 44 Fred Gowans, lives at 133 East 1600 North. Next to it is 145 East and next to that is 157 East. Behind 145 East and 45 157 East, he owns all the way to the back to the school and park which takes up about two and a half acres. His dad 46 moved there in 1968 and he moved there in the middle seventies. Since that time, they came and told him that 47 eminent domain would take place and they would take six and a half acres further north. He talked to his dad and he 48 said not to argue the point but do what had to be done. They now have two and a half acres. The other thing is, on 49 the plans where the cul-de-sac sticks over on his property, and there are two different places where it goes onto his 50 property. He has all his horses back there and they are in the process of wanting to take them down. He thinks that is 51 horrible. That is how he feels about it and he feels bad for those to the east of him and what they are going through. 52 53 Sean Baxter, part of the trust and is a beneficiary. The only way he found out about this meeting was a sign posted in 54 front of the property. The trustees have told him nothing about Baxter Gardens. He wishes the Committee would 55 take into consideration some of the legal things in this trust before it continues to rezone. His family has some 145
5 DRAFT Planning Commission minutes for August 1, 2018
1 problems with the rezone proposal. He appreciates the Committee will relook at everything in the trust before 2 moving ahead with any rezoning. 3 4 Chair Cook closed the public hearing and asked if the Planning Commission had any more questions for the 5 applicant or staff. 6 7 Mr. Cook said there are some questions from the Public Hearing to address. There is the issue of encroachment onto 8 the Gowans’ property. Ms. Haycock said this is not an official decision; the Planning Commission makes a 9 recommendation to the City Council. The applicant is requesting the rezone. If the Gowans or anyone else does not 10 request a rezone for their property, it will not be rezoned. A private developer cannot eminent domain anything. 11 12 Mr. Iglesias asked what about the cul-de-sac onto Gowans’ property. Ms. Haycock said without Gowans’ 13 agreement, none of this can happen on the Gowans’ property. Everything shown on the plans of the Gowans’ 14 property is not going to happen if this rezone is approved. Part of the process of turning in a site plan is to show an 15 idea of how adjoining properties could develop. This is just a suggestion. Mr. Cochran said this is just conceptual. 16 17 Ms. Jeffreys said there was a comment about trees and she asked if the trees are being removed. Ms. Haycock said if 18 the trees are on the Baxter property they can be removed, but not from anyone else’s property. 19 20 Mr. Cochran said regarding the fence on the east side of the Baxter property, it would have to be determined whose 21 property it is on. Ms. Haycock said whomever owns the property it is on would be responsible for the fence and 22 maintaining it. 23 24 Mr. Iglesias asked about the noticing of the neighborhood meeting. Ms. Haycock said there were two notices that 25 were sent out. The first one was incorrect. The second notice was sent out scheduling another date for the meeting 26 and that one was correct. Mr. Iglesias asked if there was sufficient notification and time and for those being notified. 27 28 Ms. Jeffreys said density needs to be addressed, as “high density” has been mentioned several times. Ms. Haycock 29 said the City considers a PRD zone to be a low to medium density, similar to the R8 zone that is currently there. The 30 site plan being shown has four houses per acre which is close to the R8 zone requirements; the houses are just 31 attached instead of being spread out. 32 33 Ms. Jeffreys asked if Zoning can put a limit on owner occupied only and age restrictions. Ms. Haycock said that is 34 nothing the City has any control over. That is up to the HOA. 35 36 Mr. Cook responded to a statement from the audience and said a proposal has been brought to the Planning 37 Commission and so it must be addressed. Ms. Haycock said she has been given legal documentation that Ms. Cox is 38 in charge of the trust. When this goes to the City Council for a final vote, the City Attorney will be there. 39 40 Mr. Goodrich spoke concerning street width. He said from the back of curb to back of curb is thirty-two feet with 41 the sidewalk being separated from the street for pedestrian safety with an eight-foot planter strip for grass and trees. 42 The dashed line on the Concept Plan is conceptually on the Gowans’ property, for possible future development. It is 43 not a requirement. It could be built when Mr. Gowans or his heirs decide if they want to do anything there. The City 44 is concerned with safety and the more accesses there are onto 1600 North the more friction there is. That is why it is 45 a good concept to have a public street here where people can pull into and out of their homes and then pull on to 46 1600 North with good site distance. Estimated traffic for coming out of the subdivision would be thirty vehicles 47 coming out and thirty vehicles going in per day. There could be resident parking only for park access; but the 48 sidewalk would be for public use. If this proposed street is compared to the 210 East, this street has traffic on it that 49 is miniscule in comparison. The City likes to plan streets so they are safe, reasonable and provide access. 50 51 Mr. Farr said he is concerned with the street width, with parking on this street, and asked if there were room for a 52 fire truck or ambulance to get down this street. With so many cars parking on the street because of the short 53 driveways, he does not think a fire truck or ambulance could turn around. Mr. Goodrich said the City Fire Marshal 54 has looked at this plan and for streets with less than six hundred vehicles per day, twenty-eight feet is an ample 55 asphalt width. Mr. Cook said this is an approved City street width for streets of this size. Mr. Farr said 210 East, 146
6 DRAFT Planning Commission minutes for August 1, 2018
1 when there are cars parked on both sides of the street, two cars cannot pass each other. Mr. Goodrich said that is a 2 good thing in a residential area, as it causes people to go slow and proceed carefully. 3 4 Mr. Cook said there was a question about providing public amenities as a courtesy to the community. Mr. Snideman 5 said there are new impact fees for all new development. New development will pay a certain amount per unit. Mr. 6 Iglesias asked if that would affect existing residents. Mr. Snideman said no, that is just for new development. 7 Existing residents do not pay impact fees. 8 9 Mr. Cochran said he has attended all meetings that Orem City has set up for transportation and other City meetings. 10 Transportation is huge. There is some brilliant planning that is going on that will impact our children and 11 grandchildren. This proposed project is in compliance with current applicable laws. All the long-range planning and 12 all the current planning is on the web site. It is exciting to see what the future holds for Orem City. 13 14 Mr. Moulton said he is torn. He is an old Wyoming kid who believes in property rights and the right of owner to 15 develop their property the way that they see fit. He is also bothered by the fact that all the comments have been 16 negative. Ms. Jeffreys asked if the Commission members were confident that everything is legal and those making 17 application can legally make application. 18 19 Mr. Cook asked when this project was scheduled to come before the City Council. Ms. Haycock said it is scheduled 20 for August 28th. Mr. Cook said that regardless of the result of the recommendation made today by the Planning 21 Commission, residents will have until then to contest this. Mr. Iglesias said the trust document states that Cindy B. 22 Cox and Tim D. Baxter are legal representatives of the estate. 23 24 Roger Dudley said he is the engineer that developed this plan for the Cox Group. If the Baxter or Gowans property 25 are ever developed, there will need to be a street into these properties. If it were to be single family lots, it would 26 still need to be a cul-de-sac. It is narrow on purpose. Because of the location of the existing homes, if these 27 properties are ever to be developed, there will have to be a cul-de-sac. He would suggest that maybe more 28 communication be had between the Baxters and the Gowans so they can be compatible. The Baxter family is ready 29 to do something with their property. This development would not affect the Gowans’ property; there will be no 30 fences taken down and no trees on their property would be removed. 31 32 Chair Cook asked if the Planning Commission had any more questions for the applicant or staff. When none did, he 33 called for a motion on this item. 34 35 Planning Commission Action: Mr. Iglesias moved to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council to 36 amend Section 22-5-3(A) and the zoning map of Orem City by rezoning the property at 195 East 1600 North from 37 the R8 zone the PRD zone and amending Appendix KK by adding Baxter Gardens. Mr. Cochran seconded the 38 motion. Those voting aye: Mickey Cochran, Carl Cook, Carlos Iglesias, Karen Jeffreys. Those voting nay: David 39 Moulton. The motion passed. 40 41 Minutes: The Planning Commission reviewed the minutes from the previous meeting. Chair Cook then called for a 42 motion and moved to approve the meeting minutes for July 11, 2018. Mr. Moulton seconded the motion. Those 43 voting aye: Mickey Cochran, Carl Cook, Carlos Iglesias, Karen Jeffreys and David Moulton. The motion passed 44 unanimously. 45 46 Adjourn: Chair Cook called for a motion to adjourn. Ms. Jeffreys moved to adjourn. Mr. Cook seconded the 47 motion. Those voting aye: Mickey Cochran, Carl Cook, Carlos Iglesias, Karen Jeffreys and David Moulton. The 48 motion passed unanimously. 49 50 Adjourn: 6:00 p.m. 51 52 53 Jason Bench 54 Planning Commission Secretary 55 56 Approved: 147
7