EDITORIAL – Making Developers Follow the Code

Let me lay down a little ground work before I voice my opinion and discuss a topic that I think the city should address. Firstly, lets talk about the Dark Skies Ordinance. Eagle Mountain city has a Dark Skies Ordinance that was approved by the City Council in 2014. The city website states this about the dark skies ordinance. “In November, 2014, the Eagle Mountain City Council approved an outdoor lighting ordinance that requires full cut-off light fixtures for all exterior lighting, effectively making them dark-sky compliant. What is Dark-sky compliance? One of the primary reasons that residents move to Eagle Mountain is to “get away” from it all. Recognizing the beauty of the night sky and that we can have an impact on preserving it, the City has taken measures to ensure we can see the night sky for years to come.” The site continues, “The standards our City follows are established by the International Dark-Sky Association (IDA) which puts a lot of work into pushing for policies that mitigate light pollution. To learn more, see the IDA website below. Additionally, to the right, you can see the Community Standards Guide and Exterior Lighting requirements to help you ensure you are in compliance.” The Dark Sky ordinance was put in place with a 4:0 vote by the City Council. There was some brief discussion before the vote and two residents discussed how the felt about it during the public hearing. Steve Mumford is quoted in the approved minutes as saying, “Uplighting is prohibited, except for government flags and seasonal decorations, and certain signage.” Councilmember Westmoreland, the current Mayor of Eagle Mountain made the following comments, as recorded by the approve meeting minutes.

“Councilmember Westmoreland stated that this ordinance was difficult for him. He felt it’s dangerous when government deals closely with people’s lives and with technology. Fortunately ordinances can be adjusted as necessary. He appreciated Mr. Austins comments on color. He also stated that when he lived in Lake Tahoe, the city was able to enact and ordinance that maintained the mountain feel of the city. That’s the intent of this ordinance without compromising safety.”

Secondly, there is a development on SITLA owned land that is being developed by Ivory homes called Overland. The master development agreement for the development gives them the ability to build 4,243 residential units. This development in June 2018 had a monument sign approved by the City Council. The council voted on the item and it passed with a 3-1 vote. Councilmember Colby Curtis was the Nay vote. Bryon Prince, representing Ivory Development, is recorded in the approved City Council minutes as saying “the size of the monument was scaled to be appropriate for what Overland will be at full build-out. Overland was planned to be a very large development, both residential and nonresidential, bridging the gap between The Ranches and City Center. Ivory Development was considering adding a plaque with information on the Pony Express Trail. Mr. Prince stated the natural elevation would be graded down before installation of the signs, which would make the signs about four feet lower than they appeared on the illustrations.” The sign has been a topic of heated debate on Social Media and among the chatter of the residents. The Eagle Mountain Concerned Citizens page has discussed the topic at ad nauseam since the sign was first introduced. The main concerns were the size, the fact it did not include Eagle Mountain on the monument (which was a recommendation of the Planning Commission), and how it makes City Center look like it is city of Overland. Then the power was hooked up to the monument and the lights stay on from dusk to dawn. The developer is using what is called Up Lighting on the monument, which is in violation of the Dark Skies ordinance. Conclusion, the city needs to force Ivory Homes the developer of the Overland development to bring their monument into compliance with the cities Dark Skies Initiative. There have been numerous emails sent to the city on this subject. Some of which residents have forwarded to me. Each one, that I received, has a response from the city that they are working with Ivory to get the monument changed so that it is in compliance. The monument still remains lit illegally and the city has not followed up with any type of action to force the developer into compliance. The code allows the city to impose a $75.00 per day fine until the infraction of the ordinance is rectified. The code states, “A violation of this chapter, or any provision thereof, shall be punishable by a civil penalty of $75.00 per day and each day of violation after the expiration of the 30-day period shall constitute a separate offense for the purpose of calculating the civil penalty.” Why is the city not imposing this fine on Ivory homes until they change the lighting on the monument to bring it into compliance. I received information from a resident in City Center that City says they are in violation of the lighting ordinance and needed to come into compliance. The resident received a “Courtesy Notice” letter from the city stating, “Well maintained neighborhoods promote community pride, reduce crime, and increase property value. To help neighborhoods meet this objective, Eagle Mountain Neighborhood Improvement notifies property owners of problems related to their property. Please review the code violation(s) and take action necessary to bring your property into compliance.” It then listed the code 17.56.050 for the General outdoor lighting standards. The Courtesy Notice continues, “There have been neighborhood complaints concerning the brightness of your exterior lighting. It is possible if you change the bulbs to 40 Watts, that may solve the problem with the bright glare from the existing bulbs. If not, there is an enclosed sheet that has examples of acceptable lighting fixtures. Please change out bulbs and fixtures by 1/15/2020” The notice continues saying an officer will check and if not in compliance further action may be taken. Actions include fees, towing, etc. It was signed “Neighborhood Improvement”. My question is this, why are residents being asked to be in compliance with the ordinance when developers are allowed to violate it without issue. The property that received the Notice was built prior to Nov 2014. Technically it could be argued that it is not required to be in compliance, unless the light fixtures were installed after original construction. 17.56.040.B in the code states, “Existing Lighting. All lighting installed prior to the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter shall not be subject to the requirements of this chapter, except that any existing lighting that is directly impacted as part of a project that requires an application for an Eagle Mountain City site plan or building permit is required to be brought into conformance with this chapter. All lighting shall be upgraded to conform to this chapter prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy or final inspection.” But that is definitely not the case with the monument built by Overland four years after the code was enacted.

I think that the city should hold developers to at least the standard they are enforcing on the residents. If the developer is not in compliance with code and the city is unable to enforce the fine, then the City Council should take action. I feel that the City Council should withhold approval of additional building plot plans and other phases until the developer is in compliance of code in existing developments. If the City Council is unable to do that, then I think the city should not approve occupancy licenses for previous developments until the developer comes into compliance.

Supporting Documents

Overland Proposal sent to City Council, June 19th 2018 Approved City Council Minutes, June 19th, 2018 Eagle Mountain Dark Skies Ordinance November 18, 2014 approved city council minutes Overland MDA Eagle Mountain Outdoor Lighting Code