TREMONTON CITY CORPORATION
PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 28, 2018

Members Present:
Micah Capener, Chairman
Val Bennett, Commission Member
Arnold Eberhard, Commission Member – excused
Troy Forrest, Commission Member
Ben Greener, Commission Member
Brad Janssen, Commission Member
Tom Stokes, Commission Member—excused
Bret Rohde, City Councilmember
Steve Bench, Zoning Administrator
Cynthia Nelson, Deputy Recorder

Chairman Capener called the Planning Commission Meeting to order at 5:36 p.m. The meeting was held August 28, 2018 in the City Council Meeting Room at 102 South Tremont Street, Tremonton, Utah. Chairman Capener, Commission Members Bennett, Forrest (arrived at 5:41 p.m.), Greener, Janssen, City Councilmember Rohde, Zoning Administrator Bench, and Deputy Recorder Nelson were in attendance. Commission Members Eberhard and Stokes were excused.

1. Approval of agenda:

Motion by Commission Member Greener to approve the August 28, 2018 agenda, swapping items 3. a and b. on the public hearing. Motion seconded by Commission Member Bennett. Vote: Chairman Capener – aye, Commission Member Bennett – aye, Commission Member Greener – aye, Commission Member Janssen – aye. Motion approved.

2. Approval of minutes:

Motion by Commission Member Greener to approve the August 14, 2018 minutes. Motion seconded by Commission Member Bennett. Vote: Chairman Capener – aye, Commission Member Bennett – aye, Commission Member Greener – aye, Commission Member Janssen – aye. Motion approved.

The agenda items 3 a. and b. were switched and discussed out of order.

3. Public Hearing:

a. To receive public input on amending Title I Zoning Code, Chapter 1.16 Overlay Zones and adding the Stokes Warner Sign Overlay

Chairman Capener called the Public Hearing to order at 5:47 p.m. There were 19 people in attendance and it ended at 6:17 p.m.

Administrator Bench said in the last meeting the Commission held a discussion. For the most part the ordinance is fine, but there was an issue with the tall pole sign (70-feet) being so close to a residential area. Commission Member Greener said the main discussion was on the tall sign, but we did discuss the multiple signs also. Architect Bill Gould said Warner Truck Centers has multiple clients and truckers need to know where to find those companies. We want and need good visibility for that business to thrive. We are asking for a tall sign that can be seen from the freeway well in advance of the exit so there is no mistake on where to get off. The signs on the building are requirements for Warner Truck Center for whom they represent. They all want and need to be represented.

Commission Member Bennett said so the large signs on the northeast and southeast will not be seen from the freeway. Mr. Gould said when you are right at the intersection you can see those signs, but the purpose of the tall sign is to give advance notice on the freeway. Commission Member Greener said why did you request zoning for distribution manufacturing when you had a set guideline for signs. Why did you ask for such huge signs and beyond what is listed this far into the project? Mr. Gould said that in our discussions we have always discussed the need for this sign with the planning staff. Commission Member Greener said this sign would not match the zoning even if you were commercial highway—it would be too tall for that and too much footage. Mr. Gould said we had to zone this property to build the facilities and annex into the City. I think we have been upfront from our very first plan that we needed a freeway pole sign. The actual zoning and getting things to match what we needed has been a process. From both sides the intent was always to get the sign ordinance to match what we needed. Commission Member Greener said there are quite a few variations for what the current zoning is for those signs and what you are asking for. Mr. Gould said the sign ordinance was always intended to be revisited and match what we needed. Commission Member Greener said I have seen other truck repair centers that do not have this many signs or as huge. You have neighbors right across the street that have concerns about the brightness. Kevin Andersen with Impact Signs compared this sign to the one at Texaco to give them a size reference. Warner Truck Centers has Freightliner partners who want to be represented. To be a part of the elite service program there has to be so much signage and you have to be established for a minimum of two years before obtaining that status. They are then an authorized, trusted, top-notch dealer. All of Warner Truck Centers’s facilities are elite and this one will strive to be.

Councilmember Rohde said are they planning on running 24/7 service? Mr. Andersen said not at this time. It will depend on the demand. Most facilities are shutdown at 10 p.m. Commission Member Forrest said could there be a stipulation that the sign goes off at night when they close their doors? Mr. Andersen said yes. The 25-foot sign is for when they come off the freeway to know how to get to the facility. The 70-foot sign is on the back of the property oriented for freeway traffic on the backside of the pond. Chairman Capener asked if it was too close to the power lines, which it is not. Commission Member Janssen said he can see the Texaco sign about eight miles away when driving at night. Being that close to residential, he would like to put specific rules there. Mr. Gould said the signs themselves would not put out much light. It will be pleasantly visible to your eye—readable and comfortable. It will be a good facility with great amenities. Having the appropriate signage is a big part of drawing in customers.

Val Stokes said I do not work for Warner Truck Centers, but I have done business with them for many years and want to speak in their support. Comments have been made that we chose the land and zoning, but I do not think that is quite accurate. Before the land was bought, I called Administrator Bench to ask his opinion about annexing, zoning, and building on it and he was very supportive from the beginning. If he had said no, we would have looked elsewhere. It has evolved some, but he had a good idea of what we wanted to do with the land. During annexation, we were guided to the zone we ended up with by Administrator Bench and Manager Warnke. Even though we knew the zoning did not include the signs that were wanted or needed, there was an understanding that when we got to that hurdle we would get over it and we took the leap of faith. It was mentioned that other trucking shops do not have big signs, however, in my travels the signs are enormous. They want those for the same reasons Warner Truck Centers wants them. You are never going to find finer people to do business with. We were shown a book of all the ordinances and of the ones I have been forced to learn about, I do not see very much compliance anywhere. Warner Truck Centers will be good neighbors.

b. To receive public input on amending Title I Zoning Code, Chapter 1.08 Commercial and Industrial Zone Districts adding Tattoo establishments as a conditional use

Chairman Capener called a Public Hearing to order at 5:38 p.m. There were 19 people in attendance and it was closed at 5:47 p.m.

Krisha Blankenship said we are asking for a conditional use permit to open our business. I am originally from here, but have done business in Arizona for the past 15 years. This is our livelihood and we want to continue our business here.

Rafael Pantoja said I opened up my barbershop last year. I am new to town and had the pleasure of meeting the Blankenships. They are really cool people and I would like to see them have the same opportunity I had. I had a vision to bring something we did not have in Tremonton—men’s grooming—because a lot of people were leaving town. I go to Clinton for my tattoos and it would be awesome to have somebody local. I am in support and excited for them. I hope they can bring their business into town.

John McClellan also spoke in their behalf, saying I am happy to have them in town. They have run their business for 15 years without any hassles or problems.

Tony Blankenship said there are quite a few tattooed people here who go to Ogden or Salt Lake City and that is money leaving town. It helps the surrounding businesses too because people get things to eat while they are waiting or go shopping. He said they ID everybody and are very strict. Those who are 18 are still accompanied by their parents. I am picky about who I tattoo on and where they place the tattoo. If it is their first tattoo, they do not need it in an obvious spot where they cannot hide it. We set our shop standards above others in town.

Krisha Blankenship added we have worked very hard to get to where we are and trademark our name.

4. New Business:

a. Discussion and consideration of amending Title I Zoning Code, Chapter 1.16 Overlay Zones and adding the Stokes Warner Sign Overlay

Chairman Capener said I think it is about more than just Warner Truck Centers sign. I think it is that whole freeway. Almost none of the property around the freeway has been developed, but it is going to be and everyone who goes there will want visibility. That freeway is so high you have to have some height on signs. My opinion is the sign ordinance needs to change. I do not like the overlay. Commission Member Janssen agreed, saying the building is 35-feet tall and a 36-foot sign would not be visible. Initially my thought was that is just too tall, but I agree with that, especially the zone around the freeway, that 36-feet for a company sign is too low. A standard freeway height sign should be done—something higher than 36-feet. Chairman Capener said in talking to residents in that area their biggest concern was having trucks getting off on the upper I-84 exit. He wondered if they would have signs saying they cannot pull trucks in the residential areas. Administrator Bench said the Council passed an ordinance that will limit 1000 North truck traffic because the road is being destroyed. Commission Member Forrest said if we are going to try to bring businesses into town, we need to facility them being successful. We live here and want our kids here so businesses need to succeed. I drive all over and a 70-foot sign is not uncommon.

Val Stokes said we are concerned about the neighbors. When I first called Administrator Bench, he said that land has been in the City’s sights for a while and they want it in the City. Part of the reason we want the monument signs on the street is so when they come in they know where they are suppose to go. We did not put any trees or tall shrubs for that very reason. We do not want them to go up that road. There will be signs on our property for trucks exiting notifying them to not turn right. We will direct them to 2000 West or the freeway.

Councilmember Rohde said instead of addressing the issue with the 75-foot maximum pole sign, could we address the whole zone along the freeway and change the ordinance. Commission Member Janssen said I would rather do that than have this each time. Chairman Capener said part of my concern is that if we say no you cannot, but then we have someone who comes in with 3,000 employees and tell them yes. I think it needs to be fair. Administrator Bench said this type of business fits in that zone. The commercial highway or district would have had to be totally revamped. These guys fit in that without conditional uses and jumping other hoops besides the signs. Commission Member Greener said I would like rules so when people come in they know what they are. Chairman Capener said the problem with that is what if you do not fit that rule, but we want that company? Commission Member Greener said there should be some property off that freeway that fits every rule. Chairman Capener said I think we need to change the zones, not the overlay. Councilmember Rohde said it might take a longer process to get that whole thing changed. You may want to consider approving the overlay to be overwritten by a future change so they are not held up. Administrator Bench said they would look into it.

The Commission asked more about the monument signs. Administrator Bench said we just look at the sign face. The dimensions for Val Stokes’s sign is 3×6 or 18 square feet, while Jack’s Tires is 4×8 or 32 square feet. There will also be directional signs for the entrance.

Motion by Commission Member Greener to accept the overlay for the sign standards and recommend it to the City Council. It was added that the Planning Commission would look at the sign ordinance for the I-15 and I-84 corridor. Motion seconded by Commission Member Forrest. Vote: Chairman Capener – aye, Commission Member Bennett – aye, Commission Member Forrest – aye, Commission Member Greener – aye, Commission Member Janssen – aye. Motion approved.

b. Discussion and consideration of amending Title I Zoning Code, Chapter 1.08 Commercial and Industrial Zone Districts adding Tattoo establishments as a conditional use

Commission Member Janssen said what zones will that allowed in. Administrator Bench said that is to be discussed and asked the Blankenships if they have found a location. Krisha Blankenship said it depends on you guys. We would really like the place at 137 West Main Street. Mr. Blankenship is the only artist in there so there is not a constant flow of cars, just a few vehicles at one time. Administrator Bench said you could recommend that to the City Council and it could be further discussed. It would be conditional and if rules are broken, they would be shutdown. Chairman Capener abstained from voting because they are looking at one of his buildings.

Motion by Commission Member Greener to recommend it to the City Council for consideration. Motion seconded by Commission Member Forrest. Vote: Commission Member Bennett – aye, Commission Member Forrest – aye, Commission Member Greener – aye, Commission Member Janssen – aye. Motion approved.

c. Discussion on code amendment to set a limit on the number of homes on one access

Councilmember Rohde said did anyone have a chance to look at Brigham City’s code. Resident Tyler Grange said they read the Box Elder County code and it says shall require a second access. I talked to the head planning commissioner in the County and he is not aware of any variances that have been given outside of Tremonton. They all use the County code whereas Tremonton City switched the verbage. Chairman Capener said they just approved one with 45 lots in Riverside and one access. He was going to put a few more homes and then run the road through, but they made it a cul-de-sac so he could get more lots. Administrator Bench read the City’s code saying a subdivision greater than 30 building lots may be required to have a second access road into the development prior to recordation of the subdivision. The Planning Commission shall determine the need of additional access roads based on density, traffic patterns, development location and natural land settings in the General Plan. He said a lot of subdivisions in the County die somewhere and do not develop like the cities do. Chairman Capener said I think the cities do somewhere too they are not going to let it keep going, that is why it is up for discussion. The City would not have approved that had developer Holmgren not already put the second access in. Administrator Bench said yeah, but it is not all the way connected and there will be a third one within a year for the other development to the east. Mr. Granger asked if that plat had been approved. Chairman Capener said they are requiring the road prior to plat approval. Whether that second access was put in or not the same traffic is still there, it is just on one of your neighbor’s roads instead of yours. It does not change the amount of traffic. Karly Palmer said but all of that traffic is coming right now. If we had it behind us, at least it would disperse the traffic. Chairman Capener said yeah it would, but then you would have twice the traffic because you would have more homes. Commission Member Greener said but some would come in from the other direction. I see it decreasing because you would have another entrance and another road. Chairman Capener said if that was not planned to happen then that would be a big problem, but the road is planned. Ms. Palmer said then why could that not be planned to happen first. Commission Member Greener said because of the cost of the development. Chairman Capener said in this case it is not that big of a deal, but in other instances, it could be. Leaving the may allows the Land Use to determine what makes sense. Councilmember Rohde said it says the Planning Commission determines that, but we never got the opportunity to address this. Chairman Capener said we did, but I did not think it was a big issue because the second access was installed. We looked at the plat and approved it. Commission Member Greener said we did three or four at a time and it is pieced out so we do not see the whole picture.

Mr. Grange said I agree that may gives you leeway for different scenarios, but this one is more of a safety issue. We have everyone on one lane plus a park. If anything did happen, we are all stuck funneling one way. Eventually could never come or be years from now. Chairman Capener said do we have any data to prove safety is an issue. Do we know what the County has really done? Have we ever had a safety problem related to this? Commission Member Greener said it would not even have to be a safety issue, it could just be a concern of the public to be justified in doing this. Commission Member Bennett said where does the maximum number of homes come from. Administrator Bench said most codes mention a 30 to 40 range. When we write something, we look at other cities. It has to be unique to each city, but 30 to 35 is normal. Commission Member Greener said can there be justifications. Chairman Capener said not if they change the may to shall, then it would make it 30 homes. If the code says shall you are limited to 30. Commission Member Bennett said would that prevent a lot of developments from going in. Administrator Bench said I do not think it would because most going in are 20 lots or less as a phase. Holmgren is on phase 7 and skipped phase 6, which would not quite connect it because phase 8 needs to be there. Each phase has been 15 lots or less. Chairman Capener said we would have killed too many deals. Commission Member Greener said it would not have killed this development it would have changed it. Chairman Capener said it would have killed it because there was not another exit out. Most property is set up in big long chunks and hard to get to. I like the may because it allows the Land Use to say it will be worked out somehow, review the safety scenario and say it makes sense, but limits it as much as we can. To pick a hard fast number has never worked for any one individual rule. Every subdivision is so different. No matter what we do, it does not affect your situation anyway. Ms. Palmer said as a Planning Commission could you not have said it makes more sense to put this phase in next. They agreed they could have. Ms. Palmer said where the money is should not trump the safety of everyone else. Chairman Capener said if it were a safety concern, we would not have done it. It is easily proven that 47 is not unsafe for that scenario. The public park changes the rules a bit, but I do not know how many, if anyone, ever uses it. The park was put in outside the scope of what we were doing. There is nothing that can be done at this point but to put in the next phase. Mr. Grange said that is fine, the past is the past and there is no point in dwelling on it. If you do not change the verbage, I suggest prying more into the overarching impact of those lots or closer to the number 30. Councilmember Rohde said the good thing is that awareness has been raised. I guarantee you when plats come to the Planning Commission in the future, that is one of the first things we will look at. That is the real win here. The City is trying to finish the trail next year and that could impact the traffic. There are things that need to be discussed.

5. Adjournment

Motion by Commission Member Forrest to adjourn the meeting. Motion seconded by consensus of the Board. The meeting adjourned at 7:04 p.m.

The undersigned duly acting and appointed Recorder for Tremonton City Corporation hereby certifies that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Planning Commission held on the above referenced date. Minutes were prepared by Jessica Tanner.

Dated this 11th day of September, 2018.

______________________________
Linsey Nessen, CITY RECORDER

*Utah Code 52-4-202, (6) allows for a topic to be raised by the public and discussed by the public body even though it was not included in the agenda or advance public notice given; however, no final action will be taken.