City Council

FARMINGTON CITY – CITY COUNCIL MINUTES September 16, 2025 WORK SESSION Present: Mayor Brett Anderson, City Recorder DeAnn Carlile, City Manager Brigham Mellor, Recording Secretary Deanne Chaston, Mayor Pro Tempore/Councilmember Alex Community Development Director Lyle Leeman, Gibson, Councilmember Roger Child, Assistant City Manager/City Engineer Chad Councilmember Scott Isaacson, Boshell, Councilmember Melissa Layton, Assistant Finance Director Levi Ball, and Councilmember Amy Shumway, City Parks and Recreation Director Colby City Attorney Paul Roberts, Thackeray. Mayor Brett Anderson called the work session to order at 6:05 p.m. TRAILS APP PRESENTATION Assistant City Manager/City Engineer Chad Boshell introduced GIS Specialist Scott Kichman, who is developing an app for the City. He came from Hawaii, where he worked for the Park Service in mobile development. He also worked for the Bureau of Land Management. He is impressed with Farmington’s trails guidebook, which he has used while developing this new app. The new app shows easy, moderate, and strenuous trails marked by different colors. It will also indicate available amenities such as restrooms, parking, and pavilions. He hopes to add in future 3D modeling, historic sites, and photos of points of interest. He is also considering adding in a reservation system for City facilities such as playing fields. While he has been doing this for the last 1.5 months, Kichman feels there is still a lot of room for development. He noted that e-bikes on trails is a controversial topic. He suggested posting QR codes along the trails pointing to this new app. Mention of it will also be made on the City’s facebook, website, and newsletter. This is a great time of year to roll this out, as many residents are enjoying cooler weather on the City’s trails. The Mayor and Councilmembers expressed their excitement for this new app. Councilmember Amy Shumway noted that the West Davis Corridor was not included in the trails guidebook. City Manager Brigham Mellor said he and the City Parks and Recreation Director have been considering bringing back the Trails Committee to organize volunteers who want to be involved in trail clean up. Councilmember Scott Isaacson said he thought there would be subcommittees under the Parks, Recreation, Arts and Trails (PRAT) Advisory Board, and one of those would be for trails. PRAT was active while working on the General Plan, but they need a continued purpose. Mellor said PRAT dwindled on the vine since the City hasn’t kept them engaged. He suspects that two or three PRAT members would be interested in the Trails Subcommittee. This is an opportunity to rework the PRAT, to reform it and give members additional assignments. New Farmington City Council, September 16, 2025 Page 1 members need to be recruited to help organize volunteer labor. The new park will have an awesome stage, so it may be a chance to bring more artists and performers to the City. The Old Mill site is another future venue to consider. Farmington recently hired an employee whose main job is to help with trails throughout the City. Councilmember Melissa Layton suggested having high school and college students help with marketing. Issacson said his daughter, Melissa Mills, who has a PhD in Music, is working on proposals to support the arts in the City. Shumway, who served on the Trails Committee for 3.5 years, said the PRAT needs guidelines and could benefit from a Staff member attending each of their meetings. Various trail chiefs were assigned to walk certain trails at least twice each year while noting maintenance and service project possibilities. Isaacson said the Youth City Council works because a Staff member is assigned to guide them. DISCUSSION OF REGULAR SESSION ITEMS UPON REQUEST Councilman Alex Leeman asked if Farmington had plans to put a stop light in on Mountain Road in the north of the City. Mellor said it is a City decision, and it was already part of the plan, although he doesn’t want to impede traffic at that intersection. Assistant City Manager/City Engineer Chad Boshell said since it is so close to the next traffic signal, the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) would be leery of a new light. However, it is up to Farmington to decide. The question is if the traffic volume justifies it. Mellor said the City Council doesn’t decide on traffic measures; residents can instead comment on traffic at the Development Review Committee (DRC) level. Farmington City Council, September 16, 2025 Page 2 REGULAR SESSION Present: Mayor Brett Anderson, City Attorney Paul Roberts, City Manager Brigham Mellor, City Recorder DeAnn Carlile, Mayor Pro Tempore/Councilmember Alex Recording Secretary Deanne Chaston, Leeman, Community Development Director Lyle Councilmember Roger Child, Gibson, Councilmember Scott Isaacson, Assistant City Manager/City Engineer Chad Councilmember Melissa Layton, Boshell, and Councilmember Amy Shumway, Assistant Finance Director Levi Ball. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Brett Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Councilmember Melissa Layton offered the invocation, and the Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilmember Scott Isaacson. Farmington High School Chamber Choir sang the National Anthem. PRESENTATION: Appointment of Levi Ball as Finance Director and administration of the oath of office City Manager Brigham Mellor presented this agenda item. He said he and Assistant City Manager/City Engineer Chad Boshell started considering candidates over a year ago when Greg Davis told them of his planned retirement. They were impressed with Ball when they first met him. Ball grew up in Farmington and still has family who live there, including his parents and in- laws. He is a Certified Public Accountant (CPA) and graduated from the University of Utah with a Master of Accountancy. His wife and four children were in attendance. City Recorder DeAnn Carlile administered the oath of office. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Development Agreement for the Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Schematic Subdivision for the Brickmoor residential project Community Development Director Lyle Gibson presented this agenda item. This is a unique property, as the City is the current owner. Farmington decided it was time to sell this asset for different uses in the community. A Request for Qualification (RFQ) process was used to select a developer for the City to work with as a partner. Boyer was selected as the developer of choice. The City owns 18 acres, and the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) owns 2 acres on the far north. Some land will not be sold, as it is used for a culinary water well. The property was originally zoned for retail and nonresidential use, but over the years there has not been any interest in developing retail shops. Two public hearings for this project were held at the Planning Commission level. When the purchase contract was considered, email addresses of interested individuals were collected. The Farmington City Council, September 16, 2025 Page 3 typical online and physical publication guidelines were followed, and the email distribution was an additional layer of notification the City doesn’t typically do. This project has a total of 168 units, with 31 of those single-family detached units. Townhome front doors will face Main Street, with units featuring two and three stories closer to Highway 89. In response to public input, the number of units was reduced, additional guest parking was added, and the bakery was preserved. In addition, the stream running through the property will be daylighted so it can continue to be an asset to the community. A trail will be added to connect to a much bigger trail network on the east side. Since this is at schematic level, there are still things to be solved such as traffic impact on Main Street and intersections, stream alteration permits, and wetland mitigation. Gibson said Staff’s opinion is that using the PUD process allows bonus density as a standard process. This is a high-level schematic proposal, and is not the final approval. The Council must consider if they are O.K. with the big picture elements, general configuration, and number of units. After that, the developer can move forward with engineering and design, which is a significant cost to pursue. Under normal circumstances, this would not come back to the Council, but would only go back to the Planning Commission two more times. If the project proposal changes significantly, it will come back to the Council. Concept approval will come after the project has cleared engineering hurdles and other technical elements. Mellor said he anticipates some changes to the Development Agreement to address elements such as phasing and financing for the park. He said public feedback was to put money to the fire station instead of to a park no one wants. Councilmember Scott Isaacson said he was concerned with Section 19D on page 16 of the Development Agreement where Boyer would be allowed to transfer the project to a subsequent owner without City approval as long as the new owner followed the agreement. Councilmember Amy Shumway said changing it could take away the new landowner’s right to sell. She didn’t see reference to a “Welcome to Farmington” sign in the Development Agreement. City Attorney Paul Roberts said it is typical for a Limited Liability Company (LLC) to take over after development. He said the Council could restrict it and decide if a subsidiary would be allowed to own the land in the future. Applicant Spencer Moffat, representing the Boyer Company, addressed the Council. The original density was 192, but it was reduced after his company spent time at open houses with the surrounding residents. They initially presented a 174-unit plan to the Planning Commission. It is now at 168 units. He said the contract language is standard in that the land would be assignable only after Boyer owns the property, although it is not their intent to assign or give it away. However, they will review any changes the City Council wants to make. Mayor Anderson said the City would like a voice at the table should there be discussions about assigning the contract to another party. Moffat said that is not something he has done in a Development Agreement before. The Development Agreement will be recorded with the property and run with the land, so any future owner would be bound by the agreement. While Isaacson said in his career representing owners and developers of major projects, he would never allow the contractor to freely assign the contract to someone else. However, he said Farmington City Council, September 16, 2025 Page 4 it makes a big difference if the City owns the land or not. He just always envisioned being closely involved in this whole project because it started out as City land. He wanted to know if the City’s “say” ends when Boyer buys the land. He had assumed they would continue to work together. Councilmember Alex Leeman said the City would be involved in every aspect of the Development Agreement, but that agreement may be with another partner in the future. Shumway asked if the plans could get rid of four units that are near an important trailhead and access to a potential future park. That would leave more open space with opportunities to develop. Mayor Anderson said the City received emails that will be included as part of the record. He opened the Public Hearing at 7:44 p.m. Steve Anderson, who has an interest in Buttered Bakeshop and Rose Cottage, addressed the Council. In the past, travelers would stop here along the major road running through the area for lunch and to trade out horses. Brigham Young would stop here to house cattle and livestock. For three years, this area wintered livestock before they were moved to Antelope Island. He is concerned about the historic nature of Main Street in this area. He is also concerned about the area where four lanes collapse into two lanes, as well as the amount of density. He would like a traffic study. He wants the fire marshall to determine if engines can move around appropriately. Streams on his property run at 16 gallons per minute. He is willing to put a plaque on his land, as it is the most visible on his corner. He does not want the emergency access opened up. This area used to be an agricultural extension planted with every tree in Utah, and a giant sequoia still remains. Andrew Gemperline addressed the Council. As a civil engineer for 38 years, safety is his first priority, specifically ingress, egress, and pedestrian movements on Mountain Road. Youth in the area will be interested in walking to nearby Cherry Hill. Since traffic lights are mitigation for poor planning, he would rather see a right-in and right-out. The south access has terrible sight distance. Good engineering can take care of the problems there for a small price. He offered his services to review any future engineering there. Leeman said the City’s decisions need to be made by engineers, otherwise they could be sued. Therefore, the Council will rely on traffic studies and the Development Review Committee (DRC). Patricia Anderson (671 Somerset Street, Farmington, Utah), Steve’s wife, addressed the Council. She said if the crash gate is opened up, people will use it. She is worried about the ingress and egress. She knows the Development Agreement can’t address whether or not the units can be rentals, but parking is not addressed in the agreement. She said the daylighted stream is not clear. There has been a lot of tweaking and stretching to allow bonus density. She anticipates five housemates living together in order to afford rent, which will cause on-street parking. The agreement is very vague and otherwise open to change and interpretation, and she understood that the exhibits are not included. Leeman said that is not correct, as the Development Agreement requires the project to be developed consistent to what is in the exhibits. If it is in the Project Master Plan (PMP), it is in Farmington City Council, September 16, 2025 Page 5 the Development Agreement. Isaacson agreed, saying paragraph 9 says the PMP is part of the agreement and is therefore binding. While conceptual in nature at this point, it can be modified. Gina Kearns said it is very discouraging to come to City meetings. After a lot of talk in the neighborhood about what development would be best here, the townhomes are exactly what everyone did not want. The residents there were just beat down so the City could do whatever they wanted to do anyway. There will always be contention in this area. Sharon Tru (Northridge Road, Somerset, Farmington, Utah) said the Development Agreement compromises the Neighborhood Mixed Use (NMU) ordinance, which is supposed to protect residents from overwhelming development. The smaller the units are, the more rentals there will be, and the more adults will be living in each. She does not like the deviations from City Code listed in Exhibit D such as the three stories adjacent to Highway 89. Noting the recent death of a 13-year-old Farmingon resident while riding an e-bike, she said the NMU requires bike pathways throughout the development. Getting bikes off the road will help. She asked the Council not to approve the Development Agreement, as too many adjustments need to be made. It pushes the limits. She would like more time so better solutions and compromises for traffic and safety can be made between the City and the developer. Jake McIntire said the PMP is part of the Development Agreement, but it clearly has ways to be amended for economic and developmental reasons. Since this is a schematic phase, this will not come back to the Council again unless the Planning Commission feels they can’t approve a change. Therefore, the Council won’t have another say on this. In nine years from now, architectural style changes can be made because the original is no longer marketable. He works with communities on master plans, which are conceptual and up to change. There is very little in the actual Development Agreement that holds the City accountable for what they care about. The community members to the south came and asked that community benefits and amenities be made a part of the Development Agreement. A lot of empty promises didn’t come true because they were not made part of the Development Agreement. He strongly encouraged the Council to add qualifiers to item 19D regarding selling off to other development companies. The City could have right of first refusal, or the developer could come back to the Council for reapproval of the Development Agreement. Patricia Anderson said she generally walks 5 miles each day, and motorists have turned left into her while she was in the middle of a crosswalk by the funeral home. Sheri Evarts (1735 N. Hampton Court, Farmington, Utah) addressed the Council via Zoom. She agrees with Steve Anderson and Gemperline, and would also like to eliminate the four homes by the trailhead. She agrees with Patricia Anderson about ingress and egress. She agrees with Kearns and Tru that the NMU should protect the surrounding neighborhood. This proposal exceeds 9 units per acre. She would like this approval delayed in order to reassess. She does not want to bury another child like they did on Saturday. Jody Vanskiver addressed the Council via Zoom. She lives south of the proposed project and is worried about traffic. The Mayor is familiar with their concerns. She was told that the access road would be for emergencies only. That road can’t handle additional traffic through the neighborhood. Mayor Anderson closed the Public Hearing at 8:35 p.m. Farmington City Council, September 16, 2025 Page 6 Leeman said he is not sure where the notion that the Development Agreement and PMP is not enforceable came from. Minor changes can be approved by the Planning Commission, but major changes must be approved by the Council. Every agreement can be changed if the two parties agree to it. Isaacson said the agreement is very clear that it can only be modified by mutual agreement. It is not possible for the developer to unilaterally change things. Leeman said this project has to be moved forward in order to get greater details such as soil, water, and drainage studies. The DRC has to pass off those issues, and permits must be obtained in order to alter streams. If the developer doesn’t get those third-party approvals, the project stops. There is no guaranteed development. Part of the process is that each step adds a layer of detail, which costs a lot of money. The Council respects that the City needs to get more details, and the process ensures that. Regarding the allowed density, Gibson noted that they started out with 250 units. Leeman said that with 15.76 acres at 9 units per acre, and with a bonus, they qualified for 177. They are now under that. They are still under the most conservative calculation in the Staff Report. Gibson said it could be looked at many different ways, including if the streets, open space, and detention are included, or if it includes the entire district or just what the City owns. This is a legislative action in the Council’s discretion, as they must decide if it is appropriate or not. Shumway said 20 years ago, none of the current Councilmembers sat on this Council. Many decisions were made long ago. Layton directed the public to consider page 26 and what Farmington got in return, saying that the Council listened to resident feedback. Nine townhomes are deed restricted for moderate- income housing. A public trail going behind the development, as well as open space, is a big deal. The area around the Rose Cottage is a gem and asset to this little community. It was a really big deal to open up space and put gardens, parking, and utility access next to a historic space. Councilmember Roger Child said he appreciates the preservation of frontage, and that the taller units are deeper inside the project next to the highway. From Main Street, there are only two stories. The developer is being sensitive to the preservation of Main Street, and keeping a very residential overtone. Most of the safety issues that have consistently come up can be resolved further along in the process. This is still a schematic plan and engineering has not all been completed yet. The traffic study was originally based on 275 units, and now the unit count is 1/3 less. He doesn’t want a traffic light and would rather have a right-in and right-out. He hears from residents that they don’t want their taxes raised, but they would have been if the City didn’t consider selling this property to fund a new fire station. Shumway said she would like pedestrian access through the crash gate, which would connect neighborhoods with pedestrian access. However, she does not want that area open for cars. Isaacson said the City could have done other things that could have made much more money off this property, and the Council is trying to find a balance. As stewards of the City, they could not let this land sit there any longer. Technical issues will be addressed as the City proceeds to meet legal standards. He knows by experience that change is hard, as he moved to 1100 West 22 years ago. He doesn’t live in the country anymore. Farmington City Council, September 16, 2025 Page 7 Mayor Anderson said the City needs to find a happy medium. He recalled Gov. Spencer Cox inviting mayors throughout Utah to his mansion on May 29 to discuss the state’s housing crisis. By the time the Olympics come to Utah in 2034, Cox said the state needs 400,000 more living units, which could be solved with inventory. He told the cities that if they are unwilling to solve this, the state would instead, which would take planning away from cities. Montana and Texas have already done this. He researched what other cities recently bonded for new fire stations including Syracuse for $12 million, and Sandy for $21 million. They are literally burning money. Leeman said he appreciates the modifications that the developer has made. The quality of Boyer’s development speaks for itself, especially along the Main Street frontage. Mayor Anderson proposed doing away with the 10 units surrounding the park, in order to open it up. Layton said she approved of that idea. Mellor asked what purpose the open space would serve. Each unit that is given up results in $20,000 less for the new fire station. It is space that would be neglected, such as open space around the detention basin that no one seems to care about. Shumway said this could be a developed park in the future, and four units seem to block access to a trailhead. She appreciated the historic items Steve Anderson brought up. She asked where the developers got the idea for the name Brickmoor. Moffat said the intent was historic, and the primary building material will be brick. Older neighborhoods tend to have more brick, which is easily identifiable. Isaacson said he is still troubled by the assignability part of the agreement, but he can live with it. However, if it is not a subsidiary of Boyer, he would like the City to have a look at it. Motion: Leeman moved that the City Council approve the Schematic Subdivision Plan, Preliminary Planned Unit Development, and Development Agreement for the Brickmoor as set forth in the Staff Report, including the attached Project Master Plan subject to Findings in Staff Report with the following additional Conditions 1-3: 1. The developer return to City Council in a study session with their final signage renderings. 2. Pedestrian access through the emergency access road southwest of the development be preserved. 3. Paragraph 19 of the Development Agreement referring to assignability indicate that the developer is free to assign to wholly owned subsidiaries. Assignment to other parties is subject to approval of the City, which should not be unreasonably withheld. Findings 1-5: 1. The proposed development is consistent with the Farmington City General Plan and vision for the area. 2. The subdivision as designed creates a desirable neighborhood that is consistent with the NMU zone and Planned Unit Development purpose and standards. 3. As designed, the development can be serviced by required utility providers and establishes a street network capable of handling the number of units proposed. Farmington City Council, September 16, 2025 Page 8  4. The project creates a variety of housing while providing reasonable buffering and transitioning from abutting properties while creating a desirable streetscape along Main Street at the entry to the City. 5. The property supports and enhances the historic home/bakery which it is adjacent to while providing meaningful community benefits such as open space access and trails in addition to amenities created for the residents of Brickmoor. In addition to the proposed rent reduction on nine townhome units, these improvements qualify as “other benefits” to help the project meet its moderate-income housing requirement. Shumway seconded the motion. Mayor Pro Tempore/Councilmember Alex Leeman X Aye ____ Nay Councilmember Roger Child X Aye ____ Nay Councilmember Scott Isaacson X Aye ____ Nay Councilmember Melissa Layton Aye X Nay Councilmember Amy Shumway X Aye ____ Nay The motion passed, as it was 4-1 in favor. Layton said she voted “nay” because she would still like to see a lower density. She feels concerned when people don’t feel heard by the Council. Councilmembers really do read and respond to residents’ emails. In this case, they held extra meetings that weren’t required. She even held meetings with residents on her own. Isaacson said listening doesn’t always mean agreeing. Opinions can be respected even when they are not agreed with. Leeman said he didn’t feel the Council could do their fiduciary duty sitting on this land while borrowing money and paying interest to build a new fire station. SUMMARY ACTION: Minute Motion Approving Summary Action List The Council considered the Summary Action List including: • Item 1: Monthly Financial Report • Item 2: Zone Change Enabling Ordinance – B and C-R to CRT (Lagoon Administration Building) • Item 3: Approval of minutes for September 2, 2025 Motion: Child moved to approve the Summary Action list Items 1-3 as noted in the Staff Report. Layton seconded the motion. All Council members voted in favor, as there was no opposing vote. Mayor Pro Tempore/Councilmember Alex Leeman X Aye ____ Nay Councilmember Roger Child X Aye ____ Nay Councilmember Scott Isaacson X Aye ____ Nay Councilmember Melissa Layton X Aye ____ Nay Councilmember Amy Shumway X Aye ____ Nay Farmington City Council, September 16, 2025 Page 9 GOVERNING BODY REPORTS: Mayor Anderson and City Council Reports Isaacson mentioned that his daughter recently got a $800 water bill, which was the result of a running toilet after grandchildren had stayed for a long weekend. Mellor said he regularly gets calls about such situations, and he would like to work this out personally. Leeman is concerned with safety at the four-way stop on Innovator, as there have already been accidents there. The intersection is so big that it is difficult to see the stop signs. Mellor said he would follow up on putting more stop signs on Innovator. He and Boshell have been putting pressure on getting lighting in that area as well. There is no power transformer to put a light up at Burke and Innovator, so solar panels may be necessary. He said there will be stop sign at Maker and Burke, as well as the T at Maker and Innovator. CLOSED SESSION Present: Mayor Brett Anderson, City Attorney Paul Roberts, City Manager Brigham Mellor, City Recorder DeAnn Carlile, Mayor Pro Tempore/Councilmember Alex Recording Secretary Deanne Chaston, Leeman, Assistant City Manager/City Engineer Chad Councilmember Roger Child, Boshell, Councilmember Scott Isaacson, Matt Church, Councilmember Melissa Layton, Trent Ferrin, and Councilmember Amy Shumway, Libby Lowther. Motion: At 9:39 p.m., Councilmember Scott Isaacson made the motion to go into a closed meeting for the purpose of strategy session to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation. Councilmember Amy Shumway seconded the motion. All Council members voted in favor, as there was no opposing vote. Mayor Pro Tempore/Councilmember Alex Leeman X Aye ____ Nay Councilmember Roger Child X Aye ____ Nay Councilmember Scott Isaacson X Aye ____ Nay Councilmember Melissa Layton X Aye ____ Nay Councilmember Amy Shumway X Aye ____ Nay Farmington City Council, September 16, 2025 Page 10 Sworn Statement: I, Brett Anderson, Mayor of Farmington City, do hereby affirm that the items discussed in the closed meeting were as stated in the motion to go into closed session, and that no other business was conducted while the Council was so convened in a closed meeting. __/s/ Brett Anderson_____________________________ Brett Anderson, Mayor Motion: At 10:06 p.m., Councilmember Alex Leeman made the motion to adjourn the closed meeting. Shumway seconded the motion. All Council members voted in favor, as there was no opposing vote. Mayor Pro Tempore/Councilmember Alex Leeman X Aye ____ Nay Councilmember Roger Child X Aye ____ Nay Councilmember Scott Isaacson X Aye ____ Nay Councilmember Melissa Layton X Aye ____ Nay Councilmember Amy Shumway X Aye ____ Nay ________________________________________ DeAnn Carlile, Recorder ADJOURNMENT Motion: Leeman made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:06 p.m. Councilmember Melissa Layton seconded the motion. All Council members voted in favor, as there was no opposing vote. Mayor Pro Tempore/Councilmember Alex Leeman X Aye ____ Nay Councilmember Roger Child X Aye ____ Nay Councilmember Scott Isaacson X Aye ____ Nay Councilmember Melissa Layton X Aye ____ Nay Councilmember Amy Shumway X Aye ____ Nay ________________________________________ DeAnn Carlile, Recorder Farmington City Council, September 16, 2025 Page 11