TREMONTON CITY CORPORATION
LAND USE AUTHORITY BOARD
JULY 11, 2018

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

Chairman Bench called the Land Use Authority Board Meeting to order at 9:07 a.m. The meeting was held July 11, 2018 in the City Council Meeting Room at 102 South Tremont Street, Tremonton, Utah. Chairman Steve Bench, Engineer Chris Breinholt, City Manager Shawn Warnke, and Deputy Recorder Cynthia Nelson were in attendance. Director Fulgham and Director Christensen were excused.

1. Approval of agenda:

Motion by Engineer Breinholt to approve the July 11, 2018 agenda. Motion seconded by Administrator Bench. Vote: Chairman Bench – aye, Engineer Breinholt – aye, Manager Warnke – aye. Motion approved.

2. Approval of minutes: May 9, 2018

Motion by Engineer Breinholt to approve the minutes of May 9, 2018. Motion seconded by Manager Warnke. Vote: Chairman Bench – aye, Engineer Breinholt – aye, Manager Warnke – aye. Motion approved.

3. New Business:

a. Discussion on twin and town homes on property located at approximately 300 West 1200 South – Jonathan Roberts

Mr. Roberts said there are very few homes on the market under $200,000. The ones under that amount are older and in poor shape. There is an affordability issue especially for single families. The demand for homes is up, which is good for the economy. I am considering multi-family homes, which do not seem to be a big hit in Tremonton because most people who are here want land. Those who develop townhomes take a risk because of that mindset. He proposed developing some townhomes near the Tremonton Place Subdivision, which some developers tried to develop, but have put back on the market. I have put in an offer and I have an approved contract to buy if I move forward on it. It is zoned as single-family and that is fine, but we have plenty of houses coming in and need more affordable options. I would like to put a development in with multi-family lots. A lot of people are living in basements and little apartments because they cannot get approved for more than $160,000. Manager Warnke said how many attached? Mr. Roberts said between two and four. He thought the previous developer had a concept drawn up. Administrator Bench said it never fully went through. He brought in some stuff and then dropped it. Mr. Roberts said this is a several month process. I am here to get the Land Use Authority Board opinion, along with the rules, restrictions and zoning.

Manager Warnke said we, along with the Planning Commission, would review it and make recommendations for the City Council, who would then adopt an ordinance. I am a little concerned about adding more density here because it is one of our more dense regions in the City. I would like to see greater housing product, but have it dispersed. Potentially we are getting too much concentration in this one location. I understand the issue of affordability, but with more density I would like to see an elevated façade for landscaping. Mr. Roberts said that would have to be more of a planned unit development. If I add a bunch of lots and sell them off to contractors everyone will do the minimum to sell them and it would be up to the homeowner. Engineer Breinholt asked about the current zoning, which is half an acre. To do anything different you will need a rezone. Manager Warnke suggested he look at the pre-annexation agreement and Planning Commission minutes to learn about the timing of developing a secondary access to that property. They discussed where those accesses would make the most sense with the road, canal. and railroad tracks. Manager Warnke said the other property owner, who has that strip, is willing to sell, but he paid quite a bit for it. Administrator Bench said the code says you can have 30 units with one access. That could be more depending on how things are laid out. Mr. Roberts said where I do not own the property how can I guarantee that will continue onward? Manager Warnke said you could develop a certain number of units without the secondary access. In some cases it is a matter of timing for when and how properties are developed. The property owners might have to work together. Engineer Breinholt said there is also a limit on the length of the cul-de-sac (650 for residential). Administrator Bench said you could have one access right now and do a temporary cul-de-sac for a turn around that would go away in the future.

Manager Warnke said he would like to see the City put together a Land Use Plan, looking at densities along with the Transportation Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. You bring up a good issue about affordable homes and how we balance that with different housing products. My personal thought is this area is pretty dense. It is hard to have neighborhoods that are all one housing product. With apartments people move in and out. It would be great to have a product that is a little more stable and less dense. Not to say there are not other locations for this type of thing. I would like to see a greater planning effort with a professional helping us. It would be nice to have a citywide Land Use Plan to help guide us in these types of discussions and give developers direction. Mr. Roberts said he would take care of the City needs while providing affordable housing with a nice product and landscaping. Would that be more appealing? Manager Warnke said I think so. Since this is a denser neighborhood, I am not sure it is the best place. Density is not the enemy, but with bad design it could be a problem. Administrator Bench said it is not zoned for multi-family so that would need to be fixed with a planned development. You need to come up with a concept and show us what a building would look like, along with landscaping. You need to give us a visual. Mr. Roberts said is there another place in town that you would be more open to this? Manager Warnke said probably, when there is a diversity of housing product it makes for a good neighborhood because it blends social economic classes. Mr. Roberts said I am here to find out if I can make this work. It is going to be a balancing act with the needs of the City and the customer. To make this affordable it has to be under $200,000 and has to be a multi-unit. Engineer Breinholt said not to be contradictory, but I think something like you have talked about could work here, but you do need to come up with some conceptual stuff so we can see how it would fit. You cannot have double frontage. It may or may not work. I do not mind the higher density with an artillery road right there. I am not too worried about traffic from an engineering standpoint, but a planning standpoint is different. We are not the ones to make that decision. If you are going to get anything done you have to show the work. Mr. Roberts said with multi-units if I put a double access would I assume that limits me to 60 units? Administrator Bench said common sense and planning says a third access would need to come in eventually, but you would not be limited to 60 with two accesses—not even 120. Manager Warnke gave him the pre-annexation agreement and told him to review the special conditions, and accesses.

Mr. Roberts asked about required water shares for new developments. Administrator Bench said he would have to provide some shares based on what they consider an irrigable portion. Mr. Roberts asked if he can buy them or does he need to find them? Administrator Bench said there are some open market shares available. Engineer Breinholt confirmed there were no water shares tied to the land and said Mr. Roberts would need roughly .5 shares per acre—depending on the lot size.

Mr. Roberts added that he has his eye on a three-quarter acre lot where the City just added the road on 480 West, behind Coldwell Banker. He would like to add a building there to run his mortgage business, construction company, and rental shop. My business would be a three-step business and I would like to tie it all together with separate walls and have parking in the front with access in the back for employees. Administrator Bench said he would email him the site plan and landscape requirements. Manager Warnke said when things are on paper we can help guide developers, otherwise we point everyone to the zoning ordinance and the chapters that are applicable, including site plan, parking, landscaping and buffers. The Board suggested Mr. Roberts get back on the agenda when he has some concept drawings for them to look at.

b. Walk ins*

There were no walk ins.

4. Comments/Reports:

Engineer Breinholt asked about the status of the Tremont Center and if phase 3 was recorder, which it was. He asked about the plat that involved Crumps, which he has reviewed, but he has not seen an update. Administrator Bench said it is kind of on hold. We are ready to go, but are waiting to fill out the paperwork until the developer comes in so it will be up to date.

Manager Warnke brought up the proposed townhomes in that location and said I think it would be good to have a Land Use Plan. I would hate to see such a narrow corridor of density right through the center of town. In some ways it works well because we have a trail there to facilitate movement of people north and south. Engineer Breinholt said I think it could work, but I do not know if he has enough room there to do what he was talking about. They continued the discussion a bit longer.

5. Public comments: Comments limited to five minutes.

No public comments.

6. Adjournment:

Motion by Engineer Breinholt to adjourn the meeting. Motion seconded by consensus of the Board. The meeting adjourned at 10:01 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 Land Use Authority Board Meeting held on the above referenced date. Minutes prepared by Jessica Tanner.

Dated this 3rd day of October, 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.