December 9 2008 Planning Commission Minutes PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF ST. GEORGE WASHINGTON COUNTY, UTAH December 9, 2008 – 4:30 p.m. PRESENT: Acting Chairman Ron Bracken Council Member Gloria Shakespeare Commissioner Kim Campbell Commissioner Ross Taylor Commissioner Julie Hullinger Commissioner Ron Read Commissioner Mike Nobis CITY STAFF: Assistant City Attorney Joseph Farnsworth Community Development Director Bob Nicholson Planner II Ray Snyder Planner I Craig Harvey Engineer Jay Sandberg Secretary Gail Williams EXCUSED: Commissioner Chapin Burks CALL TO ORDER Acting Chairman Bracken called the meeting to order and welcomed those in attendance. Acting Chairman Bracken led the flag salute. CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS A.. Consider a request for a conditional use permit to expand an existing gravel pit. The total mining and grading area will encompass approximately 176 acres. The request is from SunRoc Corporation, applicant, Mr. Dana Truman, representative. The site is generally located one mile south of 1825 East 3860 South. The site is within T43S, R15W, Sections 21 and 28, S.L.B.& M. The property is zoned M-1 (Industrial), OS (Open Space), and R-1-10 (Single Family Residential; this was a “holding zone” when annexed to the city). The General Plan designation is IND (Industrial) and OS (Open Space). Case No. 2008-CUP-021 Planner Ray Snyder presented a request for the expansion of an existing gravel pit. The operation involves mobile hauling equipment, access for contracted and general public sales, along with supportive equipment to the crushing operation that will be moved and reconfigured at various times during the operation including crossing the Ft Pierce Wash. The total mining and grading area will encompass 176 acres. The applicant proposes to shut down the current operation of an existing gravel pit and to relocate the gravel pit to the south of the site and install a proposed conveyor crossing. This mining operation is in a remote area of the city limits. Typically the hours of operation would be from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, although some night time operation may be necessary. The site includes a portion of the Ft. Pierce Wash. A channelizeation study is required and applicable flood plain permits shall be obtained. The applicant shall work with Development Services to mitigate. Historically gravel pits have been located in remote areas of the city. Previously (in the year 2004) the Planning Commission determined (for another mining pit operation) that this type of use was permitted in the R-1-10 zone (in remote locations). Approval is recommended for this approx. 176 acres site contingent upon Planning Commission conditions; 1. The applicant shall pre-water each phase prior to disturbance. 2. The applicant shall mitigate each phase prior to beginning a new phase. 3. Provide a site mitigation plan; the exiting gravel pit(s) are to be mitigated (refilled with soil, contoured and compacted). This includes a geotechnical report and testing to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department . 4. Re-vegetate acreage of the original CUP; refill or provide an alternate mitigation to prevent airborne dust (from scrapped areas). 5. A dust control plan shall be submitted. 6. A channelizeation study is required. 10. As applicable; FEMA permits to be obtained.- an appointment was made today 11. As applicable; Army Corp of Engineers permits are required-as of today this is not an issue. 12. Provide a phasing plan. At the moment there is one phase. 13. The truck route shall be as originally approved.. 14. Provide a more specific plan for controlling dust along conveyors, stock piles and -disturbed area. 15. Provide a more specific plan for controlling dust during any blasting operations. 16. No head cutting of wash shall occur; amouring as required by Development Services. 17. No fines in channel. A slide was shown by Ray Snyder of pictures taken today at the site. Ray went over the conditions above and explained that # 3, 4, 8 were taken out due to information given by Development Services. Bill Swenson presented photos from the site today also and discussed the air quality concerns. Dirt and debris does spread in the Little Valley area and he would like pre-wetting to occur. SunRoc has ceased operations in the past during high winds and they are to be commended on this issue. The biggest problems occur when top soil is being moved. Bill’s questions would encompass how many of the 176 acres have been disturbed previously and in the past and is there a mitigation plan in effect? He would like to know how many acres at a time are involved. He would also like to be aware of the blasting operations. Commissioner Taylor asked how this would impact the new airport air quality. The reply from Bill Swenson was that the airport would be about a mile away from where this gravel pit is. The runway would be south and east of the gravel pit. Impact would be minimal. The applicant, Dana Truman, spoke representing SunRoc. Commissioner Nobis asked about the acreage involved and the response was that currently 30 -50 acres exist and it would take 3 years to mine that out, so it should balance out the opening of the new airport. At that time SunRoc would start reclamation work, which must be done in phases so as to disturb the area as little as possible. Commissioner Shakespeare asked if the area would then go into commercial. Dana was not sure about that at this point. Commissioner Bracken asked if no permit was first issued due to the annexation issue. The annexation was in 1982. He only knows that no permit was found within the last 6 years, so they felt it important to begin this process now. Commissioner Nobis asked why reclamation has not begun on the original 120+ acres. The answer was that the area became “capped” and crusted over. There is enough moisture in the area to hold the natural vegetation for now. The oldest part of the pit is not experiencing dust at this time. Ross Taylor asked if finding for CUP needs to be included. Joseph said yes it does need to be addressed and Ray apologized for the oversight. The findings are in 2B per Ray Snyder. MOTION: Commissioner Taylor made a motion and worked his way down through the findings to support a motion to approve the Conditional Use Permit. Looking at findings the issue of noise will be mitigated by the remoteness of the operation, it is not near any residential area , dust must be mitigated by appropriate watering to an appropriate standard for air quality, odors do not appear to be an issue, aesthetics is not an issue, safety issues would be met by meeting the requirements of OSHA, traffic is not an issue, height is not an issue, the hours of operation are stated and would not provide a harm to residential areas as none are near by, saturation spacing is not an issue, the character and purpose of the zone, even though this is R-110 there are precedence’s where an R-110 zone has included this kind of operation because this is a default zone, meeting the state requirements for public health would be a necessary part of the operation so he finds nothing that could not be mitigated and recommends approval of this conditional use permit. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Michael Nobis wanted to address the hours of operation that was stated as 6:00 AM. To 6:00 P.M. Monday thru Friday and he asked if would be the hours they would impose on them. Commissioner Taylor stated that if these are the hours stated in the application then this is what they should abide by. Bill Swenson injected that air quality regulation hours are from sun rise to sunset, so they flex through the year. That would give them longer working hours in the summer and they permit nighttime operations on a case by case basis. Assistant City Attorney Joseph Farnsworth stated that limiting hours of operation is only required if a nearby residential area would be affected by this particular project. Commissioner Taylor stated that in the area of findings, he wants to adjust it to indicate that the operating hours would be those that are permitted by air quality standards and that since this is out of a residential area it would have no other obligation than that. Also included in the motion would be that comments from staff that have been modified as of this meeting today, comments 1,2,5,6,7,9-12 as modified today. MOTION: SECONDED by Commissioner Hullinger. MOTION PASSES with 6 ayes, 0 nays. B. Consider a request for a conditional use permit for permission to establish and operate a Child Day Care. The proposed maximum number of children would be sixteen (16). A city business license and state license are both required. The applicants are Mr. and Mrs. Newby who propose to operate Monday thru Friday from 7:45 am to 5:15 pm. The zoning is R-1-8 (8,000 square foot minimum lot size). The property is located in Bloomington Hills, Lot 99, located at 2161 South Sherman Road. Case No. 2008-CUP-020. Planner Ray Snyder presented a request for the establishment and operation of a Child Day Care. This applicant is proposing to operate in a single family residence and is proposing to have a maximum of sixteen (16) children. The hours of operation would be from 7:45 A.M. to 5:15 P.M. Monday through Friday. The children will be between the ages of 2 years to 5 years old. The applicant is willing to work with the neighborhood to mitigate any drop off and pick up issues. As of this time, the staff has not received any opposition to this request. If the Planning Commission recommends approval, staff suggests the following conditions: 1. Based upon other child day care conditional uses approved by the Planning Commission staff suggests that 16 children may be too many. 2. A final fire inspection would be required prior to operation. The applicant shall comply with all Fire Department conditions; such as the posting of fire escape routes, smoke alarms etc. 3. The applicants shall work with the neighborhood to mitigate any drop off and pick up issues. The following findings must be met to mitigate the reasonably anticipated detrimental effects if imposed as a condition of approval; Noise, safety, traffic, hours of operation, maintaining character and purpose of the zone and public health. Ray Snyder explained that this home is on a corner lot on a low traffic street. It is on the corner of Sherman Drive and Sherman Circle. There is a concrete parking area as well as a single car garage. Joseph Farnsworth, Assistant City Attorney, stated that the gravel area in the front cannot be used for parking. The City Code requires all parking to be on improved areas. The day care has been operating with 8 children or less. The ages of children would be from 2- 5 years. No calls of opposition had been received by the staff as of this time, per Ray Snyder. The hours of operation asked for are from 7:45-5:15, Monday through Friday. The applicant explained that they want to expand due to the many phone calls they received asking for infant care. Commissioner Campbell asked Mr. Newby to explain the drop off issue. The answer was that the parents pull into the pad, the gate needs to be undone for them to enter and the children are brought to the back door. Joseph Farnsworth, Assistant City Attorney explained that just because there is a limit of 16 children, it does not necessarily mean that they need to have that many children to still qualify for this expansion. Commissioner Read asked if their neighbors had any outside noise complaints. The answer was no, they have personally not received any complaints. Typically they will take the children outside in the morning and then again in the afternoon. The mid part of the day is taken up with other activities. Frequently they walk the children down to Bloomington Hills North Park for exercise and they use the facilities down there as well. C. Consider a request for an extension of time for an expired conditional use permit to establish and operate a Car Wash. The property is located at the southwest corner of Fort Piece and River Road, St. George, Utah. The property is in the C-1 (Neighborhood Convenience Commercial) zone. Mr. Jeff Morby, applicant. Case No. 2007-CUP-018. (Note: This was originally approved with conditions by the City Council on November 1, 2007) Community Development Director Bob Nicholson introduced a request for an extension of time for an expired conditional use permit to establish and operate a car wash. It was approved by the City Council on November 1, 2007 and expired on November 1, 2008. It was originally a zone change request to rezone the property from C-1 (Neighborhood Convenience Commercial) to PD (Planned Development Commercial) was scheduled for the June 12, 2007 Planning Commission meeting but was withdrawn at the applicant’s request. On August 28, 2007 in its place the applicant submitted a zoning regulation amendment. This amendment was to add “car wash (auto and manual)” as a conditional use in the C-1 zone, and it was approved. On October 8, 2007 the CUP was heard at Planning Commission and it was then heard by the City Council on November 1, 2007. This is located on 1.221 acres on the southwest corner of Fort Pierce and River Road. The applicant proposes to construct a 5-bay (4 hand wash and 1 automatic) car wash. The height is not to exceed 25 feet and the exterior will be earth tone colors. Tile roof and rock work will be used to enhance the building, which will be used 24/7. Six spaces will be available for vehicles to pull into after washing for the purpose of drying and vacuuming. The City Council approved it with the following conditions 1. Install two (2) speed bumps on the east side of the building to discourage traffic passing through the property to use as a short cut to River Road and by-pass the signalized intersection of River Road and Ft. Pierce Drive. 2. Install additional landscaping on the south wall between this commercial site and adjoining residential property. Create tree canopies that intermingle. 3. Install a right in and right out only driveway on River Road. 4. The hours of operation shall be controlled to only 7 A.M. to 10 P.M. year round. 5. The site shall incorporate dark sky style lighting. A photometric plan shall be submitted during the plan check process for staff review. 6. The vacuums shall be clustered as close as possible to the landscaping on the north side of the property. Staff shall verify during the plan check process. 7. The block wall on the south side of the property between the commercial site and the adjacent residential property shall meet city ordinances for wall. Staff shall verify during the plan check process. 8. The washing bays shall have plastic or vinyl sheeting. The following standards must be met to mitigate the reasonably anticipated detrimental effects if imposed as a condition of approval: Noise, aesthetics, hours of operation, maintain character and purpose of zone and public health. Community Development Director Bob Nicholson pointed out that the code states if activity has not commenced, then at the end of the year that conditional use permit expires, but the applicant can request an extension. He stated that there is no specified time, but the code says the Planning Commission shall recommend to the Council what they feel is a reasonable time frame. The applicants are requesting a two year extension. In the code it states that at the end of one year a request may be made by the applicant for an extension. In recommending an extension the Planning Commission shall find that substantial work shall have been accomplished toward its completion. The burden is now on the applicant to tell what progress has been made. One thing that must be recognized is that the economy has changed dramatically and financing is different, so as a City he feels that we need to respond that it is not business as usual and that these are hard times. Commissioner Taylor asked if in a situation like this where they have approved the CUP in the past and it comes up for an extension, is it appropriate to see if the circumstances surrounding it have changed and if so, would they want to go back and visit the conditions of the last CUP to see if significant changes were made in the area surrounding it. Bob Nicholson mentioned in this case, the situation is pretty much the same as it was a year ago. Bob feels that the year limit gives a chance to re-look at things if they haven’t gone forward. Commissioner Read wanted to clarify that if they were to go back to the conditions and they meet them, are they not done? If they request an extension and the extension is granted, they can not add additional conditions, but if they deny it so it expired, then they would have to come back with a new one and that would be when the new additional conditions could be put on it. Assistant City Attorney Joseph Farnsworth commented that there are two criteria that the Planning Commission must look at. The first is that the Planning Commission shall find that substantial work shall have been accomplished. Substantial work is not defined in the code. After consulting with other attorney’s in the office, he feels that that substantial would be interpreted as about 50% of the work. The other option is that they have to show that it’s been impossible through no fault of their own to diligently pursue completion of the project. The code does allow the Planning Commission to make a recommendation for time restriction. Joseph doesn’t think that it should be greater than one year, since the initial period is a one year period. Mr. Jeff Morby is the co-owner and representative, for this project. Financing has been an issue for them and they worked on the approval project for about 18 months. Their records show that approval was Nov 1st from City Council and there were some road issues for them to address especially straightening out River Road, which solution has not been totally worked out. Mr. Morby feels that now is a very difficult time for this type of project to get financing. For this reason they are asking to wait for the economy to settle down so they don’t get in financial trouble at this moment. That is why they are asking for the two year period to be acceptable. Mr. Morby feels that this is a reasonable request and they are willing to live with the stipulations previously made in November of 2007. Larry Blake spoke as a partner of this project and mentioned the cash infusion needed for the banking industry. They would like 2 years as no one is projecting a recovery time anytime soon. Mid- summer, they had to address these financing problems. They ask humbly that the Planning Commission consider the 2 year time period. Commissioner Bracken asked for comments. Commissioner Read thinks both conditions for extension have been met and that by working with the engineers it would just mean how much time should the commission give them. Commissioner Taylor agrees with this comment; however he questions why there is a 1 year limit on CUP’s. Bob Nicholson stated that the economy is dramatically different today and the Planning Commission will have to recommend what a reasonable time period would be. Commissioner Nobis is leery of the two year extension requested and thinks it is prudent to stick with the 1 year guideline and revisit it later if needed. Larry Blake would not mind if the condition would be to come back in a year; however he can’t promise that more would be done in a year to run numbers until the economy is better and financing is better. The ordinance is clearly “per project” per Joseph Farnsworth, Assistant City Attorney and they could come back for another CUP extension if it is not started. MOTION: Commissioner Taylor made a motion to grant a CUP extension for a period of 2 years on the grounds that they have done significant and substantial work and preparation of the project and that it is beyond their control. The circumstances they face today are not their fault, therefore a 2 year extension is appropriate for the times right now. MOTION SECONDED by Commissioner Campbell. DISCUSSION ON MOTION: Commissioner Read stated that for the purpose of a precedence down the road it is made clear that it is based on these unique times and financial conditions that we are in that we are looking at this 2 year extension. Otherwise he would just look at a 1 year extension. Commissioner Taylor added the conditions pressing, or the inability to secure an appropriate commercial financing for the project. If that condition continues beyond the two years, they have the right to come back and ask for an extension if that circumstance is not resolved. MOTION PASSES with a 2 year extension and the possibility to come back for another extension. 3. ZONING REGULATION AMENDMENT – PUBLIC HEARING (5:00 P.M.) Consider a zoning regulation amendment to the City Zoning Regulations, Title 10 Zoning Regulations, Chapter 2 “Definitions”, Section 10-2-1 “Zoning Definitions” to define an “Equestrian Therapeutic Center” and to amend Title 10 Zoning Regulations, Chapter 7 “Residential Zones” Article A “Residential Estate Zones”, Section 10-7A-3 “Conditional Uses” to include “Equestrian Therapeutic Center as a conditional use permit. City of St George applicant. Case No. 2008-ZRA-003. (Note: Associated Case No. 2008-CUP-014 / Dual King Ranch). Previously on July 8, 2008, the Planning Commission determined that a day treatment program for adolescents and adults was not similar to and in harmony with a Child Nursery use which is a conditional use in the RE zones. However the applicant was encouraged to submit a zoning regulation amendment for further consideration. This would allow consideration of an Equestrian Therapeutic Center in the RE zones as a conditional use permit. If the zoning regulation amendment is approved it would apply to all RE zones. The applicant desires to submit a CUP for an agricultural/equestrian themed day treatment program for both adolescents and adults. The adolescent program would primarily be Monday through Friday from 8:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. with a maximum number of 15 youth (target class size is 10). The adult classes would be Monday through Friday from 4:30 P.M. to 8:00 P.M. with a maximum number of 15 (target class size is 10). Some Saturdays are possible for both programs. The Equestrian Therapeutic Center is described as an establishment for the purpose of an agricultural and equestrian themed day treatment program for both adolescents and adults. The program consists of a variety of activities working with horses and other animals and livestock with a minimum one (1) acres lot. The program may include gardening and green house projects. Such a center shall be educationally oriented and life skills based. Community service projects may be county wide consisting of clean-up, beautification and special needs. Programs and classes shall be in compliance with State Licensure requirements. The center may service Boy Scout and Girl Scout Troops, schools, church groups, at risk populations and court referrals. Ray Snyder presented photos of the applicant’s home as well as a covered corral and an arena. Names recognizable for this project and association would be “Dixie Riding Club” and “Possee”. Joseph Farnsworth, Assistant City Attorney, pointed out that this proposal is for zoning ordinance changes city wide, not just for this specific project. The applicant is Robert Bergren and he explained that Dixie Riding Club has the ability to provide these badly needed services in this area. As a non-profit organization, they would like to become state licensed as a mental health facility and grants then would be available for addition services to be offered in the future. They would like to expand the facilities they have at this moment. They provide life skills based services. This is a day program and the impact on parking is insignificant and not an issue for the neighbors. Presently he owns one acre however there is an adjacent ½ acre that he would like to purchase and use. Joseph Farnsworth, Assistant City Attorney commented it would be good to add into the ordinance that no overnight stay be allowed. He also suggested added a number for the amount of individuals to be served. The target number that Mr. Bergren is asking for 15, however he would like to work with ten individuals at any given time. The ratio for working with adolescents would be 8 people per one staff member. Councilwoman Shakespeare mentioned that this would be changing an ordinance and that it would be citywide. Joseph Farnsworth clarified that this would be a conditional use in an RE zone. There are few RE zones in the City. Bob Nicholson suggested that if they were to set the acreage amount at an acre or two acres it would narrow the possibility of this being requested elsewhere. Commissioner Taylor is struggling with the concept of a ranch in the City. He is also concerned as to who the project wants to serve. He voiced that if it is for recovery then wouldn’t it be better suited in a rural area and he is still questioning what kind of therapeutic operation they are looking at. The response from Mr. Bergren was that it is life skills oriented. Community service projects are also done there, for example the BLM, Forest Service and Special Olympics. They therefore really don’t need a large ranch to do these types of projects. Commissioner Hullinger asked if a field trip could be arranged to see this particular property. Bob Nicholson agreed that a field trip would be a good idea and also suggested that they try to get the requirements a little tighter. MOTION: Commissioner Nobis made a motion to continue item 3. MOTION SECONDED by Commissioner Read. MOTION PASSES. 4. MINUTES Consider approval of the Planning Commission minutes for October 28, 2008. MOTION: Commissioner Nobis made a motion to recommend approval of the minutes. MOTION SECONDED by Commissioner Read. All voted aye. 5. DISCUSSION Planner Craig Harvey will give a presentation on the Cache Valley Plan. The Cache Valley Plan was developed to provide a planning foundation for the Cache Valley 2020 Vision Committee. The Plan worked through several scenarios showing how the projected population growth can be accommodated without sacrificing critical agricultural lands for development. This was tabled until next Planning Commission. Bob Nicholson thanked Linda for her good work and invited the Planning Commission to a reception downstairs at 3:00 P.M on December 11th. MOTION:Commissioner Hullinger made a motion to adjourn at 6:35 PM. MOTION SECONDED by Commissioner Nobis. All voted aye.