HomeMy WebLinkAboutApril MinutesLINCOLN COUNTY
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday,April 19,2023
6:00 P.M.
Locations:Video Conference between the following locations:
Lincoln County Courthouse,Commissioner Boardroom,925 Sage Avenue 3rd Floor,Kemmerer,WY
&Afton Planning &Engineering Office,Conference Room,61 East 5th Avenue,Afton,WY
I.CALL TO ORDER
Karen Anderson,called the meeting to order at 6:05 pm.A quorum was established.
II.INTRODUCTION OF PNZ MEMBERS
Planning Commission Members:
Karen Anderson,Vice Chair
Tom Crank
Chad Jensen
Pam Price
Planning &Engineering Staff:
Robert Davis,Planning Director
Amy Butler,Engineer
Emmett Mavy,Planner II (Absent)
Katie Gipson,Development Administrator
Mikayla Hibbert,Office Assistant
County Attorney Staff:
Austin Dunlap
III.AGENDA INTRODUCTION BY PLANNING DIRECTOR
Robert Davis welcomed everyone and thanked them for attending.Robert asked the Commission if they
would like to move Sketch Plans to the beginning of the agenda as an applicant had requested.After discussion,
the Commission decided to not move the Sketch Plans higher on the agenda.
IV.APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Karen called for an approval of the March 22,2023 meeting minutes noting the changes discussed prior to
the meeting as well as in the meeting.Chad made a motion to approve the March minutes.Tom seconded.Motion
passed.Chad stated that he would in the future vote differently when it comes to issues such as the 30-foot
easement or a buffer fence that was discussed in the March 22nd meeting.Chad stated he would like to see this
kicked back to the builder in the future.
V.DEVELOPMENT REPORT
Katie presented the Development Report for February 27,2023 to March 26,2023.She stated that there
were 15 Residential Use Permits in North Lincoln County,0 Small Wastewater Permits,0 South Lincoln County,
and 0 Zoning and Development Permits.Chad questioned if every lot could have a guesthouse in addition to the
main house.Robert answered that every lot could have a guesthouse as well as a primary house in Lincoln
County.
VI.103 CUP 23 Sunroc Corporation DBA Depatco Gravel Pit
Robert presented the Project to the Commission.Robert stated the project is a Conditional Use Permit
Application for expansion of an existing 10-acre gravel pit operation to 27.5 acres on roughly 39.39 acres in the
Page 1 of 8
Rural Zone.Robert stated that Sunroc also requests to set up a hot mix asphalt plant and concrete batch plant on
the site.Robert stated that the project is located 3 miles northwest of Star Valley Ranch and would gain access
from Rock Farm Road,a 60-foot easement and private road.Robert stated that the existing gravel pit operated
under the previous owner as excavating,stockpiling and hauling gravel or ‘pit run’gravel as a Limited Gravel
Mining not exceeding 15 acres quarry exemption from the WDEQ.Robert continued stating that the previous
owner,Depacto,proposed to lease the gravel pit to different operations who would permit their own screening and
crushing equipment.The applicant,Sunroc Corporation,proposes to conduct their own crushing operation in
addition to operating a hot mix asphalt and cement batch plant on the site and expand into a Small Gravel Mining
operation.Robert stated that the applicant proposes to operate from 7am to 6pm Monday through Friday.Robert
stated that there is an estimated total of 1,156 trucks/month.Robert explained that the amount of material crushed
or hauled from the pit shall not exceed 40,000 tons per year or 3,333 average tons per month.Robert continued
that in general,a dump truck can carry 13 to 25 tons of gravel which equates to 256 to 133 trucks/month on
average.Robert stated that the proposal calls for expansion of the gravel pit from roughly 418 feet to roughly
1,030 or roughly 600 feet from the property line;the nearest occupied dwelling to the east would be roughly
330-340 feet away from the proposed disturbance boundary.Robert stated that the gravel pit,originally permitted
through WDEQ in 1985 was expanded from three acres to ten acres in 2008.Robert continued that in the 2008
approval,the applicant was to maintain a 1000-foot separation from any existing home unless home owners gave
written permission.Robert stated that although the applicant was approved by the Board of County
Commissioners for Limited Mining up to 10 acres,the WDEQ will allow the pit to expand to 15 acres with an
increase in bond.Robert stated that a request was made in 2015 to expand the gravel pit from 10 acres to 15 acres
and was tabled with the applicant eventually withdrawing the application.Robert stated that normally gravel pits
are not allowed adjoining to an existing residential subdivision,but because the pit
was permitted prior to the platting of the Rocky Mtn.Ranches Subdivision which occurred in October
2003,it was allowed as a conforming use in the Rural Zone.Robert clarified that this means the land use is
allowed to exist and expand,particularly when there will be no greater impacts of traffic,noise,hazardous air
pollution,vibration,dust and other affects industrial uses tend to have on sensitive residential areas.Robert stated
that removing gravel from the proposed site is consistent with the Lincoln County Comprehensive Plan and Land
Use Regulations with regard to promoting mineral and industrial activities but the addition of a cement batch plant
and hot asphalt mix plant is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan goal of promoting responsible and orderly
development of the county given the proximity of this industrial use to residential areas.Robert stated for those
reasons Planning Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commissioners send a recommendation of denial to
the Board of County Commissioners for File #103 CUP 23 a Conditional Use Permit for cement batch plant and
hot asphalt mix operations,and a recommendation of approval of the expansion of the gravel pit.Robert stated
that Planning Staff received 48 letters from the public of opposition;40 of those letters were received in time and
in the packet to the Commissioners and 8 of those coming in later and not included in the packet.Robert also
mentioned that he received a Petition of opposition for the Gravel Pit with 459 signatures.Karen questioned what
the petition specifically opposed.Robert answered he was unsure if it was in opposition to the hot mix plant or
the expansion or both.Someone in the public answered it was for both the expansion and hot mix plant.Karen
questioned why there would be an hours of operation change from 8am-5pm to 7am-6pm.Robert answered that
this is what the applicant requested.Chad questioned why the application in 2015 was withdrawn.Robert
answered he was unsure.Chad stated that he thinks that an operating time of 7am is too early.Chad also asked
for clarification on the truck traffic.Chad asked for clarification on the difference between what is happening
now versus what could happen if this application is approved if the operations stay the same.Robert stated that it
would be the same operations,but they would be expanding beyond the 15 acres that they could expand to as is
right now.Tom questioned if the existing use included crushing.Robert stated that yes,they are permitted to
crush currently.Tom questioned if the existing pit area is mined out already.Robert stated that he understands
that it is close to being mined out now.Bill King,representative for Sunroc,answered that the existing pit is close
to being mined out.Karen questioned what the depth of the pit was now as well as the proposed depth.Bill
answered that it is around 20 feet deep,and they would propose to keep it around 20 feet deep.Karen questioned
if it was 20 feet deep or 50 feet deep.Bill stated he could not remember exactly what was proposed but that they
want to extract all the aggregate that they can.Bill presented the proposed project giving background on Sunroc
Page 2 of 8
Corporation,and how expanding the gravel pit and allowing a hot mix asphalt plant and concrete plant would be
beneficial to the community.Karen questioned if the pit was planning on going 50 feet deep,as it said in the
proposal,or 20 feet deep.Bill answered that they would like to have the possibility to go up to 50 feet deep.
Karen questioned why they were requesting the hours of operation time change.Bill answered that the hours of
operation would make it so that employees could get everything ready to be running by 8 am.Bill continued that
they could make sure to not start crushing until 8am.Karen questioned the exterior lighting plans.Bill answered
that they could submit a Lighting Plan and comply with all lighting requirements the County has.Karen opened
up the meeting for public comment asking for the public to not be repetitive of one another also stating that all
letters received by the deadline have been reviewed.Robert read a letter,as requested by Jennifer Anderson.
Jennifer Anderson’s letter opposed the project and included some history of the land,and stated some concerns
including:adverse damage to the culvert,the proximity to homes,that a Batch Plant would be a new use and
therefore not grandfathered in,hours of operation,heavy truck traffic,the need for berms,and the lack of required
dust abatement.Jeff Hidman asked if there was a permit in place now for crushing.Robert answered that the
State Air Quality has given a permit to Sunroc for crushing currently.Chad questioned if the state or Lincoln
County allows crushing.Robert stated that the state permits it,and Lincoln County has not stated that it is not
allowed.Jennifer Anderson gave further history on the gravel pit while stating that they were promised a setback
of 1,000 feet from the disturbance of the pit.Jennifer Anderson stated she had some concerns with the Findings
classifying the proposed project as a non-conforming use while the non-conforming language states that there is
low impact.Julie Johnston opposed the project stating concerns with the heavy truck traffic,truck disturbance
before 8am,and the issues with the culvert.Scott Henderson opposed the project stating that Sunroc did not have
the County’s best interest in mind,that a gravel pit does not belong in a Rural Zone because it does not have low
impact.LouAnn Henderson opposed the project stating that there is no enforcement,and that there were several
violations made by Sunroc that may affect the East Side Canal.Dennis Draney opposed the project stating that
the harmful airborne matter would be detrimental to the community including the nearby school kids.Ted
Wagner opposed the project by stating that the gravel pit is not cost economical,families will be affected
adversely,and the adverse disturbance to the canal and culvert on the road.David Gorley opposed the project
stating that he has concerns about inversion,and pollution occurring in Star Valley.LouAnn Henderson reiterated
that the Petition with the 459 signatures are all opposed to the expansion as well as the hot mix plant.Chad
questioned how these signatures were collected.LouAnn answered that it was collected on Facebook through
Change.org.Julie Johnston opposed the project stating that she feels like her rights as a business owner are not
being acknowledged.Lauren Chaston opposed the project stating that Sunroc has a toxic work culture,produces
toxic air,and that the County as a whole would suffer.Scott Henderson opposed the project stating that the prior
permit submitted to expand was tabled and then withdrawn due to the amount of opposition.Ted Wagner stated
that the Canal that runs by the property does deposit into the Salt River.Kristin Merrell opposed the project
stating that the gravel pit will not allow the community to maintain their rural lifestyle.Scott Henderson stated
that he believes that Sunroc asked for more than they knew they would get in hopes of getting something.Chad
questioned if the gravel pit could be stopped from expanding.Austin stated that the gravel pit is allowed to
continue given some conditions.Austin continued that the Wyoming Supreme Court case that deemed that it was
obvious that a gravel pit would need to expand due to the fact that gravel is a diminishing asset.Austin explained
the three-prong test that is used to address a non-conforming use.Chad questioned if the culvert is a County issue
or a landowner issue.Robert stated that it is a private road so it is the responsibility of the owners.There was
question on why the setback was 1,000 feet.Jennifer Anderson stated that due to opposition the compromise
between the gravel pit and landowners was 1,000 feet.Amy stated that for a Limited Gravel Mining DEQ
requirements and County Land Use requirements used to be 1,000 feet,but when DEQ switched it to 300 feet the
County did as well.Karen questioned how many gravel pits are in the County.An audience member said there
are approximately 12 operational gravel pits.Karen questioned the 24th Condition of Approval and what it might
be.Robert stated that the 24th Condition of Approval would be to limit the pit to not haul more than 40,000 tons
per year.Karen questioned the dust mitigation control packet included and if the community could speak on the
effect of dust the pit makes at this time.Jennifer Anderson answered that the dust does roll across the field and
from the trucks coming down the road.Julie Johnston stated that the crusher creates a lot of dust,and she has not
witnessed the dust mitigation being taken care of like required.Karen questioned how the dust mitigation plan
Page 3 of 8
would be enforced.Tom questioned Condition of Approval item 15 and what constitutes an emergency to allow
the pit to run after regular hours.Robert stated a 5-day notice would be given to the County for anything they
deemed as an emergency,and the County would approve or deny the request on a case-by-case basis.Bill King
gave examples of what they would deem as an emergency situation.Tom stated that he did not see why
emergency situations such as those given would be allowed.Karen agreed.Karen questioned if we could limit the
depth of the gravel pit.Austin stated that it could be part of the Conditions of the Conditional Use Permit.Austin
added that if DEQ regulates the depth of the gravel pit then the County cannot.Amy stated that the DEQ
regulates if there is groundwater.Chad made a motion to deny the project based on Findings of Denial A-D.No
second.Motion failed.Tom made a motion to deny the asphalt and concrete plant based on Findings of Denial
A-D.Pam seconded.Two approved and one opposed.Motion passed.Chad made a motion to deny the
expansion of the gravel pit due to Findings of Approval A-D.No second.Motion failed.There was discussion on
possible motions.Chad made a motion to deny the expansion of the gravel pit based on Findings of Denial A-D.
Tom seconded.Motion passed.Robert stated that the recommendation of denial from the Planning and Zoning
Commissioners would be heard before the Board of County Commissioners May 3rd,2023.
VII.102 MP 23 &111 MA 23
Robert presented the Project to the Commissioners.Robert explained that this Master Plan Application
asks to modify the approved Master Plan 704 PZ 05 proposal.Robert gave background on the Master Plan stating
that it was approved for a total 125 lots.Robert stated that Phase II was started and the first 5 lots were platted
under permit #208-MS-22 which leaves the remainder of Phase II to allow a total of 65 residential lots.Robert
continued that the requested modification by the developer proposes to place 66 residential lots as opposed to 65
residential lots along with one utility lot in the remainder of Phase II.Robert stated that this proposal is not a
substantive change in density;the current Master Plan approved 1.7 lots per acre,the proposed revised master
plan requests 1.73 lots per acre.Robert stated that the Chapter 23 wastewater study was performed for 180 total
lots when the original master plan was permitted and a non-adverse letter was provided by WYDEQ.Robert
stated that the proposed subdivision would be serviced by the Etna Water District.Robert shared a letter that
came from Sanderson Law Office and stated that to take into consideration the concerns in the letter,they would
be asking for a 500-foot safe distance to fire a gun in the direction of the development for waterfowl hunting.
There was correspondence from the Conservation District,Weed &Pest,and the State Engineers Office.Robert
stated that Planning staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission send a recommendation of
approval to the Board of County Commissioners for File #102-MP-23 a Master Plan and 111-MA-23 a Major
Subdivision Preliminary Plat,with:Findings A.thru C.,Conditions of Approval 1.thru 4.,and recommendation
for the Board Chairman to sign the Development Agreement.Chad questioned if the Etna Water and Sewer have
provided a Will Serve letter.Robert answered that it should be included in the packet.Ryan Erickson,from
Sunrise Engineering and representing the owners,went over some history and gave an overview on the project.
Chad questioned where the project would gain access from.Ryan answered that there is one major access off of
US Highway 89 with an emergency access onto Good Neighbor Lane.Karen questioned the snow removal plans
with the high-density area.Ryan answered that the proposed density is not that high and within the Land Use
Regulations.Tom asked when the Chapter 23 Wastewater Study was done and if there have been any significant
regulation changes to the study since then.Ryan answered that it was done in 2005 and there were no significant
regulation changes.Tom questioned if the septic systems may have a problem with the safe drinking water study.
There was discussion on the Source Water Wellhead Protection Program from DEQ.Karen stated that a neighbor
asked for a study to be made on the wetlands and the impact a development would have.Ryan answered that this
is why we have the DEQ study to address that.Karl Scherbel,Etna Water and Sewer District Chair,spoke stating
that Etna Water District would provide water services to this project.James Sanderson shared some concerns that
were not addressed in the Staff Report including how the County,with this project,would not be following the
Comprehensive Plan when it comes to preserving open space.James stated that the surrounding use is
recreational and having a high density near will start impeding on the recreation.Chad stated that because of
having the Etna Water and Sewer District that this is where the County will see growth.Marlowe stated that this
project has been in place for years,and that surrounding land owners bought knowing it was within a Mixed zone.
Page 4 of 8
Dale Peterson,a neighbor,opposed stating that the proposed project is too dense especially for not having a
centralized sewer system.Marlowe stated that there is legal access in place on Good Neighbor Lane,and the
County was the one who required a crash gate on that access.Chad stated that for 128 lots,one access did not
seem adequate.Ben Peterson opposed the project stating that he has hay and animals on the surrounding property,
and is concerned with how the subdivision would affect his animals.Mary Peterson opposed the project stating
that there is concern about the water and sewer as well as concern as the density of the project.Tom stated that
what he was referring to previously is the Source Water Wellhead Protection Program from DEQ that was
implemented in 2004.Tom continued stating that the DEQ made reports for all public water systems that
contained maps and potential sources of contamination.Tom stated that he believes that this needs to be looked
into.Karen asked Austin for his thoughts on what Tom stated.Austin stated that he did not have anything
definitive,but believes that since DEQ was the entity who put the Source Water Wellhead Protection Program in
place and also completed the DEQ study that they would be harmonious with each other.Karen stated that she is
concerned about conserving the recreation lands and following the Comprehensive Plan.Karen continued stating
that she would not be against tabling the project or denying it based on what has been stated.Robert stated that
there is concern with conserving the Salt River,but if this Commission does decide to deny this project it would
limit the Developers to adding the one additional lot,but they have a Master Plan for the rest of the lots.Chad
shared his concern with the number of enhanced septic systems in this dense area.There was discussion on how
long a Master Plan approval is good for.Austin stated that he believes there is not a condition of how long a
Master Plan is good for.Tom questioned if these lots would be able to fit a house,septic tank,and all the
setbacks.Chad made a motion to table the project to the May 24,2023 Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting giving time for the County Attorney to check how long a Master Plan is good for,Planning Staff time to
have a discussion with DEQ,and the applicant to discuss with the Etna Water and Sewer District.Pam seconded.
Motion passed.
VIII.101 CUP 23 Etna Village Post Appartements
Robert presented the Project to the Commission.Robert stated that the proposed project consists of 16
Residential apartments up to 2 stories each.Robert stated there would be a density of eight units per acre,and that
32 bedrooms have been included in the septic analysis.Robert stated that this project is proposed to be located on
two 1.02 acre lots west of HWY 89 in Etna,Wyoming behind the Etna Trading Company.Robert continued,
stating that the property is within the Mixed Use Zone and appropriate for high density housing.Robert stated that
access is an existing loop road named Clearview Drive,and a looped driveway is proposed by the developer.
Robert stated that public comment was received and addressed the concerns made by the public comment.Robert
stated that Staff recommendation includes improving Clearview Drive to include 2 eleven-foot travel lanes with
1-foot shoulders and a pedestrian sidewalk.Robert stated that Planning staff recommends that the Planning &
Zoning Commission send a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners for File #101
CUP 23,a proposal to establish four 4-unit apartment buildings,with Findings of Approval A through D and
Conditions of Approval 1 through 11.Brett Bennett,representative,stated that creating affordable housing is
important and the hopes of the land owner.Brett stated that they are building to regulations and a lot of thought
has gone into the project including landscaping and buffers.Brett continued that they have a designated place for
a play structure as well as areas where additional play structures can be placed.Chad questioned where the park
area is going.Brett pointed out the area between two of the structures.Karen questioned what kind of lighting
was proposed.Brett answered that whatever the Lincoln County Regulations require will be met.Chad
questioned if the area has been cleared already.Brett answered that there has been some grading done but not
related to the project.Chad questioned who provided the public comments.Robert answered that it was Karl
Scherbel,who was in attendance.Tom questioned if the septic and the playground are located at the same area,
and questioned what the fall was between the two areas.Brett answered that the playground and septic systems
will be next to each other,and that there is a 9%slope between the two.Tom questioned if all setbacks for the
buildings and septic systems were met.Brett answered that Sunrise Engineering has looked over and ensured that
they are met.Karl Scherbel stated that he is opposed to the project for several reasons.Karl continued that the
notice stated that the project was a Conditional Use Permit and then tonight it was referred to as a Planned Unit
Development.Karl stated that he requests that this project goes back to noticing and is noticed correctly as a
Page 5 of 8
Planned Unit Development and follows the regulations of a Planned Unit Development.Karl stated that this
proposed project does not have the right to use the loop road of Clearview Lane,and that the property owners
have the right to block access to this road due to the fact that these are private easements.Karl stated that this the
proposed densest development in Lincoln County,and they do not meet the Open Space requirements.Karl stated
that he does not believe that there is adequate snow removal space.Karl stated that the entirety of Clearview
Drive needs to be improved including the highway approach.Karl questioned if Darin Kaufman had been
contacted.Robert stated that he has not.Karl stated that he contacted Darin Kaufman and there are things that
need to be addressed.Karl stated that it does not have a loop road or a turnaround.Karl questioned the size of the
playground and if it was adequate.Mr.Trennell stated that the highway access is a problem and it creates several
dangerous situations that need to be addressed.Mr.Trennell also stated that he would like to see something a lot
less dense for this area.Brett spoke that this project was asked to be placed in the County’s Queue as a Planned
Unit Development.Brett stated that they have been in contact with the Fire Marshall.Brett stated that any
emergency vehicles could use the road going around the property to turn around.Brett stated that half the
property is 1-bedroom apartments and the other are 3-bedroom apartments.Brett stated that he has been in
contact with Darin Kaufman and the property owner is willing to do what it takes to make the highway access
better.Brett stated that they are following the regulations as written and meet the density requirement.Matthew
Burtness,owner,stated that he is motivated to make this project work and if that includes getting a road
agreement or anything else he is willing.Don Schneider opposed the project stating that the developer is trying to
put too much for the area he owns.Chad stated that he appreciated all that was brought to the Commission's
attention and questioned if the project does need to be re-noticed and tabled until then.Karen questioned if the
Thayne Fire Chief was noticed.Robert stated that he was,but Staff hadn’t heard back.Tom stated that if this
project does get tabled,he would like something that shows setbacks being met.Chad made a motion to table the
project until May 24,2023 and give the applicant time to resolve some issues brought up and have the project
properly noticed.Tom seconded.Motion passed.
IX.SKETCH PLANS
a.Planned Unit Development,Alpine Trailhead
Robert presented the Sketch Plan to the Commission.Robert stated that the project proposes to
develop 105 units of market rate rental housing consisting of 3,4 and 5-plex units on 15.93 acres of land
in the Mixed Zone outside of Alpine.Robert stated that the proposed project has a density of 6.6 units an
acre.Robert stated that there would be one access point with two emergency crash gate exits.Robert
stated that there is a concern of snow storage areas,and the need to possibly eliminate Lots 12,13 and 14
or Lots 15 and 16 to create a cul-de-sac for a turnaround.Robert stated that it does meet the open space
requirements.Karen questioned how the ponds will be filled.Robert stated that the State would regulate
how it will be filled.Chad questioned what kind of water and sewer was being proposed.Robert
answered that they would be hooking on to Alpine’s Water and Sewer District.Chris Cave,
representative,stated that they have met with WYDOT about accesses and will only be granted one
access.Chris explained that if the ponds are not doable,it will just be more open green space.Chris
explained the different features on the project including extra parking,sidewalks,buffers,private space
for homes,and public space.Karen questioned if the extra parking spaces could be used for storing
trailers.Chris explained that these would just be for storing trailers and not for people to reside in.
Marlowe questioned why they would not annex into Alpine.Chris stated that the reason for this is
because it is not directly touching the town of Alpine and therefore not allowed.Discussion followed
about possible annexing.Karen stated that she believes that there may be some snow removal issues.
Chris questioned if there is any guidance or recommendations on the amount of snow removal needed.
Amy answered that the County does not have anything at this time.Karen questioned the lighting of the
community.Chris stated that they plan to do the dark night sky practices for the project.
b.Major Subdivision.Vista Hills II
Page 6 of 8
Robert presented the Sketch Plan to the Commission.Robert stated that the proposed project
would be for a Major Subdivision to subdivide 62.75 acres into twelve residential lots ranging in size
from 4.14 to 6.26 acres.Robert stated that the average lot size will be 5.23 acres in the Rural Zone at a
density of .19 units per acre.Robert stated that the lots will have access from County Road 116 and share
a private subdivision road.Robert continued stating that each lot will have individual wells and individual
septic systems.Robert stated that in the middle of the project is a subdivision,Vista Hills,that was
already processed.Robert stated that the physical restraints of the land could be the East Side Canal that
runs through the property.Chad shared concerns about building close to the canal.Amy questioned if the
developer would consider placing building envelopes on the lots.
X.OTHER PLANNING MATTERS
Discussion about the open Planning and Zoning Commissioner position took place.Robert stated he
presented the top 3 candidates for the position to the Board of County Commissioners and was waiting to hear
back.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 11:09 P.M.
Page 7 of 8
The minutes from the April 19th,2023 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting were approved
on the _____day of _________________,2023.
__________________________________________________________________________
Chair Dated Director Dated
Page 8 of 8