TREMONTON CITY CORPORATION
PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 25, 2022

Members Present:
Micah Capener, Chairman
Jordan Conrad, Commission Member
Penni Dennis, Commission Member—excused
Paul Fowler, Commission Member
Layne Sorensen, Commission Member
Bret Rohde, City Councilmember
Steve Bench, Zoning Administrator
Shawn Warnke, City Manager
Cynthia Nelson, Deputy Recorder

Chairman Capener called the Planning Commission Meeting to order at 5:35 p.m. The meeting was held October 25, 2022 in the City Council Meeting Room at 102 South Tremont Street, Tremonton, Utah. Chairman Capener, Commission Members Conrad, Fowler, Sorensen, City Councilmember Rohde, Zoning Administrator Bench, and Deputy Recorder Nelson were in attendance. Commission Member Dennis was excused.

1. Approval of agenda:

Motion by Commission Member Sorensen to approve the October 25, 2022 agenda. Motion seconded by Commission Member Conrad. Vote: Chairman Capener – aye, Commission Member Conrad – aye, Commission Member Dennis – absent, Commission Member Fowler – aye, Commission Member Sorensen – aye. Motion approved.

2. Declaration of Conflict of Interest: None.

3. Approval of minutes – September 27, 2022

Motion by Commission Member Conrad to table the minutes until their next meeting. Motion seconded by Commission Member Fowler. Vote: Chairman Capener – aye, Commission Member Conrad – aye, Commission Member Dennis – absent, Commission Member Fowler – aye, Commission Member Sorensen – aye. Motion approved.

Chairman Capener called a Public Hearing to order at 5:37 p.m. to receive public input on the proposed Moderate Income Housing Plan. There were four people in attendance.

4. Public Hearing:

a. To receive public input on proposed 2022 Moderate Income Housing Plan, which is an element of the Tremonton City’s General Plan

There were no public comments. Chairman Capener closed the Public Hearing at 5:38 p.m. Chairman Capener then called a Public Hearing to order at 5:38 p.m. to receive public input on an amendment to the zoning code. There were four people in attendance.

b. To receive public input on proposed amendments to the Zoning Code Chapter 1.08 Commercial and Industrial Zone Districts that the maximum height of all residential buildings be three (3) stories or thirty-six feet; amend those chapters within the zoning code requiring public notice be advertised in a local newspaper by removing that requirement

There were no public comments. Chairman Capener closed the Public Hearing at 5:39 p.m.

5. New Business:

a. Discussion and consideration of proposed 2022 Moderate Income Housing Plan, which is an element of the Tremonton City’s General Plan

Manager Warnke summarized the draft of the Moderate Income Housing Plan and five potential strategies to implement. We need to identify the number of affordable housing units that are needed in the City. The numbers show 775, although those numbers are only as good as the data set, which has limitations. That number is tied to income brackets from the census. Even though we might have seniors who have paid off their home, the census still reports their income bracket and since they are living on social security that shows them as low to moderate income. Some limitations are inherently problematic. As time goes on the data will get better. Another limitation is not being able to identify all the townhomes that are owned by individuals and rented out. The Council could implement the Good Landlord Program, which would help provide better data in the future. The plan shows 775 units are needed and that the affordable housing demand would require another 222 in five years based on growth projections and estimates.

Manager Warnke said we have to implement at least three strategies, but if we choose five then we would have priority consideration for future transportation projects. Here are the five proposed strategies. First is to invest in infrastructure that facilitates the construction of moderate-income housing. The plan shows estimates to extend and where those would be located. According to the State statue the City is required to report annually. Strategy E is to create, allow or reduce regulations related to internal or detached accessory dwelling units. The next strategy is to zone or rezone higher density for moderate income residential developments, and commercial, or mixed use near major transit investment corridors, commercial centers, and employment centers. Strategy N would implement mortgage assistance for public employees. That is done with RDA funds that are restricted to affordable housing. They would go through the housing authority, which is BRAG. The last strategy is X and that is coming up with a local funding source for moderate income housing associated with land use that requires 10% or more residential development to be dedicated to moderate income housing. Each strategy has its shortcomings. None of these are perfect and these are complex issues. In some ways if you are requiring market rate to participate in affordable housing then it makes it more expensive, but it could be effective. We would need to adopt ordinances to enact the plan. You have the plan—the vision and implementation comes in the form of ordinances.

Commission Member Fowler said he liked the idea of requiring 10% of a development to be affordable. That is a mixed bag and the idea of having a few here and there as we develop seems very appealing. It seems like it shares the load so you do not have any one section that is overburdened. It helps the folks in that housing too, and you have a better mix of people in the community. Manager Warnke said 10 years ago affordable housing was not the hot issue it is today. If we extend the infrastructure as a strategy, we could use some of the money we have saved from impact fees. We would have to have some guarantees. I envision we would work with a large landowner and extend the infrastructures with some agreement that they would deed something to us, not sure what it would look like exactly. Chairman Capener said we need an imminent project that would provide that as part of the concession of extending the utilities so it happens in a timely manner. Manager Warnke said we would structure something and get the agreements recorded. There are lots of areas we could do this. Chairman Capener said we should do a special improvement district where all the landowners pay back the money to the affordable housing fund. If we extend all the utilities, we put an agreement together with everyone and it is funded with that money, but ultimately when anyone wants to develop it, they put the money back in so we can do it again. That is a win-win. We would get the affordable housing component while trying to connect those dots.

Manager Warnke said the Planning Commission needs to determine if we want three or all five of these strategies. There is a lot of work ahead of us so maybe three is more realistic. Councilmember Rohde said I think a strategy or process needs to be that we button up our data and make it more accurate. It would be nice if we had something driving us to do that. Manager Warnke said we can to some degree. Rentals are a huge part of affordable housing, which is the alterative to ownership. I know there are a lot of rentals. Every year we have to report to the State, who will monitor and let us know if we are meeting our objectives and timeframes.

Commission Member Fowler said I know you have a deadline, but I cannot say we have hammered this all out. Manager Warnke said there is some flexibility with the implementation plan and evaluating those measures. The State wants a good faith effort from us. We can make adjustments as needed. In some ways it makes sense to start with three and then figure out five later. There is a lot of work to be done. The reporting is more focused on action and what you are doing to implement and create affordable housing units. This will all be revisited in a year or two.

Chairman Capener said so which three would we implement? Maybe B, E and F? N is low hanging fruit and X is the hardest to implement, but probably has the most potential or return as far as physically creating affordable units. Manager Warnke said if you decide to do three, I would still show the other two we considered in the appendix because at some point we would want to revisit those. Nothing will happen until we create ordinances.

Motion by Commission Member Conrad to submit the Moderate Income Housing Plan to the City Council for approval. Motion seconded by Commission Member Sorensen. Vote: Chairman Capener – aye, Commission Member Conrad – aye, Commission Member Dennis – absent, Commission Member Fowler – nay, Commission Member Sorensen – aye. Motion approved by a 3-1 vote.

b. Discussion of proposed amendments to the Zoning Code Chapter 1.08 Commercial and Industrial Zone Districts that the maximum height of all residential buildings be three (3) stories or thirty-six feet; amend those chapters within the zoning code requiring public notice be advertised in a local newspaper by removing that requirement

Administrator Bench said previously we discussed tall buildings. We are talking about the Commercial District or downtown area. Chairman Capener said I do not think we want to limit it. South of here every development that is going up that is nice and big has four plus stories. They are going up for affordability. I would be reluctant to limit height. Commission Member Fowler said in some areas of Ogden and Layton you feel like you are in a canyon and nothing about that is attractive. Chairman Capener said you would rather it sprawl out and take up many more blocks rather than go up? Commission Member Fowler said sure. I am from Indiana and they do not build up or build high density and the housing is about a third of the cost it is here. Studies prove that anywhere they do that and keep the density down the overall cost of housing is lower. I am not a fan of the high-rise building. I like this being limited to three stories. Chairman Capener said why would we not want four to five story buildings in town? Administrator Bench said there is always method to the madness of keeping things low. It affects the fire fighting and putting an elevator in. Manager Warnke said and parking, too. That would be the limitation. As you build bigger complexes there is a shared parking scenario with some parking reduction, but generally speaking the limitations will be parking stalls. I do not mind something that is three stories, maybe four, but at some point, it starts to look out of character for the area. Chairman Capener said this has other ramifications. For example, DL Evans’ flag would not be allowed. The flag height is limited to the building height in the code. So, our flag max would be 36 feet in the downtown Commercial District and most all the flags are twice that. Administrator Bench said we could adjust the footnotes on flags, steeples and appendages. The residential zoning chapter already has the three-story limit (36 feet) in residential zones. There is not a lot of apartments you can do in residential zones. Do you want to do the whole zone or just limit it to residential three story? Chairman Capener said I think we will see them. The world is changing and in order to make things pencil we have to go up. Why would we want to limit them? The cost to build is what is driving things. If you build a building that is five stories high with one roof and one foundation and five floors between it, you have to have a bigger lot, but that is not a big deal. The building is what costs the most. That is the driving factor. By doing five stories you can get more building and more parking on that lot than you could by doing five, one story buildings sprawled out. Commission Member Fowler said what we are talking about is primarily the downtown area. I think you would have trouble building that scale in that area because it is a tight, small area that would be out of scale. I do not want to see a seven-story building downtown. What about all the traffic it would create on our tiny streets? There is no way that would be responsible planning. That would create two to three times the amount traffic in that area. I could see something like that in the new area of alternate main. Not in our downtown. I do not have a problem with it in some areas, but I do have a problem with it in the downtown area. Chairman Capener said if they could meet the fire code and work out the parking and all the details why would we limit them? Commission Member Fowler said why would we want to be like everyone else and drive the density higher and the prices even higher? We do have some areas to do this, but not downtown. What fits that area is more of a historical nature. If we pursue that as a theme it would do more for our downtown and make it more attractive than a modern high rise that does not fit. We have areas for that further out in town. Our town is built narrow and is a small, farming community. We do not have the lanes on Main. That would destroy the character. Chairman Capener said we have to go up to make it affordable because dirt is expensive. The residential is not as big of a deal for me. We want 75-foot signs and buildings. This is where we want the walkable retail to be a commercial downtown, we do not want it sprawled out for blocks. Commission Member Fowler said our ideas are similar, but we have different ways of going about it. Keeping it historic will bring more people in because that is all going away.

Commission Member Fowler said I make a motion we limit all buildings to three stories at 36 feet in the CD zone. Part two of that would be to remove the newspaper requirement. Administrator Bench said no one looks at the newspaper anymore. There would still be public notice on the City website and the State public notice website. The motion died. Commission Member Conrad made a motion to table the discussion about the building height on item 5. b. until they have more information. I also move that we approve the part that says we amend those chapters in the zoning code requiring public notice to be advertised in the local newspaper, by removing that requirement.

Motion by Commission Member Conrad to table the item and to remove the newspaper as a requirement for public notice. Motion seconded by Commission Member Sorensen. Vote: Chairman Capener – aye, Commission Member Conrad – aye, Commission Member Dennis – absent, Commission Member Fowler – nay, Commission Member Sorensen – aye. Motion approved by a 3-1 vote.

6. Planning commission comments/reports: None.

7. Adjournment

Motion by Commission Member Sorensen to adjourn the meeting. Motion seconded by consensus of the Board. The meeting adjourned at 6:57 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 31st day of January, 2023.

______________________________
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.