TREMONTON CITY CORPORATION
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE
APRIL 6, 2022

Members Present:
Steve Bench, Chairman/Zoning Administrator
Chris Breinholt, City Engineer
Marc Christensen, Assistant City Manager—excused
Paul Fulgham, Public Works Director
Shawn Warnke, City Manager
Cynthia Nelson, Deputy Recorder

Chairman Bench called the Development Review Committee Meeting to order at 9:04 a.m. The meeting was held April 6, 2022 in the City Council Meeting Room at 102 South Tremont Street, Tremonton, Utah. Chairman Bench, Engineer Breinholt (left at 12:34 p.m.), Director Fulgham, City Manager Warnke, and Deputy Recorder Nelson were in attendance. Assistant City Manager Christensen was excused.

1. Approval of agenda:

Motion by Director Fulgham to approve the April 6, 2022 agenda. Motion seconded by Engineer Breinholt. Vote: Chairman Bench – aye, Engineer Breinholt – aye, Assistant Manager Christensen – absent, Director Fulgham – aye, Manager Warnke – aye. Motion approved.

2. Approval of minutes—February 2, 2022, February 9, 2022, & February 16, 2022

Motion by Director Fulgham to approve the minutes stated above. Motion seconded by Chairman Bench. Vote: Chairman Bench – aye, Engineer Breinholt – aye, Assistant Manager Christensen – absent, Director Fulgham – aye, Manager Warnke – aye. Motion approved.

3. New Business:

a. Discussion and review of Wizard Wash Car Wash – Dan Hart, Bret Cummings, and Jim Flint

This plan includes four wash bays, one automatic bay, as well as an office and equipment area. Six vacuum stalls would be in the back of the property. This will include an RV clean out site. (See attached drawings for more details).

Chairman Bench said the Main Street dedication needs to be applied. Manager Warnke said use the same dedication language and show it for Tremonton City. The Committee asked about the access, which would be shared. The developers said they would prefer a straight drive for trailers to get in and out of 1650 West. They would dump at the RV bay, wash, and the flip around and go back out. Mr. Cummings said we want room to turn so we do not want the vacuums out back they need to be out front. Engineer Breinholt said that will be really tight if cars are waiting to get washed. If you have them lining up to get in, I am not sure how you take care of that unless you use more property to the north. There is only room for one RV to be waiting behind one that is dumping. They will hang out in the entry way. They need to be in alignment with wash bay 4 and push it to the north. Make that a straight shot. Manager Warnke said you have plenty of property and it looks like you need more room. Mr. Cummings said it will work, but we could push that north side out a bit and add a few more feet. Director Fulgham said that is a wider entrance than we typically do, which I do not mind if it flows.

Manager Warnke reviewed his comments (see attached). The landscape buffer falls really short. I also wondered about having that sign post in the landscaped area so it is somewhat protected. I think there is a better spot for the vacuums, but I understand what you are saying. Our code talks about having dumpsters in the back they are not allowed on the front. Mr. Cummings said the trash receptacles are integrated into the vacuum and mounted on the pole. Manager Warnke said you need something to break up the area. The landscape plan could use more work and have more landscape in the front.

Director Fulgham said the water needs to be brought to the main. You have a valve on the hydrant, but if that ever has to be replaced that would be shut down. You are required to run a two-inch line all the way to the main and tap off that. Then you could do away with the valve by the hydrant. Your meter will be in the main. That way we can work on the hydrant and not worry about pressure. You could do a one-inch landscape meter to save money. You do not want to be charged sewer for your landscaping so that needs to be separate. All water you use inside the bays will have a sewer bill. Engineer Breinholt said this area can do retention, but it cannot release too much at a time because the Mill Ditch cannot handle too much water. They would determine water shares.

b. Discussion and review of Archibald Estates, Phase M – Jon Harrop & Ben Johnston

Manager Warnke said we will get the development agreement wrapped up. We are waiting for the chip seal amount since these are private roads. What about water shares? Mr. Harrop said we gave them all at the beginning. Chairman Bench said that was calculated out and put in the development agreement (2.4 shares for this phase). When asked about landscaping and how they are coordinating with residents. Mr. Harrop said they are working on it. Manager Warnke asked about the dedication of a pump station. Mr. Harrop said that will be in this plat. We will record this and that will be a dedicated section (40×30). We will add a vinyl fence here. We are fencing the entire active adult community. Chairman Bench said I will work on a development agreement and get that to them for their review. They confirmed they will have cans instead of dumpsters and will have a mix of elevations.

Motion by Director Fulgham to approve Phase M. Motion seconded by Manager Warnke. Vote: Chairman Bench – aye, Engineer Breinholt – aye, Assistant Manager Christensen – absent, Director Fulgham – aye, Manager Warnke – aye. Motion approved.

c. Discussion of Price Property site plan and utilities – David Driggs

Manager Warnke asked about a concept layout for the road and storm drain. Mr. Driggs said we have a concept, but wanted to get in front of the Committee to decide options. There is another concept that utilizes this area as a truck stop and phasing the development out with a warehouse building. There are concerns in getting utilities down this road. They discussed layout and possible uses for the warehouse. Manager Warnke asked if they would acquire the smaller parcel next to them. Mr. Driggs said maybe, but it seems so tight. Manager Warnke said if that parcel was a part of yours, it could be used more efficiently instead of having it be a stand-alone site. The Committee discussed how things would be lined up and what alignment could be made.

Director Fulgham said we have regional ponds on the other side of the interstate, but we also have the Mill Ditch and we have to control that flow. Engineer Breinholt said you mentioned you needed 10 acres for the pond, but I come up with nine acre feet of storage. With it being three feet deep you would only need about three acres for a detention pond. Director Fulgham reminded them to keep the integrity of any tile drains in the area. Manager Warnke said you will need buffering and landscape islands. We need to figure out the drainage, access, and transportation improvements. The Committee explained that they would have to allow water from this other property to pass through their basin. There would also be some road widening due to the increase in traffic their development would cause. Manager Warnke said those kinds of improvements we would exact as part of your project. It would be developer driven. If your development goes in it would have to be widened to handle that traffic.

d. Discussion including elevations for Bear River Meadows—Nick Wilcox and David Chugg

This concept plan includes 122 townhome units. The developers are proposing 22 buildings ranging from three to six units per building. There will be some open space and detention areas.

Manager Warnke said for that cross access there needs to be a legal description for your side of the road and for Aspen Ridge’s side. This would be an agreement that references the legal description granting access to each other’s development. It cannot be undone. It should also talk about maintenance. Have an attorney draft that and we would review it. It would then be recorded in the County Recorder’s Office. The Committee wants to see the new plan with the layout and elevations. Mr. Chugg said we lost four units by the play area and one here, so five units total. Manager Warnke said thanks for doing that, it looks a lot better. Engineer Breinholt said that makes a nicer entrance, too. They discussed possible elevation ideas. Mr. Chugg said we will have two elevations, plan a and plan b. We would prefer to start the development at the north. The development to the south is nowhere near our line. We will not make the window for the water being turned on. We will do five phases. The first will have about 15 units, which is basically two buildings. We would build out what we can and put the culvert and bridge in in the fall. Manager Warnke said you could do all the improvements at once. Director Fulgham said get the sewer and water looped. Do all the utilities, which will be public. You will have to feed from the south. All the testing and piping needs to be done to our standards. Mr. Chugg said we will have the final engineer drawings submitted to you and the canal company for approval.

e. Concept discussion of two lot subdivision at 2189 W 1000 N – Lynn Martineau

Chairman Bench said this is half acre zoning (R1-20). Mr. Martineau said this is a potential future road and access to these other buildings so we want to maintain that access to the back. I do not think it will become a road. We have use that for the buildings in the back for years. We would sell lot 1 and build on lot 2. Engineer Breinholt said you would have to extend the sewer to get to the lot (about 100 feet). Chairman Bench said when you are within 300 feet of sewer you would connect to it. The Committee reviewed the proposed layout and discussed setback requirements. Mr. Martineau said the well will stay with the house. It is tied to the sprinkler system. When talking about water shares Mr. Martineau said we own three shares with this so we will add some to the new lot. Manager Warnke said you will have to dedicate water shares to the City for secondary water. Any subdivision or subdividing of property requires a dedication to offset the impact. It is essentially one share per irrigable acre. Chairman Bench said this is just a concept. You would submit for a preliminary plat and have to go to the Planning Commission for preliminary approval.

f. Concept discussion of Lookout Point, Phase 2 at 1200 N 3200 W – Max Mills & Zach Smith

This item was not discussed at this time.

g. Walk-ins:*

Marisha Menlove, Kelly Harris, Jim Flint from Hansen Engineering, and Bret Cummings from Hansen Engineering were in attendance to discuss their development. They discussed utilities and water pressure to the property. Mr. Flint said these storage units would be for the tenants. The apartments are micro so they will need that storage. Our units are spacious and nice, but depending on the tenant they will have bikes and toys and we do not have a place for that stuff. These storage units will be easy to fill. Chairman Bench said half the town could come and store things here there are so many buildings. Mrs. Menlove said we want our tenants using the garage as a garage and their guests parking in their driveway. The HOA would require that the garage house their cars so we do not have permanent cars out here. Manager Warnke said the storage units are supposed to be accessory to the main use, which is residential and then secondary would be the storage so it should be smaller than the principal use. Mr. Flint said we could do a 10×20 storage unit that seems to be popular. Manager Warnke said they are positioned awkwardly and access seems difficult. It seems like you just filled in all the vacant space with storage units. Chairman Bench said are the storage included or would it be a separate fee? Mrs. Menlove said they will be fee related.

The group discussed landscape requirements and open space, as well as the orientation of the buildings. Manager Warnke said when we grant more density, we want improvements to offset that in the form of recreation amenities. They could be onsite amenities or offsite. You could negotiate a fee in lieu to dedicate to the City to use for our parks or future parks. Those improvements offset the impact of density. Proposing your package and shedding some of the storage units would help. A Sports Court would be a great amenity and one of the gaps in our park system.

4. Comments/Reports: None.

5. Public comments: No public comments.

6. Adjournment:

Motion by Director Fulgham to adjourn the meeting. Motion seconded by consensus of the Committee. The meeting adjourned at 12:50 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 1st day of June, 2022

_____________________________
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.

 

Click HERE for attachment