TREMONTON CITY CORPORATION
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE
AUGUST 20, 2025
Members Present:
Jeff Seedall, Chairman & City Planner
Chris Breinholt, City Engineer
Bill Cobabe, City Manager
Zach LeFevre, Parks and Recreation Director—excused
Carl Mackley, Public Works Director
Andrew Beecher, Assistant Public Works Director
Tiffany Lannefeld, Deputy Recorder

Chairman Seedall called the Development Review Committee Meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. The meeting was held August 20, 2025 in the City Council Meeting Room at 102 South Tremont Street, Tremonton, Utah. Chairman Seedall, Manager Cobabe, Engineer Breinholt, Director Mackley, Assistant Director Beecher (arrived at 10:40 a.m.) and Deputy Recorder Nelson were in attendance. Mayor Holmgren was in attendance for portions of the meeting. Director LeFevre was excused.

1. Approval of agenda:

Motion by Chairman Seedall to approve the August 20, 2025 agenda. Motion seconded by Engineer Breinholt. Vote: Chairman Seedall – yes, Manager Cobabe – yes, Engineer Breinholt – yes, Director Mackley – yes, Director LeFevre – absent, Assistant Director Beecher – absent. Motion approved.

2. Approval of minutes— July 16, 2025

Motion by Engineer Breinholt to approve the July 16, 2025 minutes. Motion seconded by Director Mackley. Vote: Chairman Seedall – yes, Manager Cobabe – yes, Engineer Breinholt – yes, Director Mackley – yes, Director LeFevre – absent, Assistant Director Beecher – absent. Motion approved.

3. New Business:

a. Discussion and consideration of Conditional Use Permit for NextGen Cabinet Door Specialists—Ariel Rosario

Chairman Seedall said they are looking to remodel a building over on 200 West in the commercial zone for manufacturing assembly. They are a cabinet shop. There will be no painting or staining, just assembling the cabinets and shipping them off. This would be an internal remodel with no expansion. They have parking and loading docks.

Motion by Manager Cobabe to approve. Motion seconded by Director Mackley. Vote: Chairman Seedall – yes, Manager Cobabe – yes, Engineer Breinholt – yes, Director Mackley – yes, Director LeFevre – absent, Assistant Director Beecher – absent. Motion approved.

b. Discussion and consideration of Miller’s Travel Center remodel—Christian Wilson Center Street Architects, Jason Miller Owner

Mr. Wilson said I represent Center Street Architects. We have been approached by Mr. Miller to do an addition to his existing building just off the freeway. He also owns buildings to the west. This is the fourth remodel we have done for him. It will be larger, but it is not going to bring in more customers. There should not be an impact, other than it will look nicer. They discussed parking and that stalls should be 10 feet wide with 25 stalls being sufficient. Director Mackley suggested having asphalt around the meter to clean that area up. Mr. Wilson said I know there was concern about UDOT, and I got a hold of the engineer, who will get you documentation of their decision. It should not impact this because this will not create more traffic.

Motion by Manager Cobabe to approve this with the condition that you work with Director Mackley on protecting that meter and address the parking. Motion seconded by Director Mackley. Vote: Chairman Seedall – yes, Manager Cobabe – yes, Engineer Breinholt – yes, Director Mackley – yes, Director LeFevre – absent, Assistant Director Beecher – absent. Motion approved.

c. Discussion of concept plan for the Junction, Alliance Equity Services, LLC—Mark Stevenson, Dale Bennett, a few individuals joined via Zoom and Trevor Williams joined via phone.

Mr. Bennett said there have been several layouts this is one we would love to get your input on. This has about 350 units (cottage homes). Parking is all around and each unit will have a two-car garage. Mr. Stevensen said we are showing the sewer station potentially here with pickleball courts. Mr. Bennett said the storage units has a similar layout. The property all slopes to the south and here is the power corridor. We will have the detention basin and maybe a dog run with open space. Then we have little pockets for parking and trails. Mayor Holmgren brought up flooding that happens south of the area. How are you dealing with storm drain? Mr. Bennett said this will solve that problem and substantially restrict that flow through there.

This area is around 52 acres. A portion of the development would include a park. Engineer Breinholt said would the City really want to own a park? It seems like more of an HOA area. Chairman Seedall said we will have that discussion with Director LeFevre. If the acreage makes sense, we could (about two acres). Engineer Breinholt said I do not know how many people from other parts of town would go down here to use a park. Mr. Williams said in regard to some of your questions, the answer should be what do you want to see? What are the needs of the City? We would like your opinions on what we should or should not do. In regard to the park, tell us what you want. Manager Cobabe said it might be a little early to be thinking about those kinds of details. It is going to be a question of what the zoning is and do you want to pursue a PUD? If you want additional density there could be other amenities that come into play through the development agreement. We will look at that going forward, but at this point we need to determine is this a good location?

The Committee then discussed traffic and connectivity. Engineer Breinholt said I am sure this would require lane improvements on Iowa String (a left turn lane and right deceleration). We need to verify the site distance coming out of there because of the bridge abutment problems. I think it is okay, but we will have to prove that. The entrance/exit needs enough room for a right and left turn lane with a receiving lane. Mr. Williams said the traffic report did show a lighted intersection so it would have full movement. The Committee also discussed an emergency entrance/exit, along with how many units would be allowed on a single access, especially for emergency situations. They also discussed flow through the site with intersections and potential roundabouts. Manager Cobabe said I agree that the traffic probably would be okay getting in and out, but it is the secondary egress. It is just so close to the primary access and if there is an emergency it is going to impact and restrict people from getting in and out through the secondary as well. Engineer Breinholt said the traffic study is going to say this all works traffic-wise. The question about the accesses being too close together is a safety question. There is really not a good option. This density is a lot better than what we have seen in the past though. Manager Cobabe suggested they work with their fire chief on these constraints, as well as the traffic engineer. Not with the question of accessibility and appropriateness of the facility, but the safety concern.

The Committee then discussed street widths. Private roads could be 50-feet wide. A 54-foot-wide road could be public but would have no on-street parking. Chairman Seedall said I like the diversity of product types here. The Committee then discussed the lift station, as well as potential upsizing. Mr. Williams said we will do some revising and be back.

d. Discussion of concept plan for Clover Field Phase 3, Subdivision, Keith Russell

Mr. Russell said we have discussed either a cul-de-sac or stubbing to the south with a future connection. There were concerns regarding too many lots on a private drive and possible turnaround issues. It would be good to make that connection to the south rather than just having a cul-de-sac. This layout shows us going a bit further to the west and eliminating the fifth lot on the private driveway, which would meet the four-lot maximum and stubbed the road to the south. Either of these two options have the same number of lots. That solves a temporary turnaround without having to sacrifice a lot. I have heard this owner is looking to build on land he owns. That would open up the option to buy his home, which could be moved to create that through street. Engineer Breinholt said the cul-de-sac makes a lot of sense, but if he really would move and that becomes a realistic option that could make sense, too. If not, then it has to be the cul-de-sac. It is the same number of lots for you either way. Manager Cobabe said from a planning standpoint, road connectivity is always preferable. This is a bigger question mark since that right-of-way was given away and a house was built in the way. He has drawn a feasible road that cuts through and avoids the house. Engineer Breinholt said the question for me has always been, is this guy realistically going to sell and move away? Is that opportunity there? It may be. Mr. Russell said there is an option to move the house over. There could be more lots and that is the reason for this new zone. We want to make smaller lots with smaller houses that are more affordable. I intend to have a conversation with these owners about selling within the next year.

Engineer Breinholt said if you did this layout, you would have to accommodate a Public Works turnaround at the end of the stub for snow removal and garbage. That standard is an international fire code standard and a Tremonton Public Works requirement. The Committee spent time reviewing the different layouts and ways to make them work. Chairman Seedall said I would still rather push for the road to be put through at some stage. I am tired of cul-de-sacs. Manager Cobabe said this is basically to the point of the zone change application. The development agreement itself is going to be fairly brief because of the size of the development and that you are not dedicating any land to the City. You are not really asking for any special density so it should be pretty brief.

e. Discussion and consideration of revising Title II and Title III of the Tremonton City Zoning ordinance

Motion by Director Mackley to table the item until they have more information. Motion seconded by Manager Cobabe. Vote: Chairman Seedall – yes, Manager Cobabe – yes, Engineer Breinholt – yes, Director Mackley – yes, Director LeFevre – absent, Assistant Director Beecher – absent. Motion approved.

f. Walk-ins:

Marisha Menlove with Bear River Manor was in attendance. We are not going to do boxables because they are expensive, however, the footprint works really well. We have eight fourplex units currently that are 100 feet wide 51 feet deep. The 19×19 boxable unit fits 10 studios. This design works because it creates an attainable product that people can afford. The type of product we want to provide is for people making $20 an hour. They are probably going to be rentals. We could possibly do some condos. Our question is on parking. Our sidewalks have been turned into parking spots. This created 228 parking stalls in the development. Engineer Breinholt said where will people walk? Mrs. Menlove said if you change the setback, we could accommodate a walkway in front. We are willing to shift this back if the setbacks can be adjusted. Stick build is probably the direction we will end up going. Chairman Seedall said I think we can play with the setbacks and get space for walkways to exist, even if we just put them on one side. Really, we are just trying to designate a way for pedestrians to get through. I do not think this is going to generate a lot of pedestrian traffic to require sidewalks on both sides.

The Committee also discussed connections to the units and how that could be done. Engineer Breinholt said the laterals have to be owned by the owner of the property. If you are selling them off there has to be individual sewer connections for every unit. Mrs. Menlove said are there any issues if we do these as condos? We may want the option to sell off individual units, but we will build it and own it for now. Engineer Breinholt said just record it as a condominium and you can still own all of them. Just do it now. The State requires it to be owned by a single owner. They would meet and continue their discussions at a later date.

4. Comments/Reports: None.

5. Public comments: None.

6. Adjournment:

Motion by Director Mackley to adjourn the meeting. Motion seconded by consensus of the Committee. The meeting adjourned at 11:39 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 ___________, 2025

_____________________________
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.