TREMONTON CITY CORPORATION
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 11, 2025
Members Present:
Micah Capener, Chairman—excused
Karen Ellsworth, Commission Member
Andrea Miller, Commission Member
Mark Thompson, Commission Member
Ashley Phillips, Commission Member (alternate)
Jack Stickney, Commission Member (alternate)
Raulon Van Tassell, Commission Member
Bret Rohde, City Councilmember
Jeff Seedall, City Planner
Bill Cobabe, City Manager
Tiffany Lannefeld, Deputy Recorder

Co-Chairman Van Tassell called the Planning Commission Meeting to order at 5:32 p.m. The meeting was held February 11, 2025 in the City Council Meeting Room at 102 South Tremont Street, Tremonton, Utah. Co-Chairman Van Tassell, Commission Members Ellsworth, Miller, Phillips, Stickney, Thompson, City Councilmember Rohde, Manager Cobabe, Planner Seedall, and Deputy Recorder Lannefeld were in attendance. Chairman Capener was excused.

1. Approval of agenda:

Motion by Commission Member Thompson to approve the February 11, 2025, agenda. Motion seconded by Commission Member Miller. Vote: Co-Chairman Van Tassell – yes, Chairman Capener – absent, Commission Member Ellsworth – yes, Commission Member Miller – yes, Commission Member Phillips – yes, Commission Member Thompson – yes, Commission Member Stickney – yes. Motion approved.

2. Declaration of Conflict of Interest: None.

3. Public Comments: None.

4. Approval of minutes—January 14, 2025

Motion by Commission Member Miller to approve the January 14, 2025 minutes. Motion seconded by Commission Member Ellsworth. Vote: Co-Chairman Van Tassell – yes, Chairman Capener – absent, Commission Member Ellsworth – yes, Commission Member Miller – yes, Commission Member Phillips – yes, Commission Member Thompson – yes, Commission Member Stickney – yes. Motion approved.

5. New Business:

a. Discussion of amendments to Chapter 1.08 Commercial and Industrial Zone Districts—Sam Taylor

Planner Seedall said here are the changes we are looking at for our industrial zone. I sent a very edited version and the clean version. We wanted to bring more clarity to the definitions of the industrial zones because currently they read about the same. Mr. Taylor said we have tried to reclassifying things as industrial and business park, light manufacturing and heavy manufacturing. We are creating a scale of intensity of industrial use with flex industrial, sort of bridging the gap between industrial uses and commercial uses. Business Park could be a little nicer with landscape and flexible space for start-ups to grow. Maybe an industrial room with an office. We want to provide those moderate intensity industrial uses, but also permit the office and professional service accessory to the primary industrial activity. Heavy is the most intensive. Each of these has a description regarding their impacts. We want to make sure things meet the regulations of this chapter to help mitigate issues that come with industrial. When asked what existed prior, Planner Seedall said we had three zones that read very similar and all the uses were similar. There was not a discernment of what form of industrial should go where. This change will help differentiate that. We are trying to create a gradation between business park industrial to manufacturing industrial to heavy industrial and put clustering in spots that make sense based on transportation and utility capacity. With the Inland Port, it is possible we see all three of these zones clustered together or it could just be one zone. Regardless, we want to envision what we want to see closer to the highway versus further away next to existing neighborhoods. We want to allow this code to set more restricting boundaries in our current industrial code for where we have permitted uses.

After some discussion on different uses, Mr. Taylor said speaking economically, there is a lot of demand for a startup space. Manager Cobabe said when it comes to zoning, you have to assume that the worst possible scenario will happen. Just as an example, if you allow a daycare in the zone, you have to assume there will be daycares throughout the entire zone. Obviously, it does not happen that way. We want to plan and add zoning, but that does not ensure all businesses we want to attract will be able to make it work in our area. At the end of the day, they will choose what is best for making money. Mr. Taylor said a lot of what those companies are looking for is the labor force. Do they feel they can recruit enough of the labor force from here. Manager Cobabe said part of what we are doing tonight is setting up the regulatory environment that is conducive to, allows for and permits these kinds of uses. If businesses have to ask for this legislative process to go through public hearings and the Council to say yes or no then they do not want it. It is too much of a risk. Putting this in place says we are open for business. We want you, come on in.

When reviewing the use table, Planner Seedall said are there things we should flat out allow or are there things that should have to go through the conditional use permit? Manager Cobabe said a conditional use permit is a permitted use provided they meet the conditions as outlined in the code. Frankly, we should have very few, if any, conditional uses because the code should specify the performance standards we are looking for, for every use. If it is not in the code, we cannot require it. There has been some case law in the last couple years saying if it is not a requirement in the code, you cannot discuss it. We have to make sure our performance standards are robust enough to capture everything we do not want.

When discussing potential issues, Manager Cobabe said you can add a performance standard in this flex space to keep things small. Then you do not run into the problems of extra odors and noises and other things. As they grow, they can move into a big warehouse space and move out of that particular zone. Someone else would then move in. Part of your job is to determine what you do not want to see in the flex. We can scratch those from the table.

Planner Seedall said I want to make sure everyone has time and feels comfortable adding input. We can go resource by resource. What we are hoping to do with the water use capacity is set industry levels. Our City Engineer is working on finalizing the Capital Facilities Plan for the water system and is hoping to have it done by the end of the month before our Public Works Director retires. Then we would be able to say, in light industrial you are allowed this many gallons per day. Things can be done to meet that and steps would be in place if not. It still needs a lot of work. We would like to be able to clearly communicate, especially with the unknowns of the Inland Port, what our system can generally handle for use. Manager Cobabe said when these developments come in, we could ask them to bring water with them. If the water use capacity is not there, they have to find a way to get it, not the City. Having wastewater use and capacity in there is a good idea just because it would permit for making sure lines servicing these areas are up to par. I do not know if we would be able to do anything about treatment plant capacity because that is what impact fees are for. The other section I wanted to add is light pollution and downlighting, or dark sky requirements, especially as we get toward the west side. It is easier for us to lean on those State requirements with the air quality and noise pollution. The last part that goes on for quite a bit is the impact mitigation plan. This will be a written document submitted to the DRC following these guidelines to show that if they are outside these boundaries, what they are doing to mitigate them. We would use this as a report submitted for the site plan approval.

Planner Seedall said in the last section we added general architectural colors and standards that we can suggest. We want all sides to show connectivity for the whole building and have things look nice. Manager Cobabe said people like these kinds of standards because it brings a higher quality, higher end client and they can charge more in rent for these spaces. What they really crave is predictability. They want a code that is easy to read and delineates exactly what is expected so there is no guesswork.

The Commission was asked to review this information and provide feedback. Planner Seedall said my hope is we can have this ready to go by the end of next month. This is a lot to process and a lot of information we still are looking for, but this is our best shot to get this code ready so when things start to come in with the Inland Port, we feel comfortable with it.

6. Planning commission comments/reports:

Planner Seedall reminded the Commission about the upcoming conference on May 7-9. Manager Cobabe suggested checking out the Utah League of Cities and Towns website to review their section on Land Use Academy of Utah. He said it has incredible information and is a great resource.

7. Adjournment

Motion by Commission Member Ellsworth to adjourn the meeting. Motion seconded by consensus of the Board. The meeting adjourned at 6:39 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 _____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.