Bountiful council refines general plan goals; clarifies 'active transportation,' parks and tree canopy language

Bountiful City Council members on April 8 reviewed and revised language in a consolidated draft of the city's general-plan goals, focusing discussion on how the draft references "pedestrian" facilities versus the broader term "active transportation," where to place preservation language for the urban tree canopy and clarifying several action items on parks, water-wise landscaping and utility planning.

The discussion began after Francisco Astorga, identified in the meeting as city planning staff, reminded council members that the goals were compiled from earlier element reviews and a community vision drafted at the council retreat in January 2024. "We copied and pasted the exact wording from state code," Astorga said when explaining why one welcoming-community goal retained statutory phrasing used in the moderate-income housing report requirement.

The council debated where the phrase "active transportation" should appear in the document. Councilwoman Bradshaw said the two action items were intentionally different: one is intended to improve pedestrian safety on constrained, high-capacity streets and the other to support full complete-street approaches where right-of-way allows. "We should make improvements where we can even if we can't make as many improvements as would make it a complete street," Bradshaw said. Councilwoman Price Huish and others agreed that the connected-community section should explicitly reference active transportation; the council supported replacing the term "non-motorized" with "active transportation corridor" in one action and adding the phrase where it improves clarity.

Council members also approved several wording changes and clarifications requested during the session. The agreed edits and directions to staff included:

- Keep the state-code phrasing for the moderate-income housing report requirement unchanged to match statutory language and avoid rejection of the report, per Astorga.

- In welcoming-community action language, retain wording that specifically addresses pedestrian-focused improvements on constrained streets but accept that "active transportation" terminology will be used in the connected-community section where full complete-street strategies are appropriate. "Complete streets are designed to facilitate safe, comfortable, and efficient travel for all modes of transportation," Astorga observed, linking that phrasing to the active-transportation concept.

- Replace the phrase "non-motorized corridor" with "active transportation corridor" in connected-community Goal 2, Action 1, after council members said the term better aligns with state and regional planning usage (Wasatch Front Regional Council, UDOT, UTA were cited in discussion).

- Clarify park-accessibility language in the active-community section to read "analyze park accessibility based on resident proximity to parks to identify possible future needs," rather than using the broader term "infrastructure."

- Change water-related language from "consider water-wise landscaping principles" to "use water-wise landscaping principles" where appropriate on city-owned property.

- Add a directive to "review utility capacity when making capital plans to account for currently permitted and future land uses," to connect utility-capacity analysis with capital-planning decisions.

- Split a multipart action in the "friendly community" section into separate action items so distinct tasks (for example, preserving tree canopy versus facade rehabilitation or arts venues) are clearer and separately actionable.

- Consolidate tree-canopy language by moving "taking steps to preserve the tree canopy" into the efficient-and-resilient community goal that includes an inventory of existing street trees and a preservation objective. Councilman Murray specifically recommended tying inventory work to preservation language so the action is not merely descriptive.

- Add examples and target locations for bicycle parking: council members suggested adding bike racks along Main Street and at high-use parks, naming Town Square and Bountiful City Park and discussing Washington Park and North Canyon Park as candidates.

Council members repeatedly emphasized that the edits were intended to clarify how the goals will be implemented rather than to set formal priorities. Astorga said the draft does not impose a ranked order of actions and that priorities could be addressed later. "We have not had a priority discussion regarding any of these," he said.

What happened next: staff were asked to incorporate the agreed phrasing and formatting changes and return an updated draft for further review. No formal vote or ordinance was taken during the work session; the item remained in the staff-drafted goals and actions stage.

Why it matters: The phrasing changes affect how city staff, neighboring jurisdictions and regional transportation partners interpret the plan and how projects will be prioritized or scoped. Specific language matters for compliance (the council kept statutory phrasing for the moderate-income housing report to avoid a state rejection) and for coordination with regional active-transportation planning and utility and capital budgeting processes.

The council continued the work session agenda after the discussion; staff will bring back the revised general-plan goal language for additional review.