HomeMy WebLinkAboutJuly Mins (edited)Page 1 of 8
LINCOLN COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES (Edited)
Wednesday, July 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 6:03 pm. A quorum was established. II. INTRODUCTION OF PNZ MEMBERS
Planning Commission Members: Karen Anderson, Chair Allen Smoot, Vice Chair
Tom Crank Chad Jensen Pam Price
Planning & Engineering Staff: Robert Davis, Planning Director Amy Butler, Engineer Emmett Mavy, Planner II 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 stated that there would be
some changes to the order on the agenda. He added the agenda would go as follows: the Commissioners would have discussion and motion regarding the Planning and Zoning Commission Bylaws, nomination of officers, approval of minutes, development report, and then the projects as laid out on the agenda. Robert stated that there
would be no discussion items in Other Planning Matters. IV. PLANNING AND DISCUSSION BYLAW DISCUSSION
Karen stated that in the workshop before the Planning and Zoning Meeting, there were some amendments discussed regarding the bylaws that the Planning and Zoning Board follows. She said that a potential amendment discussed was that the Chair could vote on motions. All members of the Commission stated that they were in favor of this amendment. Karen stated that another potential amendment was that the Chair could make a motion. Karen, Allen, Chad and Pam were in favor of this amendment. Tom stated that he would rather the Chair ask for a motion. Karen stated the next potential change was there would not be a second needed for a motion. Pam was in favor of this amendment. Allen, Tom, and Chad were not in favor of this amendment. Karen stated the next potential change would be concerning ex parte conversation and if it should be disclosed in the public meeting. All were in favor of this amendment. Karen stated the last potential amendment would be to move the Planning and Zoning Commission Meetings to the second to last Wednesday of the month. All were in favor of this amendment. Allen made a motion to amend the existing resolution making it a bylaw and amending Section 6
making it so that the Chair can make motions and vote, the Commission will have seconds on its motions, any ex parte conversations will be recorded the following meeting and the date of the commission will be the second to last Wednesday of the month. Pam seconded. Karen questioned if we wanted to add to the motion the disclosure
of site visits. Tom stated that he did not think it was necessary to disclose site visits. Discussion followed.
Page 2 of 8
Motion was left as was. All were in favor. Motion carried. Karen questioned if all other items in the resolution would be carried over into the bylaws. It was answered that they would be. V. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Tom nominated Karen as Chair of the Planning and Zoning Board. Pam seconded. Motion carried. Karen nominated Allen as Vice Chair. Chad seconded. Motion carried. VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Karen questioned if anyone had any proposed changes to the June 21, 2023 meeting minutes. Chad stated that he had one proposed change. Tom stated that he had one proposed change. Chad made a motion to accept the minutes as amended. Tom seconded. VII. DEVELOPMENT REPORT
Katie presented the Development Report for May 26, 2023 to June 25, 2023. She stated that there were 21 Residential Use Permits in North Lincoln County, 16 Small Wastewater Permits, 1 South Lincoln County, and 0 Zoning and Development Permits. Chad questioned if there was a requirement for the amount of building that
could happen on one lot. Emmett answered there is not as long as setbacks are being met. Chad questioned if the Planning Staff has come up with a definition for a barndominium. Emmett answered that Planning Staff defines it as a primary residence with more garage square footage than living quarter square footage.
VIII. 101 CUP 23 ETNA VILLAGE POST APARTMENTS Robert presented File Number 101 CUP 23 Etna Village Post Apartments. He stated the proposed project is for twelve residential apartments up to two stories each with a density of 5.88 units per acre. Robert continued stating that twenty-four bedrooms have been included in the septic analysis. Robert stated that there are four apartments per building and each building has a proposed footprint of 4,621 square feet with a proposed maximum height of 35’-0”. He continued that the project will have two phases: Phase I is to construct two four-unit buildings, and Phase II is to construct an additional four unit building for a total of 12 apartments. Robert added that the project is proposed to be located on two 1.02 acre lots west of HWY 89 in Etna, Wyoming behind the Etna Trading Company. Property is within the Mixed-Use zone and appropriate for high density housing. Access is from an existing road named Clearview Drive, and a looped driveway is proposed by the developer.
Robert mentioned that there has been some controversy on using Clearview Drive. He added that some concerns at the April 19, 2023 PZC meeting centered around density, the site plan and the need for a road maintenance agreement. Chad stated that there was concern about the project being properly noticed and questioned if Staff thinks it has been. Robert stated that the project was noticed correctly as a Conditional Use Permit. Robert explained that although not considered as a Planned Unit Development, the project is following PUD procedures with the
provision of a centralized water and sewer system, landscaping plan, site plan depicting open space, drainage, ingress and egress, play area, elevations, floor plans and procedures of the subdivision review process. Chad questioned if there were any issues or conflicts with Planning and Zoning Commission rules. Robert stated that there was not any. Tom questioned Condition of Approval 11 and what the different phases are. Robert stated that the project will have two phases: Phase I is to construct two four-unit buildings, and Phase II is to construct an additional four unit building for a total of 12 apartments. Tom questioned what phase the loop road would be installed. Robert stated that it would be completed in Phase 1. Karen questioned the road width for the subdivision stating that there were two different wordings explaining the road width in the staff report. Robert clarified that they are requesting two eleven-foot lanes with two one-foot shoulders. Karen questioned if there were sidewalks required. Robert stated that Planning and
Zoning Commission members could amend the Condition of Approval to include the sidewalks. Karen stated that Condition of Approval 9 discusses Lighting Standards that are in the Land Use Regulations. Karen continued asking about the 3,000k LED lighting that was proposed and if it meets the Land Use Regulations.
Page 3 of 8
Karen questioned in the Recommendations D, E, F, and H if these were recommended or required. Robert stated that this wording was used by WYDOT and he would like to see these points in the project, but it
may not be feasible. Karen questioned point F and who would do the confirming. Robert stated that the developer would confirm. Karen questioned if there were deadlines for the Phases. Robert stated that the developer may be able to answer. Brett Bennett, representative, stated that the developer has taken the public comments and made amendments to the project including removing 4 units, meeting setbacks, having open space, additional parking, and aid in reconstructing the road. Brett stated that there was public comment with concern on tenants of the apartments using the Clearview Subdivision access. Brett continued that it is proposed that the tenants of the apartments would sign in the lease agreement that they will not use the subdivision road. Brett added that the May 11, 2023 public meeting between the developer and the residents really helped to improve the project. Chad questioned if Clearview Drive was a private or public roadway. Brett stated that it is private and that the developer has been given a 60-foot easement running east to west on Clearview Drive. Chad questioned
who plows the road and the easement portion. Brett answered that that is all in the Road Maintenance Agreements. Dave Kennington, with Sunrise Engineering, gave information on the UIC program and how that affects
the septic systems for the property. Chad questioned what the projected number of gallons used for this property would be. Dave answered that there is a projected 960 gallons per building. Dave stated that all the stormwater flows to the south into the capture drainage detention basin.
Karen asked Brett Bennett about the outdoor signage. Brett stated that there will be one for each entrance, and that the proposed 3k lighting does not exceed the County’s regulations. Brett continued that the lights will be downlit, shielded, and recessed. Karen asked for any public comment. Karl Scherbel stated that he is appreciative of Planning Staff and the developers for listening to the public's concerns. Karl shared that he would like to see the road be consistent with the new road width guidelines. Discussion continued. Rob Schneider stated that he would appreciate if the developer would put in the tenant lease that those who do reside in the apartments will not use the part of Clearview Drive that is not a part of the shared easement. Dale Cottam, developer’s attorney, stated that he would be assisting in the leases for the property and will include that the tenant not use the south access of Clearview Drive. Dale stated that they are looking forward to getting the road maintenance agreement finalized and agreed upon by everyone.
Karen stated that when a motion is made that a potential Condition of Approval 15 could be added stating the developers would include in their lease agreement that would prohibit tenants from accessing the apartments from south Clearview Lane. Karen questioned if the boundary adjustment had taken place. Robert stated that it had not, but would before the Zoning and Development permit was pulled. Allen made a motion to send a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners for
File #101 CUP 23, a proposal to establish three 4-unit apartment buildings, with Findings of Approval A through D and Conditions of Approval 1 through 15 modified as follows: Number 12 to have two twelve foot lanes and two one foot shoulders with sidewalks along the northside of Clearview Drive up to Highway 89, number 14 G & E would be changed from considered to require with F that the developer confirms, and add Number 15 that the developer will come up with something in the lease that tenants default if they utilize access to the South Clearview Lane. Tom seconded. Motion carried 5-0. IX. 106 CUP 23 BIG SKY MINIATURE GOLF Robert presented File # 106 CUP 23 Big Sky Miniature Golf. Robert stated the proposed project is for a19-hole 9,900 sq. ft. miniature golf course that will be located at the southernmost point of a 24-acre site currently occupied by a Recreational Vehicle Park, restaurant and single-family use. Robert stated that the ADA
compliant golf course will contain hand-built structures, boulders and turf. Robert continued stating the site will be landscaped and fenced around the perimeter. Robert stated that when fully operational, the hours of operation will begin at mid-Spring to mid Fall, Monday through Saturday 6pm to 9pm. Robert stated that the course’s capacity is estimated to be 95 players/90 minutes with 63 parking spaces to accommodate needs for both the
Page 4 of 8
miniature golf course and the adjacent JACZ Drive-in Restaurant. Robert stated that the mini-golf customers will be able to access the restrooms in JACZ. Allen questioned if the Right of Way in existence for Highway 89 would interfere or hinder WYDOT’s future plans to widen the highway. Robert stated that the proposed area is not part of the highway widening. Allen shared concern with the access and the issues he has seen with the high-speed limit (65 mph) that exists where the access is. Chad questioned if the restroom would be open when JACZ is not open? Robert replied that he believes that the mini golf and restaurants hours of operation would be mirrored. Chad questioned if the RV Park was seasonal or year-round. Robert stated that the Planning Office is waiting for the necessary paperwork to move the project making it year-round forward. Alessandra Ivie spoke concerning some of the comments made by the commission. Alessandra stated that as she understands all the Planning Office is waiting on for the all-year RV park is a backup well. Alessandra stated that the name of the project is Puttz Mini Golf not Big Sky Mini Golf. Alessandra gave some information
on how the project will be constructed. Alessandra stated that there was some miscommunication and that the mini golf will be open when JACZ is open, but she anticipates the busy hours to be from 6-9 pm. Alessandra states that as soon as the snow melts, they would like to open mini golf even if the restaurant is not open.
Alessandra continued that the restrooms will be available at all times. Alessandra gave information on the extra parking spaces stating that it is at capacity plus 18 extra spaces. Alessandra stated that Darin Kaufman, from WYDOT, explained that if there was needed expansion of the highway it would come from the other side of the
highway. Karen questioned what the highest structure on the course was. It was answered that it was 12 feet high. Karen asked for clarification on the lighting for the golf course. Alessandra stated that she would like to have gooseneck lighting, but that is not a necessity. Michael Codman, the contractor for the construction of the golf course, was available for questions. Tom made a motion to that Planning & Zoning Commission send a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners for File #106 CUP 23, a proposal to establish and build a 19-hole Miniature Golf Course located on land roughly 9,900 square feet in size within a Mixed Zone 24.05-acre parcel, with: Findings of Approval A through E. Conditions of Approval 1 through 8. Allen seconded. Motion carried 5-0. X. 105 MA 23 SILVER SPUR ESTATES SUBDIVISION- PRELIMINARY PLAT Emmett presented File Number 105 MA 23 a Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat application proposal to subdivide 35.22 acres into seven residential lots. Emmett stated that there were some changes that needed to be made. Emmett stated the first change was that Page 2 of the Staff Report under A, I, 1, that the name should be Loulie Lane instead of Daisy May Drive. Emmett stated that the next change would be on Page 3 under Condition of Approval Number 6 be changed to roundabout. Emmett continued stating that another change was in Condition of Approval Number 7 including Blue Steel Road into Road Maintenance Agreement or CCR’s.
Emmett stated that the average lot size for the proposed subdivision would be 5.03 in the Rural Zone. Emmett stated that the project is in the Thayne Community Plan area. Emmett stated that the lots will share a private subdivision road Blue Steel Road and Loulie Lane off of Bedford North County Road 121. Emmett stated that each lot will have individualized wells and engineered enhanced septic systems. Emmett stated that the subdivision roads will require a 24’ travel way with 1’ shoulders, a 70’ roundabout intersection, and a 70’ radius cul-de-sac. Chad questioned if it was the objective of the County to have an average lot size of 5 acres when the average is calculated with one big lot and several much smaller lots. Emmett stated that this could be argued and there are two different things to consider: the true letter of the law versus the spirit of the law. Discussion continued. Tom questioned if the Board of County Commissioners had made any indication on what their view is as to the spirit of the law. Emmett stated that there has not been an official statement from them.
Karen questioned if Lot 7 could be subdivided further at a later date. Emmett explained the concept of parent tracts and how those work and summarized that it would not be able to be subdivided further. Austin questioned how Lot 7 gained access to their property. Emmett answered that Lot 7 is a flag lot and gained access from the bottom portion of the lot.
Page 5 of 8
Marlowe, representing the developer, clarified some points that Emmett made. Marlowe questioned if the roads had to be inspected by a licensed engineer. Marlowe continued stating that this has never been a
requirement in the past. Becca Self, representing the developer, stated that the family plans to keep Lot 7 and use it for livestock and a small homestead. There was discussion among the Planning and Zoning Board about possible motions and the intent of the Land Use Regulations regarding five acre averages. Karen questioned Point 4 that now required a licensed engineer and what brought about this change. Emmett stated that this was pulled from the meetings that are currently taking place about road designs. Discussion continued. Chad made a motion to table the project awaiting clarification on what was intended by the average in the Land Use Regulations. Tom seconded. Karen stated that she is concerned that the Board of County Commissioners will not release an office statement, and that she thinks the Planning and Zoning Board should
send forth an approval or deny. Allen stated that if the Board of County Commissioners disagree with an approval or denial then the Planning and Zoning Board will know where they stand rather than waiting for an official statement. Motion failed 1-4. Chad made a motion to deny the project because it does not meet findings of
approval B and C. Tom seconded. Motion carried 4-1. XI. 108 MA 23 ALPENGLOW HILLS SUBDIVISION- PRELIMINARY PLAT Emmett presented File Number 108 MA 23 Alpenglow Hills Subdivision- Preliminary Plat a Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat application to subdivide 106.8 acres into twenty-one residential lots. Emmett had some amendments to the Staff Report. Emmett stated that under Page 2 under Findings of Approval 3. A. I 1 to state a plat warning to limit guest homes until second access is completed. Emmett stated that the next amendment would be on the same page to remove the engineered bridge language and replace it with a language stating proper crossing. Emmett stated on Page 4 that he would like to add an additional Condition of Approval to install a temporary cul-de-sac at the north end of Yellow Star Road until a second access is completed. Emmett stated that this project is in the Thayne Community Plan area. Emmett stated that access will be off of County Road 115 and that there is another subdivision that Planning Staff is asking for connectivity to. Emmett explained that to have more than 30 dwellings you need a second access to the subdivision which is why there is a limit for the guesthouses until that second access is created. Emmett stated that each lot will have individualized well and
individualized engineered-enhanced septic systems. Emmett stated that Lot 1 is going to be the only lot that will be residential/commercial. Emmett explained that Condition of Approval Number 6 was made because Planning Staff will not grant two driveway access permits right next to each other, and the subdivision road and the neighboring property would access County Road 115 from the same area. Emmett continued stating that it is practical that the developer gives the landowner to the west an easement from their subdivision road onto the neighbor’s property. Emmett stated that this is what Planning Staff thought was practical given the layout of the
land. Emmett stated that Condition of Approval 7 is included because there is a property owner that had, previous to this project, had an easement, and is willing to give up that easement for a 60’ easement on all of Yellow Star Road and Grace Lane - which the developers agree to. Emmett stated that Condition of Approval Numbers 8 and 9 represent that they exchange these easements at the north end of the subdivision for that second access. Emmett continued that until that second access happens, they are asking for a temporary 70’ radius cul-de-sac. Marlowe, representing the developer, stated that Condition of Approval A. I. 1. should be read to limit to 7 houses. Discussion on which lots get the guesthouses occurred. Marlowe questioned if a licensed engineer was required for Condition of Approval Number 4. Marlowe stated that in reference to Condition of Approval Number 6, the developer proposed that they provide 30’ and the neighbor provide his 30’ to create the road and the developer would build it at his cost. The neighboring property did not want to do this, and that in turn, made the County force an easement from the developer in this Condition of Approval. Marlowe made a request to not
force a 750’ easement for the property owner but something shorter to make it up over the ridge but no further. Neal Weibelhaus, developer, stated that he was concerned about the need to have all road improvements to be inspected by a licensed engineer.
Page 6 of 8
Jeremy Jenkins, the neighboring property owner, shared some background of the property and stated that he is opposed to where the subdivision road was at. Jeremy continued stating that initially the road was not
supposed to be in the west but rather from the east. Jeremy shared concern of dust, traffic, and the layout of the land for this subdivision road. Emmett stated that Condition of Approval 3. A. I. 1., will have to state which lots can have guest homes until the second access is put in. It was discussed to add, a plat warning that will restrict guest homes to seven identified lots until the second access is completed, to the Conditions of Approval 3 A. I. 1. Planning Staff discussed the concerns of roads being built, and if there should be a need for a licensed engineer to stamp the drawings for the subdivision. The Planning and Zoning Board discussed if this should be a requirement. Discussion of other ways for sufficient evidence that the road was designed as required. Amy stated that the contract collects weigh tickets that would work as sufficient evidence. Amy stated that in the past Planning Staff has gone out and reviewed the road and made observations that provided sufficient evidence. Tom stated that this should not fall on the County Engineer to do, but that it is the developer’s responsibility.
Discussion followed. Karen questioned Point 6 asking if the County can force an easement. Emmett stated that the reason Planning Staff is asking for the 750-foot easement is so that when the road is built, there are no erosion issues that
would prevent the neighboring property owner from building their road. Emmett stated that it is not logical to have two roads run next to each other. Austin stated that in this scenario Planning Staff has to look at the health, safety, and welfare of those affected.
Allen made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Commission send a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners for File #108 MA 23 a Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat with Findings of Approval A-C, Conditions of Approval 1-10 with modification provided: 3 A. I. 1. will restrict guest houses to 7 identified lots until the second access is completed, 3. A. I. 3. to state install a proper crossing, 4 that there is sufficient evidence to see that the roadway is constructed as required, and adding Condition of Approval Number 10 stating to install a temporary 70-foot radius cul-de-sac at the end of Yellow Star Road until the second access is constructed, and a recommendation for the Board Chairman to sign the Development Agreement. Chad seconded. Tom stated that he is not in favor of Condition of Approval 4 being included. Chad stated that he has a hard time with the motion asking for sufficient evidence. Chad questioned what would the County deem as sufficient evidence? Karen stated that she would prefer the condition to ask for an inspection of a licensed engineer. Motion failed 1-4. Chad made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Commission send a
recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners for File #108 MA 23 a Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat with Findings of Approval A-C, Conditions of Approval 1-10 with modification provided: 3 A. I. 1. will restrict guest houses to 7 identified lots until the second access is completed, 3. A. I. 3. to state install a proper crossing, 4 road improvements will be inspected by a licensed engineer as drafted in the Conditions of Approval as drafted by Staff, and adding Condition of Approval number 10 stating to install a temporary 70-foot radius cul-de-sac at the end of Yellow Star Road until the second access is constructed, and a recommendation for
the Board Chairman to sign the Development Agreement. Karen seconded. Motion failed 2-3. Tom made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Commission send a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners for File #108 MA 23 a Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat with Findings of Approval A-C, Conditions of Approval 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 with modification provided: 3 A. I. 1. will restrict guest houses to 7 identified lots until the second access is completed, 3. A. I. 3. to state install a proper crossing, Condition of Approval 4- road improvements will be inspected by a licensed engineer as drafted in the Conditions of Approval as drafted by Staff, and adding Condition of Approval number 10 stating to install a temporary 70-foot radius cul-de-sac at the end of Yellow Star Road until the second access is constructed, and a recommendation for the Board Chairman to sign the Development Agreement. Pam seconded. Discussion about the 750 feet easement and the possibility of making it 100 feet. Jeremy Jenkins stated that they do not have any plans to build on this property, and that the developer does not lose anything by granting the easement. Neal Weibelhaus stated that he feels that
they are losing a shared road maintenance agreement. Motion failed 2-3. Karen made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Commission send a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners for File #108 MA 23 a Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat with Findings of Approval A-C, Conditions of Approval 1-9 adding Condition 10 stating to install a temporary 70-foot radius cul-de-sac at the end of Yellow Star Road until
Page 7 of 8
the second access is constructed with modification provided: 3 A. I. 1. will restrict guesthouses to 7 identified lots until the second access is completed, 3. A. I. 3. to state install a proper crossing, and a recommendation for the
Board Chairman to sign the Development Agreement. Allen seconded. Motion carried 3-2. XII. SKETCH PLANS (NONE) XIII. OTHER PLANNING MATTERS (NONE) ADJOURNMENT Chad made a motion to adjourn. Allen seconded. The meeting was adjourned at 10:21 P.M.
Page 8 of 8
The minutes from the July 19th, 2023 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting were approved
on the _____ day of _________________ , 2023.
_____________________________________ _____________________________________
Chair Dated Director Dated