COUNTY OF SEVIER

CITY OF RICHFIELD

At the Planning Commission

In and For Said City

October 4, 2017

RichfieldCity Planning Commission

October 4, 2017

1

Minutes of the Richfield City Planning Commission meeting held on Wednesday, October 4, 2017, at 6:00 p.m., Chairman Brion Terry, presiding.

1. Roll Call.

2. Minutes Approval: Consider approving minutes of September 6, 2017.

3. Conditional Use Permit:

A. Consider approving Gary L. Leavitt’s request for a Conditional Use

Permit allowing him to have an accessory dwelling unit for an owner,

relative, or employee at 104 North Main Street (D zone, C1 use).

4.Plan Reviews/Conditional Use Permit:

A. Consider approving a Conditional Use Permit allowing New Life

Recovery to operate an adult drug and alcohol rehabilitation facility

located at 1180 South Cove View Road (old Topsfield Lodge property)

(CS zone, C1 use).

5.Business Discussion:

A. Discuss Steven E. Young’s concept plan for operating a fellowshipping

coffee house. This could be considered a Personal Instruction Service on

the Table ofUses in the Zoning Code.

6.Other Business:

A.Discuss VRBO and Bed & Breakfasts to be located in residential

zones.

B.Other items.

7. Adjournment:

1. Roll Call. Roll call was answered byBrion Terry, Greg Bean, Jeff Albrecht, Monte Turner, and Lisa White. David Mower and Steve Kunzler were excused.

City Staff Present: ZoningAdministrator Gaylen Matheson and Deputy City Recorder Michelle Curtis.

Others present: Stewart Shaver, David Owens, Gisselle Moriarty, Ross Moriarty, Matt Crane.

2. Minutes Approval. The minutes of September 6, 2017, were reviewed. Lisa White motioned to approve the minutes ofSeptember 6, 2017. Greg Bean seconded the motion. Those voting yea:Brion Terry, Greg Bean, Jeff Albrecht, Monte Turner, and Lisa White. Those voting nay: None. The motion carried.

The motion carried.

3. Conditional Uses:

A. Consider approving Gary L. Leavitt’s request for a Conditional Use Permit allowing him to have an accessory dwelling unit for an owner, relative, or employee at 104 North Main Street (D zone, C1 use). Mr. Leavitt was not present. The matter was not discussed.

4.Plan Reviews/Conditional Use Permit:

A. Consider approving a Conditional Use Permit allowing New Life Recovery to operate an adult drug and alcohol rehabilitation facility located at 1180 South Cove View Road (old Topsfield Lodge property) (CS zone, C1 use).

Stewart Shaver and David Owens were present. Mr. Owens is the President of the corporation wanting to set up this rehabilitation facility. He works inadult probation and parole in Provo. He has seen a concept in rehabilitation that is working well in the Provo area. He has partnered with Faron Taylor, and they would like to set up the same type of facility in this area.

The facility will have an intensive in-patient treatment program, an intensive out-patient treatment program which is 2 hours a day five days a week, and also general out-patient which is 2 hours a week. This will give people an option to stay in this area if aJudge orders them to go to treatment.

They will set up the kitchen in order to accommodatein-patients. Fire suppression system is still intact and has been looked at by the fire marshal. They will upgrade the first six or eight rooms and have perhaps 10 patients total to start with. They will work onthe rest of the building as they can. He believes their full capacity would be about 40 or 50 in-patients. If they don’t fill those with in-patient, they could house “sober-living” residents who would pay rent and be tested regularly for substance abuse to make sure they are staying sober in order to qualify for “sober living”.

There is a dining area, a couple of large rooms that can be used for group therapy and classes. Mental recognition therapy is done which does not treat the actual drug offense itself. It treats the crimes that are caused because of the drug abuse. The goal is to teach them to not do the morally bad crimes.

They hope to be open by the first of the year or even sooner. Holiday time can be a difficult time for people, and there is a lot of substance abuse at that time of year.

This will not be a lock-down facility. It is a volunteer-type system. Patients pay ahead. They lose their money if they run away from the facility. They would also be breaking probation and a warrant of arrest would probably be issued.

Because the clients are adults, and they are there on their own, there is not a requirement for a certain number of patients per supervisor.

Mr. Owens was not present at last month’s meeting; however,he understands there was some concern expressed that a rehab facility could bring more crime to the area. He believes it will actually reduce the crime rate with these people being in treatment. It should not increase crime rates or cause issues. These people are already in the community, but if they are in a rehab facility, there is some supervision over them so that they aren’t just walking the streets.

There will be a therapist and some staff. The Commission wonders about putting that many people together who have the same problem. Mr. Owens said the facility will be staffed 24 hours per day.

Patients don’t usually have vehicles. The parking they need will be for staff which will probably be three or four cars at a time. As far as a hard surface for parking, they have talked about putting in rotomill or double chip seal for the parking area closest to 400 West. Their landscaping will be xeriscape.

It was pointed out that there is a charter school located a few blocks south of this building. There are quite a few kids who walk down 400 West to go to school which could pose a risk to the children. Mr. Owens said they won’t have sex offenders. If there is a dual diagnosis of sex offender and drug abuse, then they would have to look real hard at their history. The Registry issues and problems they would have in bringing them here would probably be more than what they would want to deal with. He doesn’t foresee any reason why they would ever have a sex offender there.

The facility will be inspected by the State. It has not been inspected yet, but the State has given them a list of what they need to do. Mr. Owens believes they will actually be doing more than what the State will require. Gaylen Matheson said the change of occupancy will require certain upgrades to comply with the National Building Code.

If they decide to install a sign, they will consult with Gaylen Matheson.

Gaylen Matheson advised that in accordance with the building code, the change of use of the building from an R1 Hotel/Motel to an Institutional Facility will require changes, mostly in the fire code. A licensed engineer or architect will have to prepare building plans showing how they will meet those requirements. Stewart Shaver said the fire marshal told them that because of the size of the rooms and the location of doors, all he would require is an alarm system from one end of the building to the other, with a central monitor showing which room is having a problem.

Greg Bean motioned to approve the Conditional Use Permit allowing New life Recovery to operate an adult drug and alcohol rehabilitation facility located at 1180 South Cove View Road (old Topsfield Lodge Property) (CS zone, C1 use) with the conditions of meeting the fire code and building code, and the owner of the building signing a Waiver of Improvements. Monte Turner seconded the motion. Those voting yea:Brion Terry, Greg Bean, Jeff Albrecht, Monte Turner, and Lisa White. Those voting nay: None. The motion carried.

5.Business Discussion:

A. Discuss Steve E. Young’s concept plan for operating a fellowshipping coffee house. This could be considered a Personal Instruction Service on the Table of Uses in the Zoning Code. The Petitioner was not present. The matter was not discussed.

6. Other Business:

A. Discuss VRBO (vacation rental by owner) and Bed & Breakfasts to be located in residential zones. Giselle and Ross Moriarty were present. Chairman Terry explained that this has been discussed in previous meetings and it is felt that the Zoning Code could be modified to reflect changes which would allow these businesses in certain zones. It also needs to be determined what conditions should be placed on these businesses.

Mrs. Moriarty said as they have travelled around the United States, there are many times when they would have liked to have stayed in a VRBO. It is an interesting opportunity for home owners. They would like to use their residence as a VRBO.She believes with the hotel sales tax, the City could see a significant advantage in taxes.

The following points were discussed:

  • There was some debate as to whether or not there should be a requirement that VRBOs are owner-occupied because of policing issues. Most VRBOs are not owner-occupied. However, there was some discussion that because this would be a first attempt at allowing this in the Zoning Code, it could be treated conservatively to begin with.
  • Parking: Number of off-street parking, no on-street parking, parking of ATV trailers.
  • Signage.
  • Business license to be required.
  • The Code has a definition for Bed & Breakfast. A VRBO is a similar use so they could be lumped together as far as zones where they are allowed and the conditions to be placed on them.
  • The Use Table could be changed from “Bed & Breakfast” to “Bed Breakfast/VRBO”.
  • Bed & Breakfasts are currently allowed in the C1, RR1, and RR5. It could also be allowed in the R1-10 zone. Allow the VRBOs in these zones as well.
  • Number of guests to be allowed.
  • Number of guestrooms.
  • Perhaps allow only one family and only one vehicle.

It was pointed out that in some tourist towns, the VRBOs have had a negative impact by making it difficultfor residents to find long-term rentals because short-term rentals are much more lucrative for property owners.

This will be set for a public hearing to be held on November 1, 2017.

B. Other Items. Matthew Crane represented Cleary Building Corporation. He is a General Contractor. He is also representing Swire Coca-Cola. This item is not on the agenda, but he came for clarification as to whether or not it needs to be approved by the Commission. They would like to build a 64x42 foot accessory building on the same property as the coke building at 2310 South Industrial Park Road. The building will meetall setbacks. The building is metal-sided. Because it is an accessory building, there was a question as to whether the Commission would interpret the Code as requiring them to meet the requirements for metal buildings (exterior having a percentage of the exterior being finished in a material other than metal). There will be some brick veneer, but it will not meet the percentage required in the Zoning Code.

Because this is an accessory building, the Commission feels like this is something that Gaylen Matheson can go ahead and issue a building permit for without Planning Commission approval.

C.A meeting will be noticed for Wednesday, October 18, 2017, at 7:00 p.m. to continue the review of the General Plan.

7.Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.

PASSED AND APPROVED on the 1st day of November, 2017.

______

Deputy City Recorder

RichfieldCity Planning Commission

October 4, 2017

1