Minutes for 2005-08-30, Direct pdf link.

Each Commission meeting is recorded on CD or audio tape, which is available to the public through the County Clerk's Office.
In accordance with the requirements of Utah Code Annotated Section 52-4-7(1)(d), the County Clerk records in the minutes the names of all citizens who appear and speak at a County Commission meeting and the substance "in brief" of their comments. Such statements may include opinion or purported facts. The County does not verify the accuracy or truth of any statement but includes it as part of the record pursuant to state law.

Commissioners Present: Kenneth A. Bischoff, Chair; Camille T. Cain; and Craig L. Dearden.

Others Present: David C. Wilson, Deputy County Attorney; Fátima Blackford, Clerk/Auditor's Office, took minutes.

A. Welcome by Chair Bischoff
B. Pledge of Allegiance was conducted by Fátima Blackford
C. Thought of the Day was offered by Chair Bischoff

D. Consent Items:
1. Purchase Orders in the amount of $162,258.32
2. Warrants #204815- #205106 in the amount of $872,398.48
3. Minutes for the meetings held on August 2, 2005 and August 23, 2005
4. New Business License Applications
Commissioner Dearden moved to approve the consent items; Commissioner Cain seconded, all voting aye.

Shelleice Stokes, President of the Convention Visitors Bureau, introduced Joni Walsh, the new Sales Manager. Ms. Stokes noted the great asset that Weber State University is to our community and of the current efforts to connect it with the downtown businesses.

E. Action Items:

1. Contract by and between Weber County &Wheeler Machinery for a Maintenance Agreement for CAT 966-G - Contract C2005-107

Gary Laird, County Operations Director, presented this maintenance contract for the CAT 966 G Loader. The estimated cost (based on total hours) for two years is about $6,530.
Commissioner Dearden moved to approve Contract C2005-107 by and between Weber County and Wheeler Machinery for a maintenance agreement for the CAT 966-G; Commissioner Cain seconded, all voting aye.

2. Request for Partial Reconveyance of parcel Nos. 15-366-001&002, which includes all of Lots 3A & 3B, Midland Business Park Amended Lot 3, Ogden City

Gary Laird, County Operations Director, showed an area map. The county had sold property that had been purchased for the intent of building the Transfer Station on Midland Drive. One parcel had been sold on contract to 3-D Construction (also dba Statewide Associates) and they subsequently subdivided it into four lots. The original purchase price was $150,000. 3-D paid $50,000 down and had to pay the remaining $100,000 by January 1, 2005 or penalties and interest would accrue. The penalties and interest as of May were $13,722 and at that time they gave Mr. Laird a check for $106,000 (which included what 3-D had calculated the interest to be).

3D is asking for a partial reconveyance releasing two lots so they can sell them and get money to finalize their payment to the county. Mr. Laird said that the balance due would have to be recalculated because there were other penalties accruing daily.
Commissioner Dearden moved to grant the partial reconveyance of land serial Nos. 15-366-001 & 002, which includes all of Lots 3A & 3B, Midland Business Park Amended Lot 3, Ogden City; Commissioner Cain seconded, all voting aye.

3. Resolution Appointing two Representatives to serve on the Taxing Entity Committee for all Redevelopment, Economic Development and Education Housing Development Project Areas in the City of Pleasant View - Resolution 26-2005

David Wilson, Deputy County Attorney, explained that when a municipality creates an economic development area or a redevelopment area, they are required, as part of that process to appoint a taxing entity committee. Pleasant View requested that Weber County make appointments representing Weber County on this taxing entity committee.
Commissioner Cain moved to adopt Resolution 26-2005 of the Board of County Commissioners of Weber County appointing Douglas Larsen and Dan Olsen as the representatives and Commissioner Dearden as the alternate to serve on the Taxing Entity Committee for all Redevelopment, Economic Development and Education Housing Development Project Areas in the City of Pleasant View; Commissioner Dearden seconded.
Roll Call Vote:
Commissioner Cain aye
Commissioner Dearden aye
Chair Bischoff aye

F. Public Hearings:

1.Commissioner Cain moved to adjourn the public meeting and convene the public hearings; Commissioner Dearden seconded, all voting aye.

2. Public Hearing for the purpose of receiving input from any interested person regarding the vacation of a 50' wide Public Easement along the Weber River on the property of Emogene Berrett, dba Pappas Brick and Stone as per Deeds recorded in the Book 1591 at page 1961 of the Deed Records of Weber County Utah

Gary Laird, County Operations Director, stated that the county had received an easement on a piece of property in 1991 that at the time had been owned by Boyd Parke. The easement was to mitigate flooding in that area. The county at that time had been asking for those kinds of easements along river property for trails. The trail has been installed and runs along the opposite side of the river. There is a bridge that connects the portion of the West Haven trail. Through a court action the City received an easement all the way through the Pappas property and court documents suggest that the county relinquish its easement because the trail now has its own easement. The easement states that it is for river maintenance and public access. The property had since that time been sold to Pappas Brick and Stone, represented by Emogene Berrett. The easement was 50 ft. from the high water mark of the river all the way to just before it just exits Ms. Berrett's property.

The Public Lands Advisory Board visited the site as well as the County Commissioners, legal counsel, and Mr. Laird. The options included extinguishing the entire easement, none at all or retaining the portion that would be for river maintenance, and extinguishing the public access. The Public Lands Advisory Board recommended that the county keep both easements. Ms. Berrett's concern was that if the public had an easement she would have difficulty keeping people off other parts of her property and damaging them. Ms. Berrett had done quite a bit of her own maintenance in that area.

Patrick Dean, representing Ms. Berrett, showed an area map indicating the two easements that encumber the subject property and requested a portion to be vacated from public access. He said that Mr. Berrett had already given a lot to the trails network. Ms. Berrett would like to keep the area as pristine as possible and could do so with limited public access. He said that all the maintenance that had been done had been accomplished from the east side where there are very few trees. There are a number of trees that would be seriously damaged if heavy maintenance was done on the west side. Ms. Berrett was willing to enter into an agreement with the county to have the maintenance continue. He handed the commissioners a court document which he said stated that West Haven would allow the county to utilize their easement.

Chair Bischoff invited public comments. Brad Slater, Weber County Sheriff, noted that he was a representative in the Northern Utah Regional Advisory Council (RAC) for the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources. RAC held a lengthy meeting last week on issues relating to sportsmen access along the Weber River corridor, though this property was not specifically discussed. He said that it was apparent to RAC based upon citizen input at that meeting that stream access facilitation was needed for the sportsman. He noted the importance of being able to mitigate flooding and maintenance.

3. Public Hearing on the vacating of a portion of Juniper Lane at approximately 4000 N. Juniper Lane, in the Wolf Creek area of Weber County

Kevin Hamilton, County Planning Department, showed a plat map and stated that Juniper Lane dead-ended into the Wolf Creek golf course, thus a road would probably never go through. Currently, there is a strip of land that is unused and by vacating it, the property would go to either of the two lots on the sides of Juniper Lane allowing those property owners to maintain it. Mr. Hamilton addressed the commissioners questions stating that when this portion is vacated, the property owners will amend their plat so that the two lots can use it and their frontage will be on the new cul de sac. Both lots will maintain the 150 ft. of frontage. Chair Bischoff invited public comments and none were offered.

4. Public Hearing on zoning Petition ZP #07-2005 by Kevin and Ronnie Chambers to amend the zoning map by rezoning property at approximately 10004 E. 325 S. from Agricultural Valley AV-3 to Ogden Valley Manufacturing MV-1. The property consists of approximately 5.4 acres

Chair Bischoff recused himself from discussion and action on this item due to having a close relationship with one of the property owners. Kevin Hamilton, County Planning Department, showed several photographs of the area. The subject property is located in the South Fork area of Weber County adjacent to the State road shop. The Planning Commission voted to deny the petition for this rezoning and the motion included a request that staff identify whether there was a need for more manufacturing in the Ogden Valley and to take public input to identify locations, and to determine what percentage of valley trucks go down the Ogden Canyon to do business.

This requested rezoning is not identified in the Ogden General Plan and would be considered planning by zoning, which is not appropriate. All Planning Commission members present voted to deny the rezoning.

Commissioner Dearden asked if the Planning Commission's request in the motion had commenced. Mr. Hamilton said it had not. Determining which trucks were commercial vehicles would be more difficult for smaller contractors. He said that GIS could create maps of the Ogden Valley and a series of public hearings would be conducted to help identify locations for this type of use. An area in Eden was identified as an appropriate location for equipment storage but the final language in the General Plan indicates the Planning Commission would need to determine appropriate locations.

Chair Bischoff invited public comments and following is a summary:
Ron Chambers, a petitioner, felt this was an ideal location because the State road shop and the highway were adjacent to the property. He said the petitioners had looked into obtaining access off the main highway so as to not access the small subdivision roads. He said the county had looked at that area for MV-1 zoning but it had not been put in the plan and he did not believe studies had been initially conducted to determine the need for this zoning. The petitioners had looked into other areas in the Ogden Valley but no one wanted the site in their area. The commissioners asked Ron Chambers if they had access off of Highway 39 and he said there was an agreement with a property owner to acquire access but not with UDOT. Mr. Chambers said they had not signed the CC&Rs and they had been advised most of the CC&Rs had been violated already.

Kimball Wheatley, owner of lots 9 & 10 in the South Fork Ranchettes Subdivision, spoke against this proposal. He stated that the current AV-3 zone set guidelines to continue agricultural pursuits including the keeping of farm animals and low density residential development in a continuing rural environment, which was consistent with the General Plan. However, the proposal was to change it to accommodate the need for light intensity-type manufacturing and its associated uses, some of which may have an environmental impact requiring public review and regulation. These uses included storage sheds, warehouses, carpenter shops, etc. and also called for 1-acre zoning in a current 3-acre area. This particular property had been specifically studied and rejected as an appropriate location for the proposed use because it was in the middle of an existing residential subdivision. He said that there were eleven reasons not to rezone and it set a precedent. Approving the rezoning would go against the unanimous recommendation of the Planning Commission which was not certain there was any need in the Valley, particularly in this side of the Valley, for the zoning. The concept development submitted by the petitioner was a very sketchy proposal of their intent and within two days of receiving a denial from the Planning Commission they had put in a 40 ft. driveway within 4 ft. of the adjoining property. The area is currently identified as a critical wildlife corridor.

Carolyn McLean, owner of lot 12 in South Fork Ranchettes directly across the street from the proposed rezoning, spoke against this proposal referring to property values, peace and quiet, etc., and noted the neighbors did not know what the Chambers intended to do with the property, that the petitioners had been vague and given a couple of different stories, that the proposed use was not appropriate in their neighborhood which had CC&Rs.

David Benstog, owner of lot 11 in South Fork Ranchettes, spoke against the rezoning petition. They had purchased their property with the expectation that the existing zoning and restrictive covenants on the land would protect them from this proposed land use. The State road shop brought visual, noise, and air pollution and rezoning to MV-1 would double the amount of pollution and decrease their quality of life.

Adelle Rosner, owner of lot 13 in the South Fork Ranchettes, spoke against the proposed rezoning noting that it would negatively affect the property values and the general serenity of the area with the noise of dump trucks, bull dozers, and clanging of debris across the street from her home. Ms. Rosner said that when Ron Chambers referred to an agreement with a property owner he had not said if it was a legal or a verbal agreement, and if it was the latter, people could change their minds, thus putting the trucks back on their roads. She was not aware of anyone violating the CC&Rs stating it was a small community where everyone knew each other and there would be talk if there was a problem. The Chambers would be welcome to move in but residents were opposed to a construction company wanting to do spot rezoning in a residential community.

Clint Menke, manager of the property where the easement may be granted, stated that they were amenable to putting the easement option in a written document and had no concerns with the proposal.

Etta Baker, resident who owns rental as well as other property, including a business in the frontage to the Highway on both sides ,spoke against the proposal stating that if there was an easement, it would have to go right along side her rental property. She expressed concern with the extra traffic on an already high speed traveled road and the impact to her veterinarian clinic across the street.

Paul Baker noted how close to his home this development would be as well as to the young couple that will be renting his property this week. It is perhaps less than 50 ft. away and would very negatively impact them by the presence of this type of operation, which would literally be in their backyard.

Ben Toone, of Eden, felt the proposed location was appropriate. He said that before the South Fork Ranchettes Subdivision existed there was a landfill abutting the property and then the State road shop was put in. He said that the County road shop had not seemed to deteriorate their property values.

Ed Rich, area resident (across the river), pointed out the landfill mentioned by Mr. Toone above and stated that the landfill was actually only for garden trimmings and it was burned off a couple times per year. He said that the neighborhood was concerned with the quality of life.

Barbara Benstog said she lived east of the landfill and it was a great place to live. It was a prime habitat for wildlife with deer, moose, fox etc., and a natural environment with sagebrush, etc. This proposal was for daily activity in their serene neighborhood.

George Pappas, owner of lot 7 of the South Fork Ranchettes which adjoins the Chambers property on the east, spoke against the rezoning petition and asked the commissioners to honor the unanimous vote of the Planning Commission and reject the proposed rezoning. The intent of the subdivision and restrictive covenants was for single residential homes. He did not wish to hear or see or smell heavy equipment going in and out of the Chambers property 4 ft. from his property line, nor have petroleum leaks and spills in an area where the soil has rapid percolation and the culinary water supply is wells and aquifers for major water supplies. The Chambers had put in a 40 ft. culvert and a road 4 ft. from his property line. Mr. Pappas had called County Engineering and had been told a permit was required but the Chambers did not have one. He felt if this odd rezoning was approved, it should be on the west end next to the State road shop so they would not tear up 400 ft. of county road and be 4 ft. from his property with dust, dirt, etc. He strongly recommended having the easement in writing. He expressed concern with the property being further subdivided and compounding the problems.

Gregg Chambers, a petitioner and resident of Eden, stated he did not wish to offend anyone but that he would say the same things if he was the concerned neighbor. He said the CC&Rs stated no basements and metal roofs and yet those existed in this subdivision.

Candis Facer, owner of lot 15 of the South Fork Ranchettes, spoke in opposition to this proposal. She stated that her home was by the landfill, which was a wonderful place where families strolled. In the landfill there is wildlife, unusual plant life, and nothing was placed there unless it was approved. Ms. Facer said the landfill was watched carefully and was a wonderful neighbor as well as a gift because it allowed wildlife to live there. Neighbors built their homes with the idea of a neighborhood atmosphere. They have young children who ride their bikes on the streets and Ms. Facer addressed safety concerns for these children with heavy vehicles driving in the area.

Margaret Womack, owner of lot 14 of the South Fork Ranchettes, addressed the subdivision's CC&Rs stating that none of the residents had basement houses and the metal roof was construed to mean the old fashioned, corrugated tin ones.

Sheri Cosby, owner of lot 16 of the South Fork Ranchettes, spoke against the proposed rezoning. She felt it was very unfair for someone to come in and paint a negative picture of their neighborhood who did not live there. All the residents knew that there was a landfill behind them and it was beautiful. There is a large variety of wildlife, including deer in herds. It also borders the South Fork River where people fish. She said it was their subdivision, their life, and they loved the beauty and opposed the petitioner trying to take away the beauty from them.

Mr. Toone said that the landfill was beautiful and he used to go into it often. He said that this construction site could also be landscaped with a qualification that it be done so as to mitigate views, etc. and it could be a good tenant in the neighborhood.

Mr. Wheatley noted that people see the bank of trees along the Huntsville ditch and it is a natural buffer to protect the subdivision, however, there were current plans to get funding to pipe that ditch and one bank of trees was already dead because of another ditch being piped two years ago. He said that once it was piped, all the trees would die and the entire buffer would disappear. Commissioner Cain asked what was the zoning of the Huntsville Landfill. It is zoned AV-3 and consists of about 38 acres.

Ron Chambers said that he had talked with Mr. Grove, the ditch chairman, who stated that none of the stockholders in their ditch company had any intention of piping it because of the exorbitant cost, even with a low interest loan from the State. Mr. Chambers said that he had obtained a land use permit and had the right to put in a culvert. Commissioner Cain asked if he had submitted a concept development plan and what he envisioned at the site. Mr. Chambers stated he had submitted a plan and then described their plans for landscaping to buffer the site. Commissioner Dearden noted that the entrance into the property was off of 325 S. and concurred with Mr. Pappas' suggestion for the location of the entrance. Mr. Chambers needed to verify it but understood that there should have been an easement for utilities between his and the Pappas property.

Mr. Rich pointed out that the neighbors only had the buffer of trees for six months of the year. He has stock in Down's Ditch and the Huntsville Ditch and attended meetings where some irrigation companies planned to turn in their stock in canals and put a reservoir on the hill at the mouth of South Fork with a pressurized system. He said that they had applied for grants to do this, which would take away both of the ditches.

Ms. McLean noted on photographs the Chambers' property, which had no landscaping. She indicated the buffer of trees from her property during the winter, noting how well the petitioners' site could be seen. She had been aware of the State road shop and the landfill prior to moving there. It is a yard- waste only landfill and is open only a few days per week. Ms. McLean said the residents moved into the area because it was zoned agriculture and they did not want any more impact. She stated that the petitioners submitted a concept plan but changed it by putting the entrance in a different location and too close to the neighbor's property.

LuAnn Foxley said that some people knew the Chambers and how well they had worked in the Valley and that their children would be a lot safer with them there than the State drivers. She wondered why people were trying to keep the Chambers' from building a shop to store their equipment, that they would be a great neighbor and spoke of all that her father had freely done for the community.

5.Commissioner Cain moved to adjourn the public hearings and reconvene the public meeting; Commissioner Dearden seconded, all voting aye.

 6. Action on Public Hearings:

F.2. - Public Hearing to receive public input regarding the vacation of a 50' wide Public Easement along the Weber River on the property of Emogene Berrett

Commissioner Cain, stated she was a proponent for pathways. She noted that the county had provided an area for the pathways at this location and that river access was available from the pathways. She did not sustain a public easement on property that would require trespassing private property. A person would have to be on the river to trespass this property. Legal counsel anticipates the ordinance to be on next week's agenda.
Commissioner Dearden moved to vacate the public access to the property, but maintaining the flood control and maintenance access and directed that an ordinance for the vacation be prepared as well as a new easement to be recorded to indicate this action; Commissioner Cain seconded, all voting aye.

F.3.- Public Hearing on the vacating of a portion of Juniper Lane
Commissioner Dearden moved to direct legal and planning staff to prepare an ordinance vacating a portion of Juniper Lane; Commissioner Cain seconded, all voting aye

F.4. - Public Hearing on zoning Petition ZP #07-2005 by Kevin & Ronnie Chambers rezoning property at 10004 E. 325 S. from AV-3 to MV-1

Commissioner Dearden said that he had spent a lot of time reviewing this issue and had initially believed it was a good location for the proposal because the State road shop was there but was concerned that the proposed rezoning was in a subdivision. He also had concerns with the access to the property. Because of the growth occurring in Ogden Valley and the necessary excavation associated with that growth, he noted that there are other areas that may be utilized for this type of site. He did not want track hoes and heavy machinery driving the Ogden Canyon.

Commissioner Cain recognized the Chambers had a problem finding a location to store their equipment, but believed an area zoned commercial could more readily be zoned manufacturing than an area zoned residential. She did not see justification for another manufacturing zone at this time in the Ogden Valley, but noted the problem of heavy equipment driving up and down the canyon to serve the needs of the Ogden Valley. Because there is a platted subdivision in the subject area and because there are other sites that may be more appropriate, she moved to deny the rezoning of property located at 10004 E. 325 S. from AV-3 to MV-1. The motion died for lack of a second.

David Wilson, Deputy County Attorney, outlined the options before the Commission on this issue: a) approve the petition, b) deny the petition or c) table the matter. He requested authorization from the Commission to formally adopt the minutes for actual written findings on what action the Commission would take.

Commissioner Dearden moved to study the issue and to follow the recommendation of the Planning Commission to direct staff to look at the Ogden Valley to determine if there are other areas where the MV-1 zone may fit and also what percentage of Ogden Valley trucks used the Ogden Canyon for business. Commissioner Dearden withdrew the motion because it did not bring to conclusion the matter.

Commissioner Cain moved to direct County Planning staff to draft findings consistent with the Commission discussion and decision including but not limited to the following: the property lies along a scenic byway and is part of a platted subdivision, which is currently habited by a number of agricultural residential properties, the MV-1 zone would not be consistent with those uses, therefore that the application to rezone be denied; Commissioner Dearden seconded, both voting aye. Chair Bischoff abstained.

Commissioner Cain directed County Planning staff to continue the process directed as part of the Ogden Valley General Plan to look at the Ogden Valley and determine through a public process whether or not there was a need for the MV-1 zone and where those areas might be located. She did not wish to have the trucks counted in the Ogden Canyon, but would prefer to attempt to limit traffic in the Canyon. Commissioner Dearden suggested calling the companies to see how many times they used the Canyon.

G. Assign Pledge of Allegiance & Thought of the Day for Tuesday, September 6, 2005, 10 a.m.

H. Public Comments:

I. Adjourn
Commissioner Dearden moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:04 p.m.; Commissioner Cain seconded, all voting aye.

Kenneth A. Bischoff, Chair
Weber County Commission

Linda G. Lunceford, CPO
Weber County Clerk/Auditor