TREMONTON CITY CORPORATION
PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 12, 2021
Members Present:
Micah Capener, Chairman
Jordan Conrad, Commission Member
Penni Dennis, Commission Member
Paul Fowler, Commission Member
Brad Janssen, Commission Member
Layne Sorensen, Commission Member
Tom Stokes, Commission Member
Bret Rohde, City Councilmember
Steve Bench, Zoning Administrator
Cynthia Nelson, Deputy Recorder
Shawn Warnke, City Manager
Chairman Capener called the Planning Commission Meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. The meeting was held October 12, 2021 in the City Council Meeting Room at 102 South Tremont Street, Tremonton, Utah. Chairman Capener, Commission Members Conrad, Dennis, Fowler, Janssen, Sorensen, Stokes (arrived at 5:31 p.m.), City Councilmember Rohde, Zoning Administrator Bench, Deputy Recorder Nelson, and Manager Shawn Warnke were in attendance.
1. Approval of agenda:
Motion by Commission Member Fowler to approve the October 12, 2021 agenda. Motion seconded by Commission Member Sorensen. Vote: Commission Member Conrad – aye, Commission Member Dennis – aye, Commission Member Fowler – aye, Commission Member Janssen – aye, Commission Member Sorensen – aye, Commission Member Stokes – aye. Motion approved.
2. Approval of minutes—August 24, 2021
Motion by Commission Member Fowler to approve the August 24, 2021 minutes. Motion seconded by Commission Member Dennis. Vote: Commission Member Conrad – aye, Commission Member Dennis – aye, Commission Member Fowler – aye, Commission Member Janssen – aye, Commission Member Sorensen – aye, Commission Member Stokes – aye. Motion approved.
Chairman Capener called a Public Hearing to order at 5:31 p.m. to receive public input on a proposed zoning overlay. There were 26 people in attendance.
3. Public Hearing:
a. To receive public input on a proposed zoning overlay known as the Rivers Edge Overlay Zone located on property near and around 950 East Main Street extending north to 600 North, east to 1600 East and west connecting to Holmgren Estate East Subdivision, and zoning of other properties within the boundary of the annexation.
Manager Warnke provided a presentation and explained that during this public comment period the zoning is being considered with the Planning Commission to make a recommendation to the City Council. This property is outside City limits currently and needs to be zoned upon annexation. Several parcels are being brought into the City through that process. There is land in the ag protective so they have some regulations that are in their favor not to be annexed unless they agree to. This recognizes the protection they already have. One parcel is in the City while the rest is outside City limits. We are proposing we recognize the existing zone and carry that forward to those parcels outside the City as a Mixed-Use and Overlay District. The underlying zoning district of that boundary is Mixed-Use and the Overlay District supplements what are the regulations and standards within that zone making it more restrictive or in some cases relaxes the standards.
Manager Warnke gave an overview of the development being proposed. There are 5.5 acres for commercial, 240 units are proposed for apartments with some townhomes, and mixed housing types, including some 10,000 square foot lots that would butt up against Holmgren East. The apartments would be in close proximity to Main Street so the land uses that create more traffic will be by the transportation corridors. The collector road on Main Street (950 East) will eventually go all the way north to a collector road at 1400 South in Garland. The intersections will be increased in size to add capacity and allow for turn movements in all direction. Another collector road will go to the west (450 North) onto SR-13. The single-family lots (264) will be consistent with the existing development and townhomes will be located there as well. There is nearly eight acres for a park and regional storm drain basin. That will collect all the storm drain that is generated from everything south of this development to Main Street. It is not very deep so it will feel more like a park. The park amenities have yet to be determined. The City is required to improve the park and storm drain basin unless a PID (Public Improvement District) is approved.
Manager Warnke said 950 East is an intersection the City has planned to add a traffic signal. UDOT owns that so it would be done once it meets certain thresholds. He discussed the permitted and conditional uses, as well as those that would not be allowed. There is some discretion at the planning stage with the site plan review, but they are pretty standard. The improvements are supposed to help mitigate the impacts of the density. In this agreement, we have clarified the developer’s responsibilities so there are no surprises. Project improvements are things the City can exact from the developer because they are roughly proportionate to the demand that is being placed on City services. The City would help upsize a sewer line to accommodate for land outside the development, which is a system improvement and funded through impact fees. There are also zoning and density improvements they will do to help mitigate the impacts of their high density. The land associated with the storm drain basin is 2.5 acres. That is a system improvement. The City will reimburse for that dedication at a pre-development price. They are dedicating the land for the park and the water shares. The construction of the park and storm drain improvements would be through the PID. That is up to the City Council. They will also construct private amenities like a clubhouse, which will be owned and maintained by the HOA. There will be a network of trails that connect to open spaces. They are also dedicating the secondary water pump station with all the utility easements that are necessary to serve their development and Service Area 9. The buffering requirement for land adjoining existing residential along Main Street has a 10 feet buffer, but an extra five feet is being proposed to help minimize the impact on existing homeowners. That landscape buffer would have screening, as well as fencing along the canal.
Manager Warnke said some owners are concerned about the ag protection area. We thought it would be better to have a privacy fence to delineate the two parcels and keep homeowners contained on their side. The protection area acknowledges those protections and creates a zoning district that affirms the zoning and land use rights they have by virtue of that. Those areas can lapse and the owner has ability to take them out of those areas and considered for different zoning. There is land proposed in City limits, which would be rezoned to Mixed-Use and the Overlay District applied. The land to the north is in the County so there would be a cul-de-sac until it is developed. There is also a proposed road to SR-13, but we do need additional right-of-way to loop the alignment. It makes sense for our master plan perspective to have a road continue east. We have been working with property owners to acquire right-of-way through the Corridor Preservation Fund.
The time was then opened up to the public. General Manager of the Bear River Canal Company Trevor Nielson said we have appreciated the developer and their willingness to help with the property owners and with the new infrastructure on the east side of the canal. We have had shareholders associated with the triangle piece approach us about their concerns and that has nothing to do with us. We would expect the City to protect those individual rights. When a developer wants to move a canal or water conveyance, there is code they have to follow. This shareholder expressed concerns and that is as far as we would be involved. There is a section of code that needs to be followed. The canal company does see a path forward with the bridge on the north side that crosses the east canal, but it does require some land swapping and purchases to make sure the collector road connects with the highway. None of that is signed because we are still working out the details for the easement on the canal and those lots. The developer has what we need. The decision is not settled yet, but we can see a settlement.
Resident Capree Austin said I ask this body to further consider a specific consequence of the significant housing increase in Tremonton City boundaries. We have heard about water issues and structure frailties, tax increases, reduced service of law enforcement and first responders, and costs associated with each of these, but I believe it is the school system for children that is going to suffer the most. There are two factors I would like to bring to your attention, which are already exaggerated, but will become worse as Tremonton housing will further stress our schools and teachers, and educational future. Most importantly to students and tax payers is the issue of school utilization, which is measured and recorded similarly to ICU beds in a hospital. The Box Elder School District measures utilization in a similar way and when their capacity reaches 90% the effectiveness of teaching students and student interactions begin to suffer. Not only the students, but our teachers, aids, support staff, janitors, and others who help maintain a functional school. North Park Elementary has a capacity of 575 students and they have 517 enrolled. That is 90% capacity. McKinley Elementary has a capacity of 575 students and they have 547 enrolled so that is a 95% capacity. Garland Elementary has a capacity of 715 students and they have enrolled 608, which is 91% capacity. Bear River High School is only 9% away from capacity. We ask you to please take into consideration the severe and negative impact that the continued development of our small City will have on our children, their education and educators. Please do not add more problems on their back. This will bring up the cost to citizens for a new school. An elementary costs nearly $30 million and a high school is over $100 million. The expedited rate of high-density housing and extensive home development projects will irresponsibly devastate our school system. The increased tax base on new developments cannot cover the increased infrastructure, maintenance, equipment, police, fire, and first responders, capital improvement, and education so tax increases are inevitable. The citizens are already stretched with secondary water implementation, fuel costs sky rocketing, inflation, and overall consumer product cost increases so please apply for a halt on future housing until sensible growth strategies can be created or input can be received from educators, hospitals, first responders, and other cities who are facing these same issues, and citizens like us.
Resident Jami Poppleton said I live across the road from the four-way intersection and I cannot get up and down my road right now, but we are going to add more houses and more people. Traffic is backed up all the way to the storage sheds like a parade. If I turn off the bridge that had to be built for one of my neighbors, then people follow me down that road and when they cannot get out of there because of traffic being so backed up from the west they cut across our lawn. How do you stop people from using roads they are not suppose to use without being held liable if something happens. If this development goes through, I will not be able to get out of my road without using someone else’s access. That intersection is a joke. Tremonton needs to post something on the website saying this is our 5 to 10 year plan so people are aware about what is happening. I live close to this subdivision, but I did not get a letter. Everyone I have spoken to has the same reaction, why say anything because it does not matter. Why bother to stand up and voice your concern. Are you going to take into consideration what the citizens of Tremonton say? If that is what Tremonton City is about, I will sell my house.
Ricky Hansen said I farm 600 acres throughout the valley and I know what she is talking about when it comes to traffic. We stop working by 3 p.m., because we do not dare pull out with a load of corn and block traffic. We get the finger because we slow people down. It is getting to be a joke. We farm on the other side of the Garfield subdivision and we have a ditch that runs through there and so many kids throw stuff in it and it floods over. There are a lot of things that need to be thought about before this happens. We farm to the north where this is going on and we have a drain ditch that drains 70 acres and if that has been stopped with plastic fences, there goes my weed burner. We farm by the acre not by the hour so much work is involved. I am not sure what that will do to our operation if we do not mitigate some of these problems we are facing with more people and the impact it does have on agriculture and open space. Let us make sure this is done right and you listen to us so we can all get along. Thanks for your time.
Resident Amy Cole who lives on Main Street in the middle of the commercial area said I was not notified of this meeting. I would like to know what they are planning on doing around us. There is an access road planned to the east of me and then more commercial. I have not been approached by anyone so I am not sure if I am being squeezed out. My front yard will be impacted to widen out that intersection. Is that a strong-arm tactic to get us out? I was left out of the loop here by not being notified of the major development going around us. We do not have the infrastructure or enough firefighters to supply that infrastructure and serve people. That all needs to be put in place before you just start building instead of saying oh we will just figure it out later. That needs to be taken care of. I would like to get some answers on our house so we are not suddenly losing all our property.
Karalynn Freeman, from Herriman Utah, said I own the two farms that have been in the unfortunate position of trying to be a good neighbor with this new subdivision and Tremonton. It is obvious the City wants this subdivision. We need to try to be the best neighbors possible and to work out these horrible issues. The City has asked me if I would consider being annexed. That farm is going to be impacted by the decision you all make for the future. I was not aware until it was mentioned that the whole drainage ditch was on the border of that subdivision and the 70 acres around it. The backyard of those homes will be open to that farm and it needs to have some fencing. I would prefer an eight-foot fence rather than six. Also with the road being stubbed in, the bigger the stub the wider you have to have something blocking it to keep the kids out. If not, I will have a lot of children in there and we want to mitigate the dangers to them, as well as to the farm. I am very concerned about the width. How do you stub a road into a property that is in the County? Farms need to be blocked off. When people develop, we become the trash collector for construction companies. We need them to be responsible. Our farmers will not be very successful if they have trash all over. We need to make this farm so it can still function and so I can lease it to a farmer to make money. That becomes impossible because of the subdivision. All the things I have suggested and more need to happen to protect the property and children. There are big issues with the bottom properties and the Haws ditch and the right-of-way for that and the dirt road. The County notes a right-of-way and easement for the ditch and road, but somehow the property all became part of the lots and roads that Rivers Edge is doing. They did not carry that right-of-way forward and that is a problem. There are issues they are trying to correct. How will they get the water to this property with the Haws ditch on their property? Those are big problems to consider and you should not move forward without some of them being resolved. There is a law that allows the developer to relocate things, but they have to abide by the law. I doubt you are contacting all who are being affected. Thank you for hearing me and I hope you will be very strict with Rivers Edge.
Resident Jennifer Thompson said this affects property I own at 1179 East Main Street. I am afraid my problem will seem insignificant. This zoning affects my personal health, education, family, and our future drastically. We own three fourths of an acre, which was purchased 10 years ago for the purpose of keeping horses there. The proposed zoning, to my understanding, would require us to remove the animals. The horses are used for therapeutic purposes because I am an epileptic and have Covid long haulers with neurological damage from the virus, which causes epilepsy. I ride and work with the horses with the guidance of my husband. This therapy practice is protected under Title II of the Americans with Disability Act. I ask you to respect my disability and therapy that provides me with the ability to maintain my functional health and prevent further deterioration. This property provides me with the privacy and ability to setup without additional cost of travel, not to mention location for our four legged family members to live. I received a certificate in Marriage and Family and Community Relations from BYU where I continue to complete a Psychology based degree. I am using my property and horses to capture research regarding improved health for various health disabilities like mine. The results will be documented, shared, and published with assistance from the University for the purpose of improving and introducing new therapy that will continue for years. A change in zoning will prevent my ability to maintain a controlled environment and would nullify the research I have gathered. This is a safe and clean kept area. We have done lots to improve the ground over the last 10 years—all for the purpose of keeping the horses on site. This type of property is a large reason why people move to this community so they have a sense of rural life, especially on a main entryway to Tremonton. I request our property be permitted to keep the horses, which are changing my life, until the purpose or ownership of the property changes. I am unable to see why such an allowance would affect the City or developers. I will be forced to be moved so I ask you to please respect my disability. I am pleading for your support.
Resident Chann Poppleton who has lived in east Tremonton for 30 years said we all know this will go forward no matter what. I think the infrastructure needs a lot of work. There are developments going up all over Tremonton right now. All I see are more houses going up and nothing is happening to deal with traffic and infrastructure. Nothing is being done to deal with this. This development will be across the street from me and will impact all of us up and down Main Street hugely. Everyday my daughter gets off her bus and the horn blares trying to stop traffic. I have called the school board and they cannot change the route because there are too many kids to accommodate. I am on the busiest street in town and you guys are going to add 600 more homes. We are seeing an insane amount of traffic that needs to be dealt with. Tremonton is building houses everywhere and I do not see anything happening with the roads and traffic lights or anything to deal with the added traffic. This development is the biggest I have heard about in this area and what is it going to do to that mile and half road from Kent’s to the Arctic Circle intersection. I would like to see you address the extra traffic. It is already crazy and this town is turning into a bedroom community. I commute to Ogden and know thousands of others who do. People who are moving here are not all working here. I would like to see something done with that road to make it safer for my kids when getting off the bus. There are certain times of the day I cannot even get out of my driveway because of traffic.
Resident Kristie Bowcutt said I am asking you to take a step back and look at the high-density housing you have already approved for the City. We do not have the manpower for all the people who will be moving in. For the past year, we have listened to the City Council talk about having no water. So where is the water going to come from? You are going to task the sewer system, too. I worked in the school system for 18 years and you cannot manage or teach students when they are that full. It is impossible. The apartments will not pay taxes so all of us are going to pay taxes on what you are bringing in. We do not need any more high-density housing. That crap behind Greer’s Hardware is enough. Stop the high-density housing. We do not need it. I have had rides in the ambulance and I am proud of our volunteer EMTs, but they cannot do it all because of what has passed in this City. You need to take a step back and take a look at what you have done and are doing. The school and sewer cannot handle it. The police, EMTs and roads cannot handle it, and neither can our taxes. You will have to keep raising the taxes to pay for all these people. It is going to bring the riff-raff. We already have enough crime in this City. I beg you to take a step back and wait a minute. Think about the City. We do not want to be Salt Lake or Ogden.
Developer Michael Jewell said there is a lot of concerns that have been addressed tonight. I do not mean to be dismissive, but it is important to remember the issue at hand, which is the zoning for this piece and not the annexation. We are not here to approve a site plan. I think the commission understands the amount of work that goes into each phase of a project like this. This is not 700 plus units going in at once. This is a project that will develop overtime as the market has demand. We are advocates for zoning per property. Having it zoned so she can keep her horses is not incompatible with the development we are proposing. I am unaware of any tax provision that allows owners of apartments to forgo property tax. The apartment renters do not pay property taxes, but those owners of the apartments are going to pay a higher tax per square foot of raw ground than any single-family lot in the community. I know growth is hard and change is hard. People want to live in Utah. It is impossible to shut off growth. The only thing we can do is build responsibly. This project is meant to address a lot of the infrastructure needs of the City. As far as density issues go, we have agreed to bear a significant amount of expense to help the City with its current infrastructure problem, including secondary water outside the boundaries of this project. The park is also significant. We are working with the City to mitigate some of the perceived negative consequences of this. I have lived in an apartment and townhouse and I would like to think I was not riff-raff. I do not have rich parents to buy me a house or give me ground to build. In the last eight years, housing costs have risen 60% and in the last year, that has risen 30%. Wages have lagged behind that and housing is a significant issue in Utah. It is almost impossible for a young family to get into a house. I do not know many who can afford them. Alternative housing options are a necessity. We have all been at different stages of life and taken advantage of multi-family living. We cannot take peoples’ land or water and we cannot force anyone out, but we can build around them. That is what the City code allows. Everyone is an advocate of property rights until their neighbor wants to do something they do not like. Manager Warnke is sensitive to the issue of density and has proposed buffer zones and landscaping that will allow those negative perceptions to be mitigated. Those are issues that have been address and will continue to be addressed in phases. We are not inviting 900 new families into Tremonton next week.
Resident Kipp Tanner said I am here because I have shares on the ditch, but after listening to everyone, I realize Tremonton has a problem coming. Do we have any new schools coming? Maybe we need to say Phase 1 is the only thing that gets allowed until we get a hospital or more grocery stores. You can smell the wastewater treatment plant on the interstate when you go by. I am tempted to put a semi in my mom’s field that says, “smell Tremonton City.” Septic tanks are a hell of a lot more clean. When I was going to develop property, I was told I would have to put sewer pipe through people’s fields, but I would not do that. People who own property should be able to do what they want on it. I am game for that, but the roads coming into this town are not big enough for that. That should be done before all of that is put in. Phase 1 is fine, but after that, we need more schools, grocery stores, and roads. Let us improve from the interstate to that. You have a whole bunch of other subdivisions going on and with the infrastructure; we need to move forward not backward. You are basically living on a quarter acre lot and buying 100 cows. You are going to shit all over everybody. You do not have the feed or anything to take care of it all. It has to come to a stop and you have to do the other work first. This makes you more money faster, I get that, but we do not get rich over night. This other stuff needs to be address before any more building needs to go on in this town. You are putting the cart before the horse. We need to take care of our community not just build up and not be able to take care of it.
Resident Tasha Speas said Phase 1 will get the road finished that Lyle Holmgren should have finished before. You cannot stop people from running the bus stop sign and now you are going to add another road, which will not happen overnight. Yes, this is years in the making, but you really need to consider all the stuff we have talked about such as schools and grocery stores. Where are our businesses? We need to bring more businesses to Tremonton. That is better than more apartments. The only person getting rich off those are those on the City Council and that is why those things keep getting approved. Maybe you need to consider others and not just yourself.
Robbie Petersen, a manager from Western Seed, said our business is on the east side of the canal so we want to express our concern for the public record. Western Seed is located at 85 North 1600 East and has been part of the community for 55 years. The proposed Rivers Edge development has raised concerns about possible noise and nuisances complaints that may arise from the neighbors in this new housing development. It is not unusual for our employees to work before sunrise and after sunset from early July to late October and mid March until May. During these extended hours lights, noise, and dust from our facility and equipment are regular. Our primary concern is this will raise complaints for any who have backyards that face our facility. Modifications can be considered to the affect of our operations and facility. I realize the property directly west of Western Seed is not in the development, but we feel future parcels may be developed as dead end roads. Our hope is you would consider some slight changes to help minimize any complaints of our operation. We would propose a road for the Bear River Canal on certain lots and require some changes and cul-de-sac to access them. In addition, some design changes could be considered for an eastward facing backyard for those homes on the Bear River Canal. As a citizen, I wonder if this annexation is approved is there any way to reverse it in the future? The other question I have is have any impact studies been done to provide numbers to the public for what type of water and utility demand this creates.
Resident Jen Gardner said a politician recently posted his sign that mentions responsible growth. I looked that up and that means to meet the needs of the present without composing the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. We understand we have the ability to use our property as we wish—that is our right. I understand we have a water issue in our area. The water we get from the lake affect that happens over the Great Salt Lake when that recedes there is less we get. That affects our ability to grow. When the concern was brought up about our schools and saying that is not Tremonton’s problem it is the school district and they were given more property to add a school, but chose not to take advantage of the property they were offered. Last winter the snowplow ran down my street three times. As we add more homes, we need to consider that. I am not for or against this. I just want you to think about meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations. I have lived in Logan and moved here because I did not want to be a suburb of Logan, which is where I am concerned we are heading.
Braden Moore said I am a representative of Rivers Edge and Utah has a problem. We are growing rapidly. People all over the country want to live here. The Governor’s Office and the school boards cannot all solve this one person at a time. It takes a group. On behalf of Rivers Edge we are coming to your City with what we think is a very thought out plan and a quality development. We are putting up quality housing and the last thing we want to bring to your City is something that cannot be sustainable for future generations. We do not want to come to the City and make problems. We want to team up with the City and make sure we are conscientiously looking at all the issues with the infrastructure, school districts, and whatever we can to make sure this is a sustainable development that brings in companies. There are a lot that would love to bring jobs and development to Tremonton to boost that revenue. We can conquer this together so thank you.
Chairman Capener closed the Public Hearing at 7:21 p.m.
4. New Business:
a. Discussion and consideration of a proposed zoning overlay known as the Rivers Edge Overlay Zone located on property near and around 950 East Main Street extending north to 600 North, east to 1600 East and west connecting to Holmgren Estate East Subdivision, and zoning of other properties within the boundary of the annexation.
Commission Member Stokes said the city has not annexed yet? Chairman Capener said they accepted the petition and it is in the 30-day protest period, but it is not finalized. Manager Warnke said the Planning Commission is considering a recommendation for the zoning. The annexation is going concurrent, but that is something done at the City Council level. Commission Member Fowler said according to the Tremonton Annexation Policy Plan, the first thing you should consider is how to prepare for responsible growth. They identify that to some degree and the conclusion reminds everyone there is no guarantee an annexation request will be approved. It is not something that has to be done. The next paragraph explains that when we do annex, the character of that annexation has to be in keeping with the residential, commercial, and agriculture flavor of our community. Those annexed areas should be compatible and what is currently zoned should marry together with what is being proposed. We have not talked about how that will change the Mixed-Use residential and small commercial to what this could be. That needs to be addressed. I suggest we keep the zone across there the same to better blend. When we annex we should follow the intents into the future. That area was planned for moderate density. How did we get from that to wanting to put apartments in? When you annex, it says you need to take into consideration the interest of all the affected entities, not just the developer. There are a lot of entities that will be adversely affected here. The developer says we cannot force you out, but we can develop around you. If you follow our zoning plan that will not necessary happen. It says to consider before annexation the consequences to all involved and considerations such as taxes and make sure we have the capability to provide all services.
Commission Member Fowler said can we as a City create a zoning for agriculture? We do not currently have one and could put this contiguous land in an agriculture zone. Manager Warnke said we created this protection zone that recognizes and affirms their agriculture use on the property, but we do not have an agriculture zone. It is a part of our community and typically is a non-conforming use that is allowed to occur as it exists. Commission Member Fowler said I would push to create an agriculture zone that goes along with that protection because if you do not have that then it is a non-conforming use. If it was an agriculture zone with cows and crops, then that takes the complaints away and protects the property owner. Manager Warnke said the agriculture protection does that anyway. It is a defense against nuisance complaint when subdivisions are platted and a notice alerts property owners of the agriculture use. We want to limit zoning islands. Chairman Capener said this property was all part of the agriculture zone and was removed to have this conversation. It is in the best interest of Mrs. Freeman to have an underlying zone because then she can do what she wants and not limit herself in the future. Commission Member Fowler said our bylaws say the whole area should come in and we have cut a line and are only doing part of it. We are creating an island on the other end. When we consider bringing in a large area, we are to look at the future plan of the City and it says the whole area should be considered. Manager Warnke said it is not an island as it relates to this proposal of the annexation as long as it does not violate the State code as it relates to the different shapes. Your focus as the Planning Commission is the zoning aspect of it. Commission Member Fowler said I ask because it may affect how we look at that project. As part of considering the zone, we have to consider how those areas could be used in the next few years.
Commission Member Dennis said what is the commercial and why can it not go straight across to match up with the other commercial property to the west? Will it blend with Main Street? Chairman Capener said all that is done at the site plan level and has to meet rules. Commission Member Fowler said according to their rough drawing, they know how many acres are single-family and multi-family and what the park will be so why zone it as Mixed-Use instead of R1 for houses and MU for apartments, why overlay the whole thing and open that up to anything? We do not need to unless they have different plans. Manager Warnke said Mixed-Use allows a range of land uses and some flexibility. Commission Member Fowler said Mixed-Use is great along Main Street, but I am not sure how I feel about it in a neighborhood. Commission Member Conrad said all these apartment and townhomes make it really confined I agree with Commission Member Fowler. I would rather have it zoned separately. If it is all Mixed-Use, we have a problem and they could decide not to do houses and stick just with apartments and townhomes. Manager Warnke said there are density caps and land uses associated with those. They still have to comply with all regulations in the City. They are proposing 224 townhomes and 240 apartments with a three-story maximum. Commission Member Dennis said so if someone does complain about the horses, what protection does she have? Commission Member Fowler said she would have a non-conforming use and be grandfathered in. Manager Warnke said the buffers are built in to try to mitigate the uses. Commission Member Fowler said it would if we created an agriculture zone in the City. The thing we lack most is ranch houses with acre lots and bigger. Those would drive down the cost of homes while more apartments drive up the cost. We lack that inventory. We need an agricultural zone so those uses are conforming and that would keep her from losing that right in the future and protect her from complaints. If we follow our City plan, we have to have an allowance to make sure those people are not adversely affected in keeping with the character and tradition of our City. One of the ways to do that is by having an agriculture zone that allows people to do what they have done. If we just wash it over and say no it is okay, there is no protection in that. We need to have some of these protected green spaces and agriculture zones so we do not have to sit on top of each other. I do not see why both of those cannot co-exist. An agriculture zone would allow them to use the land until it is developed for something else or not developed at all. Manager Warnke said you can create an agriculture zone and recommend that to the City Council. What we have in place now as it relates to animals are certain lot sizes relative to that. The agriculture is best suited for land in agricultural production. We need to be careful how animals impact the adjoining neighbor on smaller lots.
Commission Member Janssen said we recently went over our Affordable Housing Plan and found we have a surplus of affordable housing in Tremonton, but do not have the higher end homes. When I look at the apartments and townhomes and the stuff we have already approved I do not see a need for that density, especially with townhomes right against our agriculture. Everyone I have talked to does not want more development, especially this density. The townhomes on the south end were suppose to be one acre lots and it was rezoned and now those neighbors want to move out. I do not like approving things that make the people who were already here want to leave just so someone can have a cheap townhome. There are a lot of issues that I personally am seeing. Commission Member Sorensen said I like the bigger lots, no more apartments for sure. We have too many.
Chairman Capener said no one wants anyone to tell them what to do with their property so we also have to respect that with their property. We need to address the fencing and make sure this works together. Manager Warnke said we have talked about affordable housing. It is a crisis in the State. Prices have increased significantly. Commission Member Fowler said inventory brings that down though. When asked about our inventory, we were told we were missing higher end inventory. Manager Warnke said and the very low end. Commission Member Fowler said we have added that with our apartments. If we build more upper end homes that would drive down the prices because there is not enough inventory. Apartments breed poverty. Manager Warnke said the City does not make the rules and regulations it is the State and legislature that defines the parameters. We have to make affordable housing and have a list of strategies to do that. Commission Member Fowler said there is also a water emergency, we had to turn off our faucets to put out a fire and not even a large fire drained our tank. Councilmember Rohde said we have plenty of water for our current population and up to 1,600 more units at this point. We are planning to use some Covid money to get another well and start building that. Culinary water is not an issue because the secondary water is taking a lot of pressure off. Commission Member Dennis said that in talking to the superintendant they have zero plans to build an elementary school in Tremonton for 10 years. He said that if it is sooner, then it will need to be a loan taken out from the people. That is something we need to consider. I know it is the school districts problem, but it is something we need to think about. There have been 368 units already approve this year. Our secondary water was shut off a whole month earlier this year. What happens when the whole City is hooked to that?
Manager Warnke said some of these are outside what the Planning Commission should be focusing on. Your role in the process is in advisory to the City Council on land use issues not utilities. Schools and other issues are outside the City’s ability to resolve. The legislature has rules we have to abide by. We are working on a future land use plan and the Planning Commission will be involved in that. There are a lot of moving parts and things that need to sync up for the development to occur. You all play an important role. Commission Member Fowler said this was more to help people have an understanding. I encourage the public to attend the Council meeting and express these concerns, as well as at the County and school board level.
Motion by Commission Member Fowler to table the item. Motion seconded by Commission Janssen. Vote: Commission Member Conrad – aye, Commission Member Dennis – aye, Commission Member Fowler – aye, Commission Member Janssen – aye, Commission Member Sorensen – aye, Commission Member Stokes – aye. Motion approved.
5. Adjournment
Motion by Commission Member Fowler to adjourn the meeting. Motion seconded by consensus of the Board. The meeting adjourned at 8:13 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 14th day of December, 2021.
______________________________
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.