TREMONTON CITY CORPORATION
PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 8, 2017

Members Present:
Robert Anderson, Chairman—excused
Val Bennett, Commission Member
Micah Capener, Acting Chairman
Arnold Eberhard, Commission Member
Troy Forrest, Commission Member
Ben Greener, Commission Member
Tom Stokes, Commission Member
Bret Rohde, City Councilmember
Steve Bench, Zoning Administrator
Cynthia Nelson, Deputy Recorder

Acting Chairman Micah Capener called the Planning Commission Meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. The meeting was held August 8, 2017 in the City Council Meeting Room at 102 South Tremont Street, Tremonton, Utah. Acting Chairman Micah Capener, Commission Members Bennett, Eberhard, Forrest, Greener, Stokes, City Councilmember Bret Rohde, Zoning Administrator Steve Bench, and Deputy Recorder Cynthia Nelson were in attendance. Chairman Robert Anderson was excused.

1. Approval of agenda:

Motion by Commission Member Forrest to approve the August 8, 2017 agenda. Motion seconded by Commission Member Stokes. Vote: Commission Member Bennett – aye, Acting Chairman Capener – aye, Commission Member Eberhard – aye, Commission Member Forrest – aye, Commission Member Greener – aye, Commission Member Stokes – aye. Motion approved.

2. Approval of minutes—July 11, 2017

Motion by Commission Member Eberhard to approve the July 11, 2017 minutes. Motion seconded by Commission Member Bennett. Vote: Commission Member Bennett – aye, Acting Chairman Capener – aye, Commission Member Eberhard – aye, Commission Member Forrest – aye, Commission Member Greener – aye, Commission Member Stokes – aye. Motion approved.

3. Public Hearing:

a. To receive public input on amending the Zoning Code, Chapter 1.08 Commercial and Industrial Zone Districts, Section 1.08.010 Uses from a Conditional Use Permit required to a Permitted Use for Manufacturing/Industrial-Heavy uses within the Manufacturing Distribution (MD) zone and the Manufacturing General (MG) zone.

The public hearing was opened at 5:31 p.m. There was one person in attendance.

Administrator Bench said this would change industrial heavy from a conditional use to permitted use. He explained that if a big steel or auto company came to Tremonton, the City would want to look at things like emissions and noise. There is a pretty intensive site plan review, which usually puts as many or more conditions on it as a conditional use would. He clarified this is just saving them a step in that process. Commission Member Bennett said he did not see any problem with it.

Action Chairman Capener said in the site plan review if they do not meet what the Land Use Authority Board comes up with then they could be denied. Even if it is conditional, you cannot deny them unless they do not meet the conditions. If it is permitted, they will still have to do the site plan process. Administrator Bench said you cannot just pull conditions out of the air either.

The public hearing was closed at 5:34 p.m.

4. New Business:

a. Discussion and consideration of amending Zoning Code, Chapter 1.08 Commercial and Industrial Zone Districts, Section 1.08.010 Uses from a Conditional Use Permit required to a Permitted Use for Manufacturing/Industrial-Heavy uses within the Manufacturing Distribution (MD) zone and the Manufacturing General (MG) zone.

Motion by Commission Member Forrest to pass the item on to the City Council for approval. Motion seconded by Commission Member Greener. Vote: Commission Member Bennett – aye, Acting Chairman Capener – aye, Commission Member Eberhard – aye, Commission Member Forrest – aye, Commission Member Greener – aye, Commission Member Stokes – aye. Motion approved.

b. Review and discussion of proposed annexation and zoning of property located at approximately 1150 East Main containing 62.85 acres, proposed zoning of Mixed Use (MU)

Acting Chairman Capener said he does have a small conflict because he is working with the developer. Administrator Bench said in the past, the Planning Commission has not seen many annexations, usually that is a City Council thing, but they plan to start bringing it to Planning Commission so they know what is going on.

Administrator Bench said the zoning for this annexation has been requested as Mixed Use (62.85 acres). The Code talks about retail, light commercial and residential, with some multi-family. Commission Member Forrest asked if the landowner had something in mind for the location or if they just want as much flexibility as possible. Administrator Bench said they have seen a really rough concept, which shows some commercial near Main Street (about 150 feet from the road). Toward the back of the land there will be residential. There is also a good-sized public park being proposed in the middle, about the size of a ball diamond. In the upper end there is some senior and cluster type housing.

Commission Member Forrest said if they are not going to build a through street to the back end and they do not have the property right now there is no reason to have commercial in the back. The Board said commercial will be along Main Street, but Commission Member Forrest said the way they are zoning it the owner could put commercial anywhere. Administrator Bench said you could, but the streets are not a set plan.

Commission Member Bennett asked if there will be secondary water developed on that end of the City. Administrator Bench said the whole City is in the works for that—it is just a matter of time. However, this could be one of the last project areas. Commission Member Forrest said it is easier to put the infrastructure in as you go even if it is not connected. Administrator Bench agreed, saying after a couple of meetings the City will start requiring the infrastructure to be put in the ground and capped off, waiting to be connected. Commission Member Stokes asked what the culinary water requirements are for land, stating the City is about out of water with all of the subdivisions coming in. Councilmember Rohde told the Board, the City will start adding a secondary water system, which will relieve some of that from the culinary system. Commission Member Stokes asked about the water levels after the small water break, stating the City lost a million gallons. Had that been a major break, they could have had a crisis. Councilmember Rohde said secondary water is going to be a great solution—so much stress will be taken off the culinary system. It is a fairly aggressive build.

Commission Member Greener asked if the revenue to the Water Department has gone up or if people have conserved more water since the rates increased. Administrator Bench said some are paying less and some are paying more. Councilmember Rohde said the goal with secondary water, is that it will reduce how much it costs for water overall. Acting Chairman Capener said you just pay more for your culinary, but you will not need as much of it once there is secondary water.

Councilmember Rohde said exacting water shares for the secondary water system and picking up 62 shares will help. Commissioner Member Bennett asked how many lawns could be watered with 62 shares. Councilmember Rohde said that has been the debate. Acting Chairman Capener said 62 shares is almost as much water as the entire City uses. That is 1.4 million gallons per share right now. We are at 800 million gallons for the total City. That would be 700 million with just 62 shares. Councilmember Rohde said the City needs 300 shares to run the whole City on secondary water and already has 75 shares. Administrator Bench stated the calculation for the typical lot (single family home) is about .6 of a share, but the City cannot get .6 of a share, they have to take the whole share. Commission Member Greener asked how many acres are already incorporated into the City. Administrator Bench said about 5,000 acres, but a lot of that is still farmed. It could become residential and most is already zoned. Commission Member Greener questioned why there are 60 more acres asking to be zoned into the City and if the City has already committed to supply water to that 5,000 acres. Administrator Bench said it is the developer’s right to annex and the City could retain that water. They are not guaranteed connection to water until the building permit stage and approval.

Commission Member Bennett said it is inevitable—the City is going to keep growing, it is just a matter of making sure we have the water and resources to do it. Acting Chairman Capener said that is why secondary water is an important piece. It will give the City 50 years of development because it will open up two-thirds of the culinary water.

Commission Member Greener asked if there is an issue with annexing and if they have enough water to continue doing so. Administrator Bench said it takes time to build homes and they are guaranteed about a year and a half for that process, creating more time for secondary water to develop. Commission Member Stokes said he does not see the City putting in secondary water in two years. Councilmember Rohde said the Council has approved two phases that will be done in the next year, supplying water to the core parts of Tremonton. Commission Member Stokes said they are making a big assumption of putting in secondary water when they only have 72 shares and 300 shares are needed. Councilmember Rohde said they have enough shares to cover the first two phases.

Commission Member Stokes said it is going to be hard to buy 300 shares and asked if the City is requiring developers to give up theirs. If so, he said, legally you better talk to the City Attorney about that. Councilmember Rohde said it is State Law that the City can exact water shares. Administrator Bench said the City would not do it if the Attorney did not think we could. Commission Member Stokes said water is not associated with the land, not in Utah. Administrator Bench said when an outside developer comes to Tremonton, they think the City is going to take their shares and are willing because that is how it works along the Wasatch Front.

c. Discussion of enacting requirements for secondary water systems

Administrator Bench gave the Board papers showing the resolution that has been approved. The water system is at full capacity and the City needs to develop other sources and gain water rights. City staff have been asked to prepare items and complete tasks necessary to deploy this secondary water system. The resolution that the Council passed requires new developers to install the infrastructure for the secondary water system as an improvement.

Administrator Bench said the ordinance, which will go in the Code and subdivision chapter, is what the Board is discussing tonight. Acting Chairman Capener asked why they were seeing this ordinance if it has already been passed. Administrator Bench said the Council enacted an emergency resolution so this can be required. The Council did the resolution, but would like the Board to look at the ordinance.

Acting Chairman Capener wondered why they suggested a full share per acre when that much water will not be needed. Councilmember Rohde said the State requires that they exact one share per developed acre. Acting Chairman Capener said it should be done on an acre-foot basis not on a share basis. One share per acre would need to be quantified. The State is on an acre-foot basis because the shares are all over the board. Commission Member Greener said the concept is right. The more property that is developed, the City acquires water for that property so it can disperse it throughout the City. Commission Member Bennett said he agreed with it.

Acting Chairman Capener said the issue is how the City implements it. Councilmember Rohde said the Council debated this heavily and asked if it is fair for a developer to carry that full acre when the usage is only .6 per acre. Acting Chairman Capener said this is a big issue that needs to be addressed and they will have to ensure everyone is on the same page.

Commission Member Eberhard asked if the water at the Wastewater Plant could be used as a secondary source, and if so, the City ought to look into that. Councilmember Rohde said it could, but the issue is pumping it back to the City. If we trade for the amount of shares we are dumping in, that would be ideal. The City is putting so much water back into the Malad River, we wonder if we can turn that into a trade for shares.

Commission Member Stokes did not agree with the resolution and questioned if it was legal and constitutional. Commissioner Member Forrest asked how it is not a taking under the Fifth Amendment to say if you want to play with us you have to give us your water rights, which are worth $3K to $5K a share. Administrator Bench said it is an improvement just like curb, gutter and sidewalk. Commission Member Forrest said the City could and should buy them. This is why citizens pay a water bill so the City has the ability to acquire water. One feels like extortion and one feels like a transaction. Commission Member Stokes agreed. Commission Member Greener said if a developer comes in to develop ground and knows that is part of his cost, then it is not extortion. It is just a part of what it takes to develop that ground. Commission Member Forrest said he does not like this condition and thinks there is a better way.

Commission Member Stokes asked why they are having this discussion if Acting Chairman Capener said they want to ratify their decision with the Planning Commission and it if for their knowledge.

Acting Chairman Capener said this is easy to do, but the implementation will be difficult. However, he said he would much rather this in any form than just a blanket, ‘we are not building anymore.’ That is the only good. Commission Member Greener reminded the Board that if something like this does not happen, then the City has no water. Administrator Bench said the city has 8,000 people they are trying to get water to. Commission Member Forrest said if their rights predate you, you cannot override them unless you buy it. Commission Member Greener said this is a market transaction. If you want to develop this ground, this is the cost of doing it. Commission Member Bennett said developers still have a right and can decide if they want to annex and develop. The City is not just marching in and saying, we are taking your water. If you want to be a part of the City, this is our terms.

Commission Member Forrest said developers could sell the water before it ever came to the City and it would be gone. Councilmember Rohde said then they would have to replace it. Commission Member Forrest said the City ought to do the same thing. Administrator Bench said the City knows in order to get the shares they need, they will have to go out and buy them. Commission Member Forrest said this is why there are impact fees, so the City can acquire water to meet the needs of its residents. If they have to deed it to the City, they are doubling up. If they are requiring the water in front and then they are also charging a water fee on the backside, they are double dipping. Commission Member Bennett wondered if the ordinance should say the City reserves the right to have first choice of the water rights for a negotiated price instead of just handing it over. Councilmember Rohde told them this does not apply for existing, only for applications received after August 1, 2017.

5. Adjournment

Motion by Commission Member Stokes to adjourn the meeting. Motion seconded by consensus of the Board. The meeting adjourned at 6:18 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 22nd day of August, 2017.

______________________________
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.