[{"_1":2,"_106":-5,"_107":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,86,96],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6501303,"mediaKeyId","5653718-04faad183058580d324183d444a30d53","parentId",5653718,"title","Council denies rezoning request for Apple Creek parcel; development agreement advances on first reading","audioSeconds",2715,"startMs",11680000,"endMs",14395000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5653718-04faad183058580d324183d444a30d53&start=11680&end=14395","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5653718-04faad183058580d324183d444a30d53/thumbnail_11680000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6501303/Nibley/Cache-County/Utah/Council-denies-rezoning-request-for-Apple-Creek-parcel-development-agreement-advances-on-first-reading","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6501303-2d04fb8db4b74652904854ddc51138f7/orig.mp4?Expires=1770492959&Signature=IB55WERKEbEm81QrM70AS9aLOCcK9e3BtUBRHySEvC0gMp3oA5NbHfe54nmEBmY0hNjVFEL5gHOE2u9dhqEMTZ0E-0xzNsLTvTi0YwCbC1zDIuqnhR0RDbjmAYXQAwNHVoCyeFcbCX3eQR6NG6QALlRZ0-nuRHdHFQp8E09BunjsjjewYNKdoLderGFYHp6I2JJiXEadt948rAOHc8f5BkbSNpfydCAm4ZkveMAzmlPMQ6J31GM20TpQ6adDgIUJ9RHpzWjRgCq32Md4AeBqoZ6zmPpJ65gVQ5oNksdwT4mlnlOhxvx3z5km9IFA5OK0hXeWhQuJ95h1P87HKDjpzw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Nibley","date","2025-08-22T06:48:14.68Z","article","The council debated a developer request to rezone a portion of the Apple Creek area from R-2 to R-2A and a related development agreement at the Aug. 21 meeting. The rezoning was the focus of multiple public comments from adjacent residents who said the proposed density and lot layout would create traffic congestion, reduce setbacks and impede emergency access. Speakers voiced concerns about narrow lot side yards, on-street parking, and the potential safety effects if fire or ambulance access is limited.

Public commenters who identified addresses near the site asked the council to preserve the area’s character and to keep larger lots. Several residents cited public-safety concerns stemming from tight side-yard setbacks (comments repeatedly referenced emergency vehicle access and narrow passageways between structures). The council also received a written comment from a firefighter who argued current side setbacks could make it difficult for firefighters to operate in narrow passages.

Staff and the developer supplied technical updates in response: a storm-drain and grading plan, water-use calculations, and a runoff-management plan (under staff review). The applicant agreed to increase side-yard setbacks for lots adjacent to existing residences from 5 feet to 10 feet. Staff reported bids and cost estimates for bringing two existing structures on the parcel up to code: about $23,000 for electrical repairs and roughly $50,000 for plumbing; an earlier structural estimate for both buildings was previously identified near $125,000.

Council action: A motion to deny Ordinance 25-26 (rezoning to R-2A) passed. On the linked item — Development Agreement 25-27 and the preliminary plat for an Apple Creek open-space-style subdivision — the council voted to advance the development agreement on first reading and schedule a second reading; planning commission had previously recommended conditional approval of the preliminary plat pending execution of the development agreement. Staff and the developer must still resolve exhibit items (final legal descriptions, detailed tree/landscape costs and a runoff-management review) before final plat recording. The council also asked staff to confirm any required trail easements and the estimated city cost for building a trail if the council wants the trail constructed instead of only accepting easement dedication.

What the vote means: Denial of the rezoning preserves the property’s R-2 designation; advancing the development agreement on first reading keeps the plat/developer discussion alive but does not authorize final plat recording or infrastructure acceptance. The developer may revise proposals or return with alternate plans. Council members said they were balancing neighborhood concerns, landowner rights and the city’s development code, and several asked staff to bring back clarifying analysis or options (for example, increased lot-size diversity and clearer financial responsibility for bringing buildings up to code) before final action.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Nibley City Council- 08/21/2025","oneSentenceSummary","After extended public comment, the council denied Ordinance 25-26 — a request to rezone an Apple Creek parcel from R-2 to R-2A — but advanced the companion development agreement (25-27) on first reading for further review.","taxTitle","Nibley , Cache County, Utah","taxId",7271,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":81,"_51":82,"_53":83,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":84,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":85,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6501308,"Council hears code-enforcement software demo; vendor startup estimate $12,500 plus $7,500/year",0,4419000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5653718-04faad183058580d324183d444a30d53&start=4419&end=4419","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5653718-04faad183058580d324183d444a30d53/thumbnail_4419000.jpg","/articles/6501308/Nibley/Cache-County/Utah/Council-hears-code-enforcement-software-demo-vendor-startup-estimate-12500-plus-7500year","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6501308-19d107897aefde89e3ecb5d70db60546/orig.mp4?Expires=1770492959&Signature=BXZXWtZE1Ut2oSaMUiMMJtMWPDOb3ZNpQs3zMTggxeKmcVvMLgVmSVJMjCWZH51wrq38~DfnAurAEQvdM7pDTlxhzmGGC4yI7T5E~v7UGp5WwSReF~TvDEfrJ6r3nd2CQrAvR0bEqpfJMBd8kGFL4p3mRe5cXgpeK37q2hxUvYFskrJ6rLpPJi6lDwXwip7gmCn03eNzi90uQWlyv8MVWXvUM4~Xw9VQuV9q2qBPr-wQQzW221mKYrIl~WEvN7zsQtNvrXcAwvu4EGLHgCO5RC7-aN~hjccHeU97YmrVzqjQ1kmKdatPIqzMw0kiEIpUgHwrGM0LQSC~kn8JSx5i4g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Nibley’s code enforcement officer and staff presented an update on the department’s workload and a proposed cloud-based code- and parking-enforcement system during an Aug. 21 workshop. The city has moved from an ad hoc, spreadsheet-driven process to a part-time, dedicated code enforcement position in 2024; staff reported 835 cases so far in 2025 and said about 78% of nuisance cases reach compliance after a warning letter.

Evan (code enforcement officer) and staff demonstrated the vendor’s mobile tool that issues warnings and citations in the field, tracks follow-up inside the system, logs officer location and timestamps, prints on-the-spot warnings/citations with a mobile printer, and embeds a QR code for online payment. Staff said the system would reduce back-office work such as taking photos in the field, returning to the office, matching license plates and mailing a paper letter.

A vendor quote shared in the meeting listed a startup package of about $12,500 (hardware and implementation) and recurring annual fees of roughly $7,500 for two modules (parking and code enforcement). Staff said the vendor also offers collections and online payment processing services as part of the package. The planner and council asked for the vendor’s data-privacy and contract terms before moving forward.

Council and staff discussed policy questions: whether the city should require more warnings before citation, whether entering complaint data and officer notes in the field is feasible, and whether the system can reduce front-office time for collections. Staff said front-office staff would retain desktop access and the city could control which offices see what records. The council asked staff to return with vendor privacy and liability terms, and to confirm ongoing costs (licensing and hardware replacement) and the effect on front-office staffing and workflow.

No purchase decision was made; council directed staff to obtain contract terms, data-privacy agreements, and clearer startup/annual-cost estimates and bring those documents back for consideration.","Code enforcement staff reviewed software to automate warnings, citations and parking enforcement. Staff said the package would allow on‑the‑spot notifications, QR-code payments and cloud tracking; quoted up-front hardware and setup of about $12,500 and annual fees about $7,500.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":78,"_43":89,"_45":89,"_47":90,"_49":91,"_51":92,"_53":93,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":94,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":95,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6501313,"Nibley public works outlines $17,500-a-year asset management subscription, seeks council direction",2553000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5653718-04faad183058580d324183d444a30d53&start=2553&end=2553","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5653718-04faad183058580d324183d444a30d53/thumbnail_2553000.jpg","/articles/6501313/Nibley/Cache-County/Utah/Nibley-public-works-outlines-17500-a-year-asset-management-subscription-seeks-council-direction","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6501313-1d2e8aba59aeedf101732ba93c00cd8d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770492959&Signature=ew0N9AktpzMKFdvX1Xo-QSQuPL62vgDba3TwWDtpzH8nTJ~agSGcSjjI9rAHzyeJDqjwE7RelIZ0gVIPq~Yfynl0zd4~BZidKfc1uZI9Xi3L2oYc3~oIUKTOcv9swgSgy2OeAof6Kzwh3SwP0UnA-iUgGSaT1357OpOGlwEpEJjUUWkaqOclXbc6ORaSOGR7DmirsXG3R-ConrVSI28JOvEAZm~wOSVLAggCNK4tHfMV-BsAOQseTpuBPV-d24jBRoNl2freEE7vMcmpfvIv01ZHFtbYrAQCMP3DKwSFjQ3AnthImsvrqu63tuqcZylv8OdnK3S3ysdUQUGQyNTlIA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Nibley City public works director Steve Lisonbee presented a workshop on modernizing asset and work-order management for the city on Aug. 21, saying the software would centralize records for sidewalks, signs, water lines, hydrants, parks and other city-owned assets and make cost reporting and preventative maintenance easier. Lisonbee said current record keeping relies on spreadsheets and staff memory, which complicates budgeting and warranty tracking; an asset system would attach costs, equipment and labor to each repair and create field-accessible work orders.

Lisonbee summarized two vendor packages. One local vendor’s proposal was presented as the recommended option: an initial implementation and training bundled with three functional modules (public works, parks, stormwater) for a total first-year cost of $17,500 and annual renewals thereafter. He estimated the vendor’s standard inflation clause at about 5% per year but said the vendor has not historically raised prices. A second, larger vendor (OpenGov) was shown as a higher-cost alternative with greater setup and subscription expenses.

Council members asked how the city would pay for the subscription because the item was not included in the adopted budget. City manager Justin Mahon and Lisonbee told council the budget was adopted conservatively and that staff could either reopen the budget or look at remaining year-end balances to repurpose funds. Mahon said he would not recommend using impact fees to buy subscription software without a formal legal review; impact fees are dedicated to growth-related capital projects and generally must be tied to specific projects.

Several council members asked staff to quantify expected efficiency gains and a breakeven calculation. Lisonbee said he could not provide an immediate, robust ROI number but pointed to gains in time saved by crews, better preventative maintenance scheduling and more accurate, auditable cost reporting for repairs that now take weeks to assemble from disparate records. Council members also discussed contract length (vendor proposed year-to-year) and whether to include the subscription as an ongoing line in the annual budget if adopted.

Council consensus: workshop only. Staff was asked to return with the following before any purchase: (1) a budget amendment or funding plan showing where first-year and ongoing costs would be paid from; (2) a clearer breakeven/efficiency estimate comparing current and projected labor and equipment costs; and (3) vendor references and a draft support/termination clause for review. No contract was approved at this meeting.","Public works director presented two vendors for an asset-management system to track water, sewer, parks and streets. Staff recommended a lower-cost local vendor at $17,500/year with one-time setup included; council asked for more budget detail and asked staff to return with a funding plan.",{"_33":97,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":98,"_41":78,"_43":99,"_45":99,"_47":100,"_49":101,"_51":102,"_53":103,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":104,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":105,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6501298,"Council approves resolution to pursue creation of a South Cache recreation special service district; name amended to include 'South'",9096000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5653718-04faad183058580d324183d444a30d53&start=9096&end=9096","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5653718-04faad183058580d324183d444a30d53/thumbnail_9096000.jpg","/articles/6501298/Nibley/Cache-County/Utah/Council-approves-resolution-to-pursue-creation-of-a-South-Cache-recreation-special-service-district-name-amended-to-include-South","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6501298-05933c8c0bf6209ab8c65de41290f64b/orig.mp4?Expires=1770492959&Signature=Po48Bd77~SaPNIxczev0GlpuLUNXTtW-PJGhA~DQcxJw8GGkQSYX5qfBjAhtRd4QJ6YpC2Xcb0XvwzTL~ud~xHU74gFBW40u5oQSl9FVD1B7RTcNVCguckBz2q1XYQsrmjFFGoXkk8b2RvqRZ4YK~YwQpZG4IHn1XLffLNBjLVBtNLibV0KSbcBXGVTHWCZEFnM24SjVok8UhRfVL5JaAVaGH420Ga2XxwBGx-QeskyQ2evndNmo4cA6egiPHYDBaBwjq-DtGnJ7VjoK1raswVrgZ9LZ7aCT~MMES1qiVVLwLllpMsC~whVwBmEpy9e9k704RO~eepsZAjpojc65PA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The council approved a resolution to begin the process of creating a special service district for recreation services in southern Cache Valley, instructing staff to schedule and publish a public hearing. Under the process discussed Aug. 21, approval of the resolution does not itself create a taxing district; rather, it begins the statutorily required public-notice and hearing timeline that would allow the city to consider forming a district and to invite other municipalities to join.

Council members debated whether to keep “South” in the proposed district name. Some expressed concern that the name could alienate northern jurisdictions or the county; others argued that a South‑focused district is necessary to ensure service coverage for the southern part of the valley. The council amended the draft to include “South” in the district name and waived the second reading, approving the resolution and directing staff to schedule a public hearing on Oct. 16. The staff explained that, if the city proceeds after the hearing, the certification and election timeline would still require additional months and involve other jurisdictions if they choose to join.

Mayor and council members discussed regional coordination: a county feasibility study on recreation was under way, but council members said they wanted to move forward to avoid indefinite delay. Council emphasized that the resolution simply puts Nibley on a timeline to invite regional partners to discuss scale and funding options; it does not itself impose taxes or create the district.","Council approved a resolution to schedule a public hearing to consider forming a special service district for recreation services in the south part of Cache Valley. Members amended the draft to include the word “South” in the district name and waived second reading; the city will host a public hearing Oct. 16 to solicit public comment.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Council denies rezoning request for Apple Creek parcel; development agreement advances on first reading

Council hears code-enforcement software demo; vendor startup estimate $12,500 plus $7,500/year

Nibley public works outlines $17,500-a-year asset management subscription, seeks council direction

Council approves resolution to pursue creation of a South Cache recreation special service district; name amended to include 'South'