TREMONTON CITY CORPORATION
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE
SEPTEMBER 18, 2024
Members Present:
Jeff Seedall, Chairman & City Planner
Chris Breinholt, City Engineer
Bill Cobabe, City Manager
Zach LeFevre, Parks and Recreation Director—excused
Paul Fulgham, Public Works Director
Tyler Seaman, Building Inspector
Tiffany Lannefeld, Deputy Recorder

Chairman Seedall called the Development Review Committee Meeting to order at 9:36 a.m. The meeting was held September 18, 2024 in the City Council Meeting Room at 102 South Tremont Street, Tremonton, Utah. Chairman Seedall, Manager Cobabe, Engineer Breinholt, Director Fulgham, Inspector Seaman, and Deputy Recorder Nelson were in attendance. Director LeFevre was excused.

1. Approval of agenda:

Motion by Director Fulgham to approve the September 18, 2024 agenda. Motion seconded by Manager Cobabe. Vote: Chairman Seedall – yes, Manager Cobabe – yes, Engineer Breinholt – yes, Director Fulgham – yes, Director LeFevre – absent, Inspector Seaman – yes. Motion approved.

2. Approval of minutes— August 7, 2024 & August 21, 2024

Motion by Director Fulgham to approve the minutes stated above. Motion seconded by Engineer Breinholt. Vote: Chairman Seedall – yes, Manager Cobabe – yes, Engineer Breinholt – yes, Director Fulgham – yes, Director LeFevre – absent, Inspector Seaman – yes. Motion approved.

3. New Business:

a. Discussion and consideration of final approval for Envision Estates, Phase 1, Phase 2 and Development Agreement—Ben Steele (via phone if needed)

Chairman Seedall said this is on the agenda to get it into the minutes for final approval for phases 1 and 2. Construction costs will probably go up as they continue to build due to inflation. I have asked the Council how we would handle having a recorded document that has to be fixed every time they submit a phase. It will affect their construction and permit fees. I do not mind looking in the unit prices for some of it. Director Fulgham said I like having the whole thing under one umbrella, but each phase needs to be priced based on the market price of the day. Engineer Breinholt said and then the flexible stuff would be an appendix to add on. Chairman Seedall said I will add those changes in the development agreement and work with the developer. I will send it to our City Attorney for one last look. I like having the master development agreement and working through the appendices. We could record it the first time and again at the very end so there are not multiple copies phase by phase.

Motion by Director Fulgham for final approval. Motion seconded by Inspector Seaman. Vote: Chairman Seedall – yes, Manager Cobabe – yes, Engineer Breinholt – yes, Director Fulgham – yes, Director LeFevre – absent, Inspector Seaman – yes. Motion approved.

b. Discussion of Paul Johnson’s concept plan—Paul Johnson and Engineer Antonio Conte

Mr. Johnson said we want to get this property annexed in and start with the first phase (200 acres). This is around the City’s water tank. There are a few things to do, but our next step is to work with the City on infrastructure, especially with the elevation. We will need to add another water tank up higher and address sewer capacities. There will not be a huge rush and the project could take 20 years to fully develop. We want to have good connectivity both for traffic and pedestrians with lots of trails. We want these neighborhoods to be livable and walkable. We want every home to be within 300 steps of either open space or a park and trail. We would have pickleball courts and are looking to partner on a mountain bike park. The views will also be what defines this area. The other huge benefit of this property is it has essentially got its own interchange off the freeway. Having direct freeway access keeps this traffic out of town and other neighborhoods, with a couple small exceptions. We will work with Pacific Corp to get that direct route.

Mr. Conte said I want to understand what the City is looking for in utilities and connections to make this feasible. We need to understand what our restrictions are and what we will be required to install. The only access to this property is to this existing road. Director Fulgham said it is better to lift water in several stages and have different storage areas. The Committee further discussed what would be needed for water in the area for culinary and secondary. Director Fulgham said the overall goal for this area is to put an open reservoir. Engineer Breinholt said we would want one to serve the current area, one near the upper reservoir and another up higher. Mr. Conte said we need to know where we need the infrastructure, reservoirs and water tank. Engineer Breinholt said I can give you some parameters for your water zones. State code says 40 psi minimum, but we have a higher minimum of 60 psi.

Engineer Breinholt said you will need to do a geotech report for this development and a transportation study. We need to figure out water. It would be good to have a conversation with the Conservancy District. You will build a tank on the hill and the City will want to oversize it. We will be looking for bigger tanks than you need for your development. Manager Cobabe said since you are willing to work with the City, we will get a better product. The Committee further addressed secondary water and drainage, as well as wastewater.

Mr. Johnson said the most important thing is the location of infrastructure so we can start to refine the design. The Committee agreed a million-gallon water tank would be needed to service the first area. Engineer Breinholt said 4,600 feet is your top elevation for that tank. Mr. Conte said step 1 is annexation. We need to figure out water and you are working on facility plans for an overall master plan for culinary and secondary water. Mr. Johnson said one of our primary objectives is to get an infrastructure phasing plan. We would then match the phases up with the infrastructure phasing plan. We will work closely with you on that.

Manager Cobabe said we talked to the Council last night about this project and it seemed like everyone was excited. They want to make sure we get a good outcome and partner well. Engineer Breinholt said you should look at the street grades in the City code, they are pretty tight. For our hillside development code, we are going to have to tighten that up. The Committee also talked about retaining walls and other things that will come with development on a hill.

c. Discussion of Rivers Edge Master Development Agreement with the Triio Group—Nic Porter

Mr. Porter discussed reimbursement payments from the City through applicable impact fees. Director Fulgham said the whole development was based on bringing secondary to it and you did not start that with Phase 1. Engineer Breinholt said we should not be paying it back until it is actually out there or guaranteed. It does not make sense for the City to pay money for something that has not been done. The phasing changed. Director Fulgham said the infrastructure you put in would be required by any developer. You did not upsize anything, you just put in what was required. Mr. Porter said we just want to make sure when we do that, you are not going to carve it out. Director Fulgham said it was broken out of that master development. We need to get the City attorney involved to review the minutes. We broke that out so you did not have to put the infrastructure in. Manager Cobabe said the City agreed to pay for upsizing and additional infrastructure that would come online once we get to that point, but we have not hit that yet. Once you get into Phase 2 and we get conditional acceptance then we can start looking at reimbursing some of those fees. There is a question of timing. Once we hit those triggers, we would start paying for that. Director Fulgham said we threw Phase 1 off of the master. In Phase 1 they were supposed to start the secondary system, but they opted not to. To me, that means that took those homes out of play. Engineer Breinholt said we cannot pay you for something you have not done. Manager Cobabe said there is no question that we are going to pay for everything we have agreed to. There is a question about what exactly we have agreed to. We will abide by the requirements set forth in the development agreement. There is a question of interpretation and how that went.

After much discussion on the issue, the Committee agreed they would get it figured out.

Chairman Seedall said the multi-family has to go through a commercial site plan approval because of the open space and landscaping requirements. That is the difference between the multi-family and single-family housing. Engineer Breinholt said you need to submit a separate site plan for the improvements. There needs to be construction drawings for the subdivision and a site plan for the townhouses. Those are two separate projects. Chairman Seedall said I will send you a checklist for the multi-family. The site plan checklist will apply to what we need to see on the multi-family drawings.

d. Walk-ins: There were no walk-ins.

4. Comments/Reports:

Engineer Breinholt said I think we need to tread lightly into this annexation with water and servicing that. If water generally is going to come from the Conservancy District. Their water rights are coming into play. We need to have a discussion with them and figure out what we are doing and what we need to require before an annexation is agreed to. Chairman Seedall said it would be nice as part of the annexation agreement to have some of these, capital infrastructure plans that the Conservancy District and the canal company will pass off.

5. Public comments: No public comments.

6. Adjournment:

Motion by Manager Cobabe to adjourn the meeting. Motion seconded by consensus of the Committee. The meeting adjourned at 11:32 a.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 Development Review Committee Meeting held on the above referenced date. Minutes prepared by Jessica Tanner.

Dated this _____day of ___________, 2024

_____________________________
Cynthia Nelson, 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.