Duchesne County
Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting
The following document has been re-formatted
from the original for Internet accessibility. Planning &
Zoning Commission Minutes, in their
original format, are available through the Office of the
Planning & Community Development Department.
County
Administrative Offices
Duchesne, Utah
December 1, 2004 - 5:00 p.m.
In Attendance were:
Michael Barneck,
Planning Commission Chairman
Dean Brough, Planning Commission,
Leon Sweat, Planning Commission
Thomas Rather, Planning Commission
Chris Peatross, Planning Commission
Shelly Fabrizio, Planning Commission
Ann Bills, Planning Commission
Mike Hyde, Community Development Administrator
Laraine Dickinson, Planning Secretary
Roland Uresk, Deputy County Attorney-Absent
| Visitors: |
Agenda Item: |
| Rob & Pam
Nielsen ..... |
Conditional Use Permit |
| Taylor
Thayne.............. |
Conditional Use Permit |
| Randy Mair.................. |
Conditional Use Permit |
| Jean Liddell................. |
All |
| Lezlee
Whiting............. |
All |
| Darrin Brown................ |
All |
Chairman Barneck
called the meeting to order at 5:02 p.m.
Conditional Use
Permits:
Taylor Thayne, Five Point Utility Development requesting a
Conditional Use Permit to establish an equipment maintenance
shop, Section 21, T1S, R5W, South ½ of the SW ¼ of the SW ¼,
located at 5000 N. 25000 W. in the Talmage area.
Chair Barneck opened
the hearing and asked the applicant to present his request.
Taylor Thayne stated
that he lives in the Talmage area, 5000 N. 25000 W. and owns 40
acres near the end of the road. What he would like to do is
build a maintenance shop where he can repair his equipment. Mr.
Thayne gave the Board a little information about the business.
Five Point Utility Development has been in business 5 years. We
have been doing business in many of the Western States
installing fiber optic cable for telephone companies. This
summer we have been working quite a bit with Moon Lake Electric.
We are in the process of developing the business where we can do
any kind of utility work here in the Uintah Basin and it seems
to be going pretty good. We employ between15 to 20 in the summer
months and right now have 7 to 8 during the winter months.
Chair Barneck asked
for any comments or questions. Commissioner Rather stated that
he is a neighbor to Mr. Thayne and has known him for many years
and has been to the site in which he wants to build the
maintenance shop. I have spoke with many of the neighbors in the
area the closest one being Lynn Taylor who is about a third of a
mile away, and none of them seem to have a problem with having
the shop in their area. The neighbors are for this because Mr.
Thayne employs some of the neighbors up there.
Chairman Barneck
asked if the property owners in the area had been notified and
if there were any objections from them. Mr. Hyde and Secretary
Dickinson had not received or heard any objections. Since there
were no more comments Chairman Barneck asked Mr. Hyde to present
his findings of the area. Mr. Hyde distributed photos showing
where Mr. Thayne proposes to have the new building in the
background and outdoor storage area for equipment. If the
equipment could have been stored inside the building Mr. Thayne
could have qualified for Home Occupation Permit, but because of
the outside storage, Mr. Thayne is applying for conditional use
permit. Mr. Hyde included a site plan showing where the
equipment would be stored repaired. Mr. Hyde stated his only
concern was with the County Road Department in how they would
feel about additional heavy equipment on their roads in the
area. Included in the Commissions packet was a letter from
Forrest Bird, Road Dept. Supervisor stating that he had no
problem with them using the road and also stated that it was in
need of some repairs and would be dealt with at a later date. In
the findings document I looked at all conditional use criteria
and special conditional use findings that you have to make and I
don’t see any conditions that need to be imposed in this case.
So we recommend the Board’s approval subject to no conditions.
Commissioner Bills
asked Mr. Thayne if the building is going to be metal and he
replied that it is.
Commissioner Sweat
stated that in reviewing the material that there was no mention
of the disposal of hazardous material such as, oils, gas,
batteries, fuel, anti-freeze, etc. and am I assuming that it
will be taken care of as a matter of course, and Mr. Thayne said
that it would be. Commissioner Sweat asked if the business would
generate any of this stuff and Mr. Thayne said that maybe only
batteries and oil due to changing oil in the vehicles and
equipment. Mr. Thayne said there would probably be about 100 to
150 gallons of waste oil in the summertime. Chairman Barneck
asked what are your plans in dealing with this? Mr. Thayne said
the plan is to put it in a storage tank and deliver it to the
people that pick it up. We have been hauling it over to Tom
Thacker’s shop where he has a place to deposit it and someone
comes in picks it up and hauls it off. Commissioner Sweat asked
isn’t that covered by State Regulations and Mr. Thayne replied
that it is. Darrin Brown from Tri-County Health stated that they
maybe would have to be licensed as a used oil generator or
collections depending on the volume. Chairman Barneck said
that’s State regulated so let the State worry about it and not
put it as part of our conditions. Chairman Barneck is in
agreement with Mr. Hyde that there is no need of any special
conditions, other than abide by the standard conditions.
Chairman Barneck
asked for any other questions or comments. As a matter of record
do we need to read the standard conditions of a Conditional Use
Permit? Mr. Hyde they are in the findings document and that
should cover it.
Commissioner Rather
moved that the Planning Commission adopt the findings and
conclusions of the staff report and approve the Conditional Use
Permit requested by Taylor Thayne. Commissioner Sweat seconded
the motion and it passed unanimously.
Nielson Property
Management requesting a Conditional Use Permit to expand their
Cedar Ridge Residential Treatment Center from 36 to 70 students.
Located in Section 23, T1S, R2W, at the north end of 4000 West
in the Cedar View area.
Chairman Barneck
opened the hearing and asked the applicants to present their
request. Pam Nielson of Roosevelt being the Admission Director
of Cedar Ridge and also one of the owners appeared. We formed
Nielson Property Management from recommendation of our attorney.
Enclosed in your packets there is a picture showing our new
gymnasium and administration building under construction now, so
we are currently occupying space in one of the residents as
offices. One of the ways to increase our bed size is to vacate
those offices. The second photo shows the building under
construction, which is a 16- bed dormitory and we would like to
move our Vernal, students over here so all our students are in
one location.
Commissioner Bills
asked if the building that you now have your offices in was
meant to originally house students? Mrs. Nielson replied that it
was. Commissioner Bills, asked why there was not a floor plan
for that building here and Mrs. Nielson stated that it was not
on the commercial property it is located on the plat map, Serial
#542-1-6 under the name of Daniel A. Nielson and we now own that
piece of ground which is zoned residential. Commissioner Bills
then I have one question for Chairman Barneck, if they are going
to turn this into a residential unit to house students then
don’t we need a floor plan on that the same as the plan on the
new building that is under construction? Mr. Hyde states that
the application for a group home in the staff reports shows that
all the qualifications had been met for the new building but
there was no plans of the building now being used as offices.
Commissioner Bills then my question is do we need the plans for
that building. It was confirmed that things in that building
were not going to be changed. Mr. Nielson stated that two
buildings had been approved quite some time ago and they were
left on agricultural and not commercial, so we are just trying
to expand a little more on that property. Mrs. Nielson stated we
are moving in the direction of becoming an accredited high
school we have our own teachers in addition to the residential
staff and full therapy staff as well. Mr. Nielson stated that
the school part is a critical piece in the treatment program in
attracting some good quality students to us. Better that we can
provide an educational setting for these kids. The more appeal
that our program has we can be more selective. We’ve been very
successful up to now with our selectivity I don’t think there
has been a single neighbor bothered by us.
Chairman Barneck
asked we are not expanding acreage then and wanted to know the
total acreage involved in the program. Mrs. Nielson replied that
there are 82 acres total including some parcels that had been
purchased out of the Sundance Ranch Subdivision and there are
also 2 more parcels in Sundance Ranch that are not adjoining.
Chairman Barneck
asked if any response from letters sent out to property owners
in the area of the treatment facility. Mr. Hyde responded that
he had received a phone call from Mrs. Anderton stating that she
opposes but she would be unable to attend the meeting because
she doesn’t drive at night. Mr. Hyde advised that she send in a
letter stating her concerns, but he didn’t receive one.
Commissioner Brough requested what her reason for opposing. Mr.
Hyde, replied that she stated that when she was here a couple of
years ago that her opinion was not valued and didn’t want to
bother again because she felt that she wasn’t listened to.
Commissioner Bills so then there wasn’t any specific concerns
about the expansion that she was opposed to. Mr. Hyde, replied
that she has something against the facility I don’t know
specifically what it is unless she’s scared of what might happen
in the future. Chairman Barneck stated that Mrs. Anderton lives
some distance from the facility. She is on 5000 North and Mrs.
Nielson stated that they are on 5625 North. Chairman Barneck so
that puts her at least a half mile away. Commissioner Brough
stated property owners had been notified within the 1320 feet
and Mrs. Anderton was well beyond that.
Commissioner Bills
asked are you in the process of now applying for the permit that
will allow the expansion to the 70, I know that you have a
permit for 51. Mrs. Nielson stated that the licensure can’t be
expanded until the building is finished and the licensing agent
for the State comes out and hand measures the exact footage of
the bedrooms. There are a lot of regulations that need to be
met. We actually have to finish the building before he can come
and inspect it to verify the ratio from bedroom to bathroom,
square footage in the bedroom and then a new State license is
generated.
Chairman Barneck
asked if there were any questions or comments. Mr. Nielson
stated that some of the first buildings put on the property were
not meant to be permanent and eventually they would be taken
down and in time new ones added to replace them, but agree to
keep a maximum 70 students. Mrs. Nielson noted the first
building out there is a manufactured home and we would prefer to
build a stick built structure. Chairman Barneck as long as it is
just switching buildings and keeping the students the same I
don’t see any problems. Mr. Hyde noted that if there are any
questions I could bring it to the Commission and get the
specifics to decide whether we need another hearing or not. Mrs.
Nielson stated we would be happy to follow any procedures or
steps we need to meet any requirements. Chairman Barneck called
for any other questions?
Darrin Brown,
Tri-County Health Department, typically what happens in these
situations when people want to expand is that we ask that they
do an existing waste water inspection which would evaluate what
waste water systems are on the property to see if it is designed
for this many people. In this situation we have not done so. I
have looked at the file and they are a little complicated so it
will take some time to go through them, but I see a permit for a
new waste system in which I hadn’t seen until tonight. So my
concern is that it is designed for the wastewater and drinking
water and we have not evaluated this. Chairman Barneck said they
could add a condition to the Conditional Use permit regarding
the evaluation of the wastewater system. Mrs. Nielson said 3
years ago approximately they did a ground source protection plan
and drilled a well approved by the State Environmental
Engineering Department and that well is tested monthly. It
supplies all the culinary water for all the buildings and the
original small culinary well located on 5 acres is used only for
outside watering (lawns and garden). Chairman Barneck said he
understood Mr. Brown to be talking about the wastewater and not
the culinary water. Mr. Brown stated that he assumed there is
plenty of water but for expansion his concern is with the
wastewater systems, you now have 2 systems that have been
approved and are currently in use, I am talking about the new
system, which hasn’t been approved yet. Mrs. Nielson stated that
all 3 systems were on their own 5 acres and that Jennifer Corser
had been out and inspected the third one. Mr. Brown’s concerns
are that the facility’s wastewater systems need to be inspected
for the expansion due to the increase of students.. Chairman
Barneck stated this matter should taken be up later between
Tri-County Health and the Nielson’s to resolve the matter of the
wastewater systems.
Chairman Barneck
asked for any further questions or comments.
Randy Mair stated he
lives in the Hancock Cove area and I am actually here in support
of the facility. I am impressed with the ball field that is
being built. I have had the opportunity to be involved with not
necessarily work with some of the groups that were brought in to
play ball. I do think that the Nielson’s are doing an excellent
job. My only concern is that with increased numbers you have
increased risk so I think that you would need an increase in
security whether it’s a fence, increase in night shift or
whatever. Mr. Nielson stated we have been there for 8 years and
the most important thing about a program is how you manage the
program. In the 8 years we have not had a single neighbor harmed
in any way by the program being out there. The state has set
forth a number of guidelines and the number of students compared
to the number of staff that is required. My biggest concern as
director of the facility have been to have good public relations
with the neighbors and I feel that we have a strong track
record. Due to the different levels that the kids come in we
have the different facilities to accommodate, whether it be
lockdown or whatever. We do advertise no fences, no gates and we
feel that we have plenty of staff so at no one time do we not
know where any one student is. I think that my success is due to
the kinds of students that we take in and if you take in
hardened kids then you are asking for trouble. The students that
we take in suffer from anxiety, depression, some opposition and
some dabbling in drugs, but someone with a run history we
wouldn’t take them. People look at how well we deal in those
kinds of situations with the kids. I feel that most of the
students we have need more encouragement rather than being told
you can’t do this or that. Mr. Mair concerned with at night it
states that the staff is down to 2 and does it show anywhere in
the application the minimum number of staff required at any
given time. Commissioner Peatross indicated that on page 7 it
showed the number of staff. Mrs. Nielson indicated that the
minimum number of staff is a quotation from the State
Regulations and any facility no matter how small must have two
members on duty at night and we have one in each residence and
one that we call a float which will move around and make sure
that staff people are staying awake and things like that. In the
dormitories where there are 12 students more or less there will
be 1 staff member and in the dormitory for 18 students we will
have 2 staff members. Mrs. Nielson did say that they live there
on the property with their son so they are considered part of
the staff. She said that the last run away they had was in
January 2004 and the students went to the barn there on the
property. The attempt before that was a year ago July in which
she was caught immediately.
Chairman Barneck
asked Mr. Hyde to explain his findings. Mr. Hyde said they have
been in business since 1997 and they have provided the necessary
documents to apply for the Conditional Use Permit. I suggest
that the Owners provide copies of any document changes to their
state license in the future and also they name Duchesne County
as “Certificate Holder” on its insurance policy and provide
evidence of continuous insurance in the future. Chairman Barneck
asked Mr. and Mrs. Nielson if they were aware of this and Mrs.
Nielson replied that she had spoken to Mr. Hyde in this matter
and would be in contact with their insurance agent. Mr. Hyde
asked that the County receive from the State after approval the
licensing from 51 students to 70 students and any change of
status to Education Boarding School rather than Residential
Treatment Center. Mr. Hyde stated that all the criteria for a
conditional use permit had been met. This is being based on our
old ordinance because it was brought in 3 days before the new
ordinance took effect. So, therefore we are using the Group Home
type conditions. We are recommending approval subject to those 3
conditions I mentioned and if the Commission would like to add a
fourth condition; getting approval from Tri-County Health.
Commissioner Bills
moved that the Planning Commission adopt the findings and
conclusions of the staff report and approve the Conditional Use
Permit for Nielson Property Management, subject to the following
conditions:
| 1. |
Evidence of state
licensure for 70 students shall be provided to the
County immediately after receipt from the state. |
| 2. |
Owners shall provide the
County with copies of any documents changing the status
of their state license in the future. |
| 3. |
Owners shall name
Duchesne County as a “Certificate Holder” on its
insurance policy and provide evidence of continuous
insurance in the future. |
| 4. |
Owners shall provide the
County with evidence of Tri-County Health Department
approval of the wastewater system to accommodate the 70
students requested. |
Commissioner
Peatross seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
Other Business:
A. Consider Meeting Schedule for 2005
Mr. Hyde presented a
draft of meeting schedule for 2005. It is proposed to continue
meeting at 5:00 p.m. on the first Wednesday of the month.
Chairman Barneck asked if this works for everyone.
Commissioner Sweat motioned to accept the meeting schedule.
Commissioner Brough seconded the motion and it passed
unanimously.
B. Bob West-Stonegate
at Chrisville
Mr. Hyde asked that there was one more piece of business that
wasn’t on the agenda that needed attention. Chairman Barneck
said proceed. Mr. Hyde said back in, February 2003, Bob West was
here for preliminary plat approval of the Stonegate at
Chrisville Subdivision. I have included the minutes from
February 5, 2003 and it shows that the preliminary plat was
approved but there are a couple problems. In the subdivision
ordinance, Section 16.16.060 a person has one year from
preliminary plat approval to final plat approval and it’s been
almost 2 years and Mr. West hasn’t done this. Chairman Barneck
asked Mr. Hyde if he thought that Mr. West should come in and
reapply for a preliminary again. Mr. Hyde said that Mr. West had
written a letter dated November 24, 2004 requesting an
extension. Mr. Hyde said that the Commission is able to grant an
extension of 1 year and that would be up in February 2005 which
would give Mr. West 3 months. On the preliminary plat that was
approved in 2003 there is a yellow line on that plat were Mr.
West amended the Chrisville Subdivision and shifted the road to
provide access from South Cove Road to Stonegate. You may recall
that an amended plat came through for approval as well. The
yellow line indicates where the road goes through Chrisville to
Stonegate and that results in the road location changing and the
lots in the northeast corner of Stonegate would change to comply
with the new road. Chairman Barneck assumed that the Commission
had already dealt with this. Mr. Hyde said you dealt with the
changing of the Chrisville plat to shift the road over, question
one is would the Commission like to grant him an extension even
though Mr. West is 10 months late in asking for it and second
question is the change in the preliminary plat for Stonegate
significant enough to warrant he go back to square one and start
over? The Commission discussed that basically everything was the
same including the number of lots the only thing change was that
the road had been shifted. Chairman Barneck asked Mr. Hyde what
his recommendation was. Mr. Hyde stated that our ordinances
don’t give us any clear guidance; some ordinances would say any
change in configuration of lots or streets between preliminary
and final plats that you begin from square one. It is up to the
Commission whether you want Mr. West to start over or not.
Chairman Barneck asked what is the worse case scenario if we
make him start over. Mr. Hyde said he would have to pay another
application fee and surveyor may have to do some more work and
the time element. Commissioner Brough said that it has been
almost 2 years and my concern is are we setting a precedent by
doing this. Commissioner Sweat asked are there any mitigating
circumstances or other reasons for not acting on this within a
year. Mr. Hyde said that he thought Mr. West was trying to do
the improvements such as the roads and utilities and get them
approved before the final plat to avoid having to get a bond. It
just took him longer to get the money together to do the
improvements. Commissioner Bills said that Mr. West was a
personal friend and that he had experienced some personal
hardships in the last little while. Chairman Barneck asked if
Mr. West acted like he was in a big hurry now. Mr. Hyde said
that he wanted to start getting Stonegate at Chrisville final
platted and he seemed in a hurry to get that done. Mr. Hyde said
in a letter from Mr. West stated that he did not know there was
a time limit to have this process completed. Commissioner Brough
replied a developer who has developed as much as Mr. West must
have known that it needs to be completed in a year.
In a summary of the
final discussion of whether or not Mr. West needed to start from
square one or proceed on, the Commission stated if he needed to
redo the preliminary plat is only 23 lots involved in Phase 1 of
Stonegate at Chrisville so the cost would be approximately
$500.00. It was decided by the majority of the Commission that
Mr. West must follow the rules and have to resubmit both the
preliminary and final plats. Mr. Hyde asked that it be put on
the agenda as other business and that there be a motion made.
Commissioner Sweat
made the motion that we deny the extension for Mr. West on the
Stonegate at Chrisville Subdivision and require that he come
back in and resubmit the preliminary plat map. Commissioner
Fabrizio seconded that motion. The vote was 4 in favor and 3
against (Peatross, Bills, and Barneck). Mr. West’s request was
denied.
Minutes:
Minutes from October 6, 2004 and November 3, 2004 were reviewed
and Commissioner Brough motioned to approve with changes and
Commissioner Sweat seconded the motion and it passed
unanimously.
Commission
Comments and Staff Reports:
A. Review “Twenty Tips for Better Public Meetings”
Mr. Hyde attended the fall conference of the Utah Chapter of
the APA and one of the topics discussed was how to conduct
better meetings. Mr. Hyde said that there were some tips that
caught his eye that would help our meetings in the future. 1.
That the staff report be presented first so everyone knows what
the applicable criteria and issues are. 2. Listen to the
applicant and then anyone in the audience that wants to view
their opinion. 3. Keep the meeting under control by listening to
the facts with no arguing. 4. Better graphics so that everyone
knows where and what the discussion is about. 5. Make time
limits and that everyone stay to the point. 6. Know your rights
if the meeting gets out of control (76-9-103). 7. Make a good
record such as minutes, findings, etc. 8. That any comments to
be made are made to the group as a whole and no discussion
between individuals. Commissioner Rather asked was it OK for me
to talk to the surrounding neighbors of Mr. Thayne on his
behalf, Mr. Hyde replied that it was as long as you let the
public know that you did this before the discussion gets
started. Commissioner Peatross said that no law prohibits you
from talking with people involved with any particular matter as
long as everyone knows of the situation that took place. Mr.
Hyde announced that Commissioner Peatross attended a Citizen
Planner Seminar in Salt Lake and he is a certified Citizen
Planner now, and asked Commissioner Peatross if he would like to
make any comments. Commissioner Peatross stated that he didn’t
have time to prepare anything and would like to present some
input at next month’s Planning Meeting, he also stated that he
would try and put together a pamphlet of topics that he
considered quite helpful.
Mr. Hyde stated our
County Risk Management people were here a couple of weeks ago
and they were interested in making sure our Commissioners were
receiving enough training. And they would like evidence of
Commissioners who attend these training sessions.
Mr. Barneck stated a
couple of people had inquired what was going on with the
disposal pond issue since Chris Denver’s death. Mr. Hyde said
the County Commissioners have received new status reports from
John Chasel stating they have hired an environmental engineer to
test pond number 1. Chairman Barneck asked if this was the pond
that broke. Mr. Hyde replied that it was the one that Mr. Denver
had breached accidentally, so they have hired a consultant for
decommissioning pond #1 and cleaning it up. It is being reviewed
by; Division of Oil, Gas, and Mining and I can bring you more
information at an upcoming meeting and bring you up to date on
that.
Mr. Hyde informed
the Commission that our Junk Car removal program has taken
approximately 150 to 200 cars out of the County and the drawing
will be held on Monday December 6th. The County Commissioners
are interested in doing this again.
Commissioner Bills
asked if anything was being done with the illegal junkyard at
about 3500 W. and 4000 N. just above Bob West’s property the one
with 3 trailers tied together, there must be 60 to 80 cars. Mr.
Hyde said in this area Mr. Hamblin had been sent a letter in
conjunction with the problem but I have not had a reply from him
yet and Postma’s are participating in the junk trailer removal
program. Chairman Barneck stated that before Mr. Hyde had
arrived here someone had notified these people (Freeman and
Simonette) and informed them that they were not in compliance.
Mr. Hyde stated that in the next junk car removal program these
people will be notified to participate in the junk vehicle
removal or else they will be in violation of the Nuisance
Ordinance Law.
Adjournment:
Commissioner Fabrizio motioned to adjourn the meeting at 6:45
p.m. and Commissioner Brough seconded the motion and it passed
unanimously.
