TOOELE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
47 SOUTH MAIN STREET, TOOELE, UTAH 84074
(435) 843-3160
PUBLIC MEETING January 2, 2013
Chairperson Julie Pawlak called the Tooele County Planning Commission Meeting to order at 7:00p.m.
Staff:Kerry Beutler, Kent Page, Matt Hilderman, Cindy Coombs
1.Roll Call:Julie Pawlak, Bryan Coulter, Bill Hogan, Judy Jameson, Martie Leo
2.Election of Chair
Bryan nominated Julie as Chair for 2013. Nomination seconded by Judy.
Judy made a motion to close nominations. Motion seconded by Bill. All concurred.
Election of Vice-Chair
Judynominated as Vice-Chair for 2013. No second.
Bill nominated Bryan as Vice-Chair for 2013. Nomination seconded by Julie.
Bill made a motion to close nominations. Motion seconded by Martie. All concurred.
3.Approval of 2013 Meeting Schedule
Bill made a motion to approve the 2013 meeting schedule. Motion seconded by Bryan. All concurred.
4.Approval of meeting minutes from November 7, 2012
Bryan made a motion to approve the minutes as written. Motion seconded by Bill. All concurred.
5.Recess Public Meeting and Open Public Hearing
Bryan made a motion to recess the public meeting and open the public hearing. Motion seconded by Martie. All concurred.
5a.SUB-2012-03 Concept plan for sixty-four lot subdivision (Northport Village) - Encompassing sub parcel 8B of Parcel 9’s Master Plan. South side of SR 138, west of Delgada Estates and east of Lakeside Subdivision #13 PUD
Kent stated that this application is divided into three phases for a build out of 64 single family dwelling lots. He added that there are a couple of concerns raised by the Tooele County Fire District. The first is because of the proposed 55’ radius for cul-de-sacs instead of normal 60’ and also for the lack of a secondary access. When the subdivision was originally approved, Schooner Lane would be connected and this would provide a second access.
Bill expressed concern about the small sized lots. Bryan asked the applicant, Mike Wagstaff, if there is a possibility of Schooner Lane being extended to connect with Pequeno Road. Mr. Wagstaff said that this definitely was possible.
Kent reminded the planning commission that the 64 lot subdivision proposal was approved back in 2008 and unless there is a safety issue and not a lot size issue then the plan should be approved.
Bryan expressed concerns about traffic and safety regarding cars that might accidently end up in someone’s backyard or home. He was worried about the liability that the County will have to take on if there is a home destroyed or a life taken from allowing this subdivision.
Jim Lear, resident of Delgada Estates, stated that he is concerned about the current access out of this area (Pequeno Road) because it is short and very narrow. He thinks that without a second access that this application should be stopped now.
Mindy Hall, resident living on Schooner Lane, also expressed concern about access in and out of this new subdivision. She commutes to Salt Lake each day and it take her 8 minutes plus to get out of her subdivision now without any new homes being added. Without a second access, she believes that this area is too dangerous. She added that the new concept plan is to move a boat ramp to a different spot. This area proposed will cause problems for her lot and her access to the water. She stated that the water level where the new dock is proposed to be is too low to allow boats.
Glen Oscarson, Stansbury Park Service Agency, added his concern about the area for the proposed new boat ramp. The boat they use for weed abatement would not launch at this new site.
Martie asked whether the current boat ramp could just stay where it is. Mike Wagstaff stated that moving the boat ramp was just an idea. The proposed area where they were considering putting the boat ramp instead is because there is a park that is plannednext to that spot.
6.Recess Public Hearing and Open Public Meeting
Bill made a motion to recess the public hearing and open the public meeting. Motion seconded by Judy. All concurred.
6a.SUB-2012-03 Concept plan for sixty-four lot subdivision (Northport Village) - Encompassing sub parcel 8B of Parcel 9’s Master Plan. South side of SR 138, west of Delgada Estates and east of Lakeside Subdivision #13 PUD
Bryanmade a motion to approve SUB-2012-03 if UDOT is contacted regarding a second access as well. He added that his motion should include that the boat ramp stay in the same spot it is now. He also wants the developer to consider putting in a second access. Kent stated that UDOT has been contacted and they stated that a berm or fencing would satisfy the issue of traffic control. Motion seconded byMartie.
By verbal roll call: Judy – no, Bill – no, Bryan – yes, Martie – yes, Julie - yes
Motion passed.
7.Recess Public Meeting and Open Public Hearing
Judy made a motion to recess the public meeting and open the public hearing. Motion seconded by Bill. All concurred.
7a.LUO 2012-05 Request to amend Chapter 8, I-80 Corridor Planning District with regard to hazardous waste and Chapter 18, Hazardous Waste Industries (MG-H) of the Tooele County Land Use Ordinance amending Section 18-1-13(9) removing the prohibition on creating new MG-H zones
Kerry stated that this is a request by Cedar Mountain Environmental. This request would include the addition of new paragraph headings, reordering of some paragraphs for clarity, removal of reference to specific companies and processes, modifications to community and County Commission sentiment and expansion of the Hazardous Waste Corridor to include a 4th area.
Currently there are three areas recognized in the general plan as hazardous waste corridors. In September 2005, the general plan was amended to not allow the creation of new MG-H areas.
Kerry went on to say that in 2010 the applicant (Charles Judd) presented a similar request to the one being presented now. At that time, staff reviewed the proposal and considered it inconsistent with the general plan. The planning commission and the County Commission denied the proposal.
The proposed changes are shown below: Areas in red are proposed additions and the strike out areas are proposed to be removed.
Hazardous Waste Industry Analysis
Hazardous Waste Disposal
Industries located within the I-80 Corridor planning district dispose and treat hazardous and industrial wastes. There is one incinerator and two landfill businesses operating in this area. One landfill site is located north of I-80 near Clive at Grassy Mountain. This landfill operation accepts three types of waste: PCB contaminated solids, non-hazardous industrial wastes and hazardous wastes. All the wastes are disposed of in a solid form in specially designed disposal areas. Waste is usually trucked to the site for disposal, but some is transported to the Clive area via rail and transferred to trucks at a terminal area located south of I-80 near Clive. Some processing of wastes occurs at the terminal area including solidifying some types of waste for disposal. This facility is permitted by the State of Utah Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste (DSHW) and the current permit expires in the year 2025. Groundwater monitoring is conducted on the terminal site and required reports are filed with the State of Utah. There are also many federal and state regulations which govern the handling and record keeping requirements of the operation.
The County receives economic benefit from this operation through levying fees for mitigation, establishing property taxes, and collecting 10 percent of the disposal fee charged by the State of Utah. In addition, between 100 and 200 people are employed at the site, a majority of who live in Tooele County.
Radioactive Waste Disposal
There areThetwo low level radioactive disposal sites that are located south of I-80 near Clive. One is a landfill operation that accepts industrial waste and mixed waste. Mixed waste can be low level radioactive waste, hazardous waste, or both. Only solid wastes, mostly construction wastes, are disposed of there -- no liquids. Radioactive wastes are stored separately from non-radioactive wastes. All cells are specially constructed with multiple liners and special covers. Envirocare is permitted to dispose of 80,000 cubic yards of mixed waste and 4,000,000 cubic yards of normal waste. The company was also recently granted a permit by the federal Nuclear Regulatory Agency to construct a new low-level radioactive disposal facility at the existing site. It is planned for use as a disposal site for wastes currently stored in New Jersey and from cleanup of a “Superfund” site (a federally designated hazardous waste clean-up site).
The first facility at Clive was In addition, at Clive there isa disposal site which was used to dispose of mill tailings wastes removed from the “Vitro” site located in Salt Lake County. The “Vitro” site was used by the state and federal agencies involved in the cleanup of an old uranium mill operation. This landfill is closed and there are no plans for it to accept additional waste material. Current activity is limited to maintenance of the permanent cap installed and groundwater monitoring.
The second facility at Clive is a private company that operates a disposal and processing facility at their location. That landfill operation accepts low-level waste, mill tailings and mixed waste.
Mixed waste can be low level radioactive waste, hazardous waste, or both. Only solid wastes, mostly construction wastes, are disposed of there – no liquids. Allcells are specially constructed with multiple liners and special covers.
A third low-level radioactive waste disposal facility has been proposed north of I-80 near Clive. If permitted, this new facility would operate in a similar manner as the existing private facility and would accept similar waste materials.
The County receives significant economic benefit from radioactive wastes being disposed in the County through levying fees for mitigation, establishing property taxes, and collecting 5 percent of the revenues of said disposal. Fees accepted from radioactive waste were over $12 million in 2005 but have dropped by more than 50% since that time. In addition, between 100 and 200 people are employed at the site, a majority of who live in Tooele County. Additional sites could create more revenues for the County and also bring more jobs to the County.
Hazardous Waste Incineration
A hazardous waste incinerator facility which is located south of I-80 at Aragonite. The incineration capacity is about 85,000 tons per year. It has been in operation since 1991. It also operates under state and federal permits and regulations.
The state permits require that various parameters be monitored by the operator and the results reported to the state. Parameters monitored typically include hazardous waste handling manifests, air quality, groundwater, surface water, ambient air quality, emissions from stacks, and other processes. The specific parameters required for each permittee are established at the time the permit is issued.
Permitting of New Sites
Recently, The State of Utah passed legislation which requires that any new hazardous or radioactive waste facility proposed within the state must be approved by the legislature, the governor and the county or city in which the facility is located, in addition to obtaining any other permits already required. The effect of this legislative action will be to restrict the development of any new commercial hazardous waste disposal facilities within the state. Given the stringent requirements, it is unlikely that any new hazardous waste disposal facilities will be permitted.
The basicEarlysentiment expressed about these operations in community and steering committee meetings for the general plan process were concerns over safety, the desire to limit activities, and the desire to discourage any new companies coming into the area. However in public meetings, a majority of citizens have supported these facilities to create jobs and revenues for the County. The permitting process is The County Commission has addressed these concerns by requiring new facilities to go through a permitting process that isdifficult, demanding and expensive, whichandwill discourage some companies from locating inTooele County. No new facilities were licensed in the County between 1990 and 2012. Safety considerations are necessaryfor permit approval and are required for ongoing operations of such facilities.continued operation, and theseindustries are likely to continue being safe.
The County Commission has stated that they are comfortable with competition in the waste industry and encourage new business as long as new operations comply with all Federal, State and local regulations. The County Commission believes the stringent requirements for site licensing will limit new companies from developing sites in the County.
Hazardous Waste Corridor
All hazardous and radioactive waste disposal and treatment facilities should only be located in the hazardous waste corridor. The transportation system in place can accommodate those industries in the safest modes of transporting materials to the sites. The legal description for the hazardous waste corridor is:
Area 1 (North)
Commencing at the southwest corner of Section 20, Township 1 North, Range 12 West,
Salt Lake Base and Meridian; and running thence northerly along the section lines to the northwest corner of section 8; thence easterly along the section lines to the northeast corner of section 10; thence southerly along the section lines to the southeast corner of section 22; thence westerly along the section lines to the point of beginning. Contains 5,760 acres more or less.
Area 2 (Southwest)
Commencing at the northwest corner of section 29, Township 1 South, Range 11 West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian; and running thence easterly along the section lines to the north quarter corner of section 28; thence southerly to the center of section 4, Township 2 South, Range 11 West; thence westerly to the west quarter corner of section 5; thence northerly
along the section lines to the point of beginning. Contains 2,400 acres more or less.
Area 3 (Southeast)
Commencing at the south quarter corner of section 17, Township 1 South, Range 10 West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian; and running thence northerly to center of section 8; thence easterly to the center of section 10; thence southerly to the south quarter corner of section 15; thence westerly along the section lines to the point of beginning.Contains 1,920 acres more or less.
Area 4 (Northeast) – Proposed
Commencing at the northwest corner of section 32, Township 1 North, Range 11 West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian; and running thence easterly along the section lines to the northwest corner of section 33; thence southerly to the southwest corner of section 33; thence running westerly along the section lines to the southwest corner of section 32; and running thence northerly along the section lines to the point of beginning. Contains 640 acres more or less.
Total area: 10,720 acres more or less.
Section 18-1-3(9), Chapter 18, Hazardous Waste Industries, Tooele County Land Use Ordinance
Language proposed to be removed by applicant:
(9)No new MG-H zones shall be created after September 25, 3005.
Language proposed by staff:
(9) New MG-H Zones shall only be created that are within the Hazardous Waste Corridor as described within the County’s General Plan.
Bryan asked why the current facilities have had a 50% decrease in fees paid back in 2005. Kerry said that he cannot answer that but maybe the applicant could. Charles Judd, applicant, stated that there is a lot less volume coming in to the sites. Also the ways the fees are being applied determines how much the County receives.
Charles Judd, Cedar Mountain Environmental, feels that there is a need for another facility. He showed the process that he still needs to go through after approval from the planning commission tonight along with changes that have occurred in current sites. These changes are a drop in volume or waste brought in, fees reduced, and jobs lost. He added that if this proposal is approved then there will be an additional amount in volume coming into the state, an addition in fees that the County will receive and jobs that will be created.
Margaret Bird, Director of SITLA, stated that Section 32 is owned by SITLA. This section is the one that Mr. Judd is proposing to put his facility. She believes that this facility would provide thousands in funding for the schools along with money for the County from fees that are charged.
Jared Bunn, member of a Community Council in the area, feels that funding for the schools has gone down greatly and this proposed facility would help immensely.
Kit Morgan, work in the construction industry, and is looking at this facility as a way to provide new jobs within the County. He is in favor of creating jobs and other opportunities.