THE STATE OF UTAH
COUNTY OF SEVIER
CITY OF RICHFIELD
At the City Council
In and for said City
April 28, 2026
Minutes of the Richfield City Council meeting held on Tuesday, April 28, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Richfield City Office Building located at 75 East Center, Richfield, Utah. Mayor Bryan L. Burrows presiding.
- OPENING REMARKS
- PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
- ROLL CALL
- APPOINTMENTS – Michelle Christensen and Emery Polelonema to the Planning Commission.
- MINUTES APPROVED
- CONFLICT OF INTEREST
- BUSINESS
a. Consider approving the cost to upsize the water line on Cove View Road.
b. Consider approving an agreement with HomeServe.
c. Public hearing to receive comments on SITLA’s overlay zone proposal. - OTHER BUSINESS
- ADJOURNMENT
- OPENING REMARKS – Offered by Police Chief Trent Lloyd
- PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Led by Kevin Arrington
- ROLL CALL – Present: Bryan Burrows (not voting), Brayden Gardner, Kip Hansen, Kendrick Thomas, Andrew Chappell, Kevin Arrington, Administrator Michele Jolley (not voting), Finance Director Rob Jenson (not voting).
Also, in attendance, Tracy Balch, Kris Nielson, Duane Utley, Vicki Utley, Cindy Reyes, Michael Snow, Alexa Wilson, Max White, Danielle White, Lee Woolsey, Shannon Waters, Jessica Waters, Greg Torgerson, Chet White, Lisa White, Clark Bleazard, Trent Lloyd, Keith Mogan and David Anderson. - APPOINTMENTS – Consider approving the appointment of Michelle Christensen and Emery Polelonema to the Planning Commission. Motion: Approve the appointment of Michelle Christensen and Emery Polelonema to the Planning Commission, Action: Approve, Moved by Kip Hansen, Seconded by Brayden Gardner, Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 6).
Yes: Andrew Chappell, Brayden Gardner, Kendrick Thomas, Kevin Arrington, Kip Hansen. - MINUTES APPROVED – Consider a motion to approve the minutes of the meeting held on March 24 and April 14, 2026. Motion: Approve the minutes of March 24 and April 14, 2026, Action: Approve, Moved by Brayden Gardner, Seconded by Kip Hansen. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 6).
Yes: Andrew Chappell, Brayden Gardner, Kendrick Thomas, Kevin Arrington, Kip Hansen. - CONFLICT OF INTEREST – None declared.
- Consider approving the cost to upsize the water line on Cove View Road from 8-inch to 12-inch. The cost difference is $22,212.73 to upsize the pipe.
Public Works Director Keith Mogan explained this project would allow all of the pipe in that area to be 12 inches in diameter instead of downsizing to 8 inches in certain areas as part of the water project. This will also tie into the line at 1800 South later this year.
Administrator Jolley said the pipe was already ordered to beat a significant price increase on it, but that the City doesn’t have to take the order if the council doesn’t approve the upsizing. Motion: Approve the cost to upsize the water line on Cove View Road from 8-inch to 12-inch, Action: Approve, Moved by Kip Hansen, Seconded by Andrew Chappell.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 6).
Yes: Andrew Chappell, Brayden Gardner, Kendrick Thomas, Kevin Arrington, Kip Hansen. - Consider approving an agreement with HomeServe to allow the use of the City’s brand and logo to promote a service line insurance program to the residents of the City. The City’s attorney advised against it following some concerns voiced by Councilmember Chappell in the last meeting.
Motion: Deny the request from HomeServe to use the City’s brand and logo to promote a service line insurance program to the residents of Richfield City, Action: Approve, Moved by Andrew Chappell, Seconded by Kevin Arrington. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 6). Yes: Andrew Chappell, Brayden Gardner, Kendrick Thomas, Kevin Arrington, Kip Hansen. - Public hearing to receive comments on SITLA’s proposal to adopt an overlay zone for the 20+ acres they own in the southeast area of the City.
Mayor Burrows opened the hearing at 7:09 p.m.
Alexa Wilson, representing the Utah State Trust Lands explained what their proposal was for an overlay zone. The missing middle proposal is designed to provide a mix of different kinds of housing that reaches a middle point in density and a mid-point in price. Traditional single-family housing is too expensive for normal people to afford. The goal is to provide housing that is achievable in price. By building a little denser, homes are smaller and the infrastructure is less expensive because it can be consolidated for several units at once. Wilson said this is a way to avoid large square four-story buildings. By allowing a higher density and homes to touch as with townhomes or courtyard-type developments, then there is property left over for public space like parks or small businesses. This is a way to provide those types of buildings, but with a more traditional appearance. Wilson said SITLA’s mandate is to use trust lands to generate revenue for the state’s school systems. This proposal would give Richfield a way to mix building types, but still provide something that is attainable. If SITLA were stuck with zoning in R1-10 it would be difficult to build housing opportunities due to expense. She encouraged the council to give this proposal consideration.
Tracy Balch asked if SITLA is going to control the developer and the costs of the homes? SITLA will not be able to control the ultimate costs of the homes, Wilson said. Balch said the developers will build the homes to maximize profits and they won’t end up with an affordable product at the end. Balch said she works in agricultural water and said this concentration of homes near agricultural land has her concerned.
Mike Snow stated that he has been opposed to this overlay zone. The main problem is that the City has taken the RM-24 and limited lot sizes and spacing. He knows that the Planning Commission is working on an update to the RM-11 which they are trying to limit the size and the acres so that large developments are not all in one area. It is 21 acres out there at 9 units per acre, which is 197 housing units in that small area. He wondered if the parks, open spaces and the alleyways would be on the City or the homeowners association. If the homeowners association is not charging enough to maintain a reserve, the homes cannot be insured, and as a result they cannot be sold. He also wondered how this would affect the City’s water capaCity. He sees that the Cove Junction is getting ready to build its next phase and he wondered how many units would be there. There is also an RM-24 development at the former site of the Villa 647 on two or three acres. Corey Winkle is preparing a new subdivision on the north end of town as well. The two new subdivisions down by the golf course, every lot has been sold. The new subdivision on the north end has smaller lots, and only two are sold. Snow said the City should slow down on this, figure out the RM-11, and then address how it wants to limit acreage and size of developments.
Lee Woolsey lives just to the north of the SITLA property and is opposed to the high density. He understands SITLA’s primary goal is to maximize profit for the schools, but there have been a lot of assumptions made on costs. There are townhomes listed for $400,000 currently for sale in Richfield City. He believes that there are ways more affordable and his first preference would be to keep the land green and second keep the zoning as is. He asked if the City had calculated how much water would be needed, and how much would upsizing of pipes would be needed. There is a water line down 100 east and that is going to require some things done unless the City limits when people shower. He also expressed concerns about the road access. There are a lot of things that need to be ironed out prior to saying that this is for sure cheaper.
Max White addressed the statement about keeping the small-town feel of Richfield. He is unhappy with the fact that the 40 percent of the proposed overlay zone consists of his land. He is in an agricultural operation and does not plan to stop. In Richfield’s General Plan it states that agricultural areas should be preserved. Several years ago he was in a council meeting and he was doing some work for his own business and he gave a presentation and someone from the Wasatch Front was here helping make a very competent business presentation. One councilmember responded to it by saying he was offended that someone from the Wasatch Front would come to Richfield to tell the people of this community what to do. This is a small area and we have a great agricultural area and the more development happens the less water is available for his and other agricultural land.
Kip Hansen stated that SITLA has many, many grazing leases. He said this isn’t a big of an income stream as the one-time boost of a development, but it would be perpetual and consistent with what is being stated here.
Greg Torgerson stated that he has leased this property for the last 15 years for agricultural uses. He was squeezed out of land where they built high-density high-rise buildings on it. Generating more revenue with high density homes comes with its own set of problems. It is their own water that they use because there is no water there. This year there is only allotted .5 of a share. The high-density housing does not generate money to a lot of the businesses. He would propose that something is done that is a benefit to the City.
Clark Bleazard lives on Annabella Road, stated people run their dogs and walk out there and enjoy the land as it is. The water table is very high in that area, with water at four feet deep. A sewer in that area would be a big problem, which the City would need to address.
Vicky Utley lives in the area. She said already the area is affected by increased traffic concerns. The road is not wide enough, in order to build a standard street the developers would have to acquire other property. The housing in the area near the SITLA property is already overflowing, and adding more would affect school district, the City budgets, and will affect the county and City taxpayers. She moved to her home to be secluded. The houses that are there are now are already too crowded and this would escalate potential dangers in the area. She stated Richfield doesn’t need to be the Wasatch Front.
Chris Wilson is a fourth generation raised in this town. The best things Richfield has include its water, pristine mountains and its attachment to agriculture. She went to California for a while and she said that money is not what is important. A community’s camaraderie and atmosphere is more important to maintain. Once the decision is made, there is no turning back. Her water pressure is low and it takes 15 minutes to take a shower. Once the decision is made, the bell is rung. She hopes that the City will take that in to consideration. This is a home, not a building block to enhance bank accounts.
Cindy Reyes stated she has lived in large cities and she likes that this community is small. She does not want HOA homes. There is garbage around the town, graffiti and it is crazy what has happened to this town. She likes the quietness and is used to knowing the people she encounters, but now when she goes traveling and comes back the town seems foreign. People need to have money, but it is still evil. She is not voting for the housing project. People are coming here from different states and buying up the property to make money. She does not want to live in a cement jungle and that is what it is going to be.
Mayor Burrows said that he told Alexa that the lot sizes were not conducive to the lifestyle of people in Richfield. Every man has a pickup truck, every lady an SUV and they have trailers and recreational vehicles. That isn’t going to happen in what has been presented. He has been very disgruntled with what is going on in the community recently and he wants to see things change. For years everyone blamed it on COVID, now it’s affordable housing. But affordable housing is subjective. The community has changed. Richfield City has worked very hard at keeping our infrastructure up and in getting water. As your costs go up, our costs go up. The City is not covering its cost without growth, but I’m OK with it.
Councilmember Gardner asked those in attendance if anyone is in favor of it.
One individual that did not identify herself said to her understanding it would be like a planned community. She said this could be a good development because she understood that this is a medium density – not a high density. It’s a mix of fourplexes, triplexes and the like. It wouldn’t be just box after box.
Councilmember Hansen stated that the property will be developed at some point. All the City can do is make sure that it is done as responsibly as possible. That is why the City has put so much effort into its zoning ordinances. This overlay zone is not conducive to that. The overlay zone could be put over any other zone and allow for special exceptions, but not defining them well. Essentially developments would all be done through a conditional use permit and defeats the purpose of the zoning. The City has established zoning, and the proposal would function outside of what is on the books. It’s a nation within a nation that would operate on its own set of rules inconsistent with other zones. RM-24 was changed because the City didn’t like it. The RM-11 zone is currently being tweaked to better suit the City’s needs.
Michael Snow stated that a PUD may be an option for how to do this type of thing in the future. However, there is not currently a PUD stipulation in the ordinances.
Mayor Burrows said this overlay covers a large swath of the City and would create areas where the rules would be different.
Councilmember Chappell stated that the second phase of the Cove Junction is being built and the City allowed for a reduction of impact fees for that project. While he doesn’t know if the SITLA proposal is the right solution, the community has a housing problem with a $400,000 being charged for a duplex unit. The community needs to do something so children have a place to live when they grow up. Otherwise the community becomes a place just for millionaires.
One member of the audience said many of the people living in the new apartments near Walmart are not from the community, so the housing isn’t being built for community needs.
Greg Torgerson said people who are not from here are the ones benefiting from the building of the various multi-family housing projects.
Councilmember Chappell used the example of the duplex for $400,000 a unit as something that is not sustainable.
Mayor Burrows said the cost of construction materials also increases, and the City can’t control that. He said the City’s role isn’t to provide affordable housing.
Councilmember Chappell said he agrees with both sentiments. Our friends and neighbors are being priced out. Adding more supply could reduce demand as well as prices. The City should be helping to create homes that people can afford that are not apartments.
Mayor Burrows said supply is already outpacing demand with duplexes, townhomes and condos that are not selling.
Councilmember Chappell expressed concern that if the supply is just too expensive, does that mean no one gets to live in Richfield unless they are a doctor.
Councilmember Hansen said it’s not the government’s role to fix any of that, only to set the boundaries and rules of what the community should look like. The City sets the rules to guide what it will look like in the future, and enforcement of the rules should be vigilant.
Mayor Burrows said anytime the government gets involved, it results in the government picking winners and losers, which is something he is not interested in doing. Let the market do its thing. If you want to make a living here you can. However, home sizes have increased and priorities have shifted as to what is expected. Thirty years ago, people would live in a home that was 900 square feet. They need less of the government.
Mayor Burrows closed the hearing at 8:05 p.m.
- OTHER BUSINESS –
Councilmember Hansen said there is a reason why the City has zoning regulations. If a regulation is found to be not good, it can be changed, otherwise the rules should be followed. Someone advertising a home that was a single-family home as something that was brought up to code to be a duplex. However, it does not meet the specifications for a duplex. This example was something the City is involved in an enforcement issue because it does violate the zoning laws. That is the City’s role to keep things compliant, in spite of what the intentions may or may not have been. It is concerning, we have reasons for zones, setbacks and other rules for a variety of reasons from fire, to aesthetics to other factors. We don’t have the resources to fix things.
Councilmember Chappell disagreed and said this is an example of government standing in the way. He said he doesn’t understand who it is hurting, other than it violates some zoning laws that do have a purpose. The City is not Salt Lake City, the council and zoning commission has enough wisdom to say, this makes sense here. Why give JJ Lund a break and not these people?
Councilmember Hansen said JJ Lund went through the legal channels. These individuals knew in advance and did what they did anyway. It’s not just zoning, it’s a whole bunch of laws including covering the City’s ditch along a state highway with steel plates. Apply and do it the right way.
Councilmember Chappell said he doesn’t think it’s OK to break the law. So, it will now sell and someone will live in the top and rent out the bottom, which is legal. It doesn’t fix anything.
Mayor Burrows asked if they got a building permit. They did get a permit for the renovation.
Administrator Jolley said the interior accessory dwelling unit law is a state law, not a City one.
Chappell said this is a technicality, and the City should enforce laws, but maybe this is something to look at.
Councilmember Hansen said this particular situation is like asking a highway patrol trooper if you can speed, being told no, and then speeding anyway.
Councilmember Thomas said the concrete for the R is being formed and will be poured in the next week. The steel for the project has been ordered. The fundraising has been successful so far. Fire department should have more room when we are done.
Deputy Clerk Anderson said the theory of zoning is to protect the neighbor’s property rights. Nothing one does on their own property happens in a complete vacuum. He asked the council to consider if someone next door to them did the same thing, divided a home into several apartment units and rented out. The fact is that renters often don’t take care of things the way owners do, which is why the Accessory Dwelling Unit is allowed and the separate rentals are not. If the owner is on site, things are more likely to be taken care of. Anderson said he initiated the enforcement issue based on a complaint he received. All zoning/property enforcement action in Richfield City is complaint based; he does not seek out violations, violations are brought to him.
Mayor Burrows read a resolution passed by the State of Utah supporting religious freedom in public places. He quoted the resolution stating – “Now therefore be it resolved that the Legislature of the State of Utah, the Governor concurring therein supports and encourages practices that support and exemplify religious freedom in public spaces including the right of public school students and teachers to openly express their faith, accommodation of religious observances in government and community settings, the protection of religious symbols in public spaces, and the fostering of respectful dialogue among diverse faith traditions to uphold the foundational principles of religious liberty enshrined in the United States Constitution.”
This change was adopted, so if the City chooses, it can post the ten commandments.
- ADJOURNMENT Motion: Adjourn the meeting, Action: Adjourn, Moved by Andrew Chappell, Seconded by Kendrick Thomas. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 6). Yes: Andrew Chappell, Brayden Gardner, Kendrick Thomas, Kevin Arrington, Kip Hansen.