PUBLIC NOTICE

DANIEL TOWN PLANNING

THE DANIEL TOWN PLANNING WILL HOLD IT REGULAR MEETING ON

December 17th , 2008 AT THE COUNTY COMMUNITY SERVICE BUILDING AT

55 SOUTH 500 EAST HEBER CITY IN THE NORTH CONF. ROOM # 132 AT 7:00

P.M.

Council Members: Eric Bunker, Barry Hobbs, Boots Crisler, Gary Weight, Diane Grose

Francis Smith has resigned due to wife’s health.

Eric called the meeting to order @ 7:04 p.m.

AGENDA:

1. PUBLIC COMMENT
2. 2 MINUTES PLEASE
3. None
4. Report of Town Council request (Therapeutic Boarding school)
5. Barry Hobbs and Gary Weight researched information about therapeutic

boarding schools.

1. Attached is a copy of the notes they made from their research.
2. Residential Facility vs treatment facility vs therapeutic boarding school

(semantics)

1. The boarding school is supposed to set up a board with local residents as

part of the board.

1. The board recommends that the town leave the code as it is currently set.

Do not make a change to the code in this P-160 zone.

3. Harry Weyandt (General zone concept) 1918 w 3000 s Zone Change R-A 5 to

Commercial

1. Harry Weyandt added five more acres to his property.
2. Motion: Gary Weight
3. We hold a joint meeting with the Town Council on January 5th,

2009 for a public hearing.

1. Second: Diane Grose
2. Vote is Unanimous. Motion carried
3. Question: Barry Hobbs. Will the members of both boards be sitting up

front? Yes. Voting and motions will only be made by town board

members, but Planning Board members can make comments and

recommendations on motions.

1. Paul Berg & Lane Lythgoe have been working hard on conceptual

drawings. Mike Peterson will be working on the building of the

facilities. They have a much better plan than the original and feel

we will be pleased with what we see in the new drawings.

1. Barry, question: Are storage units allowed in residential?
2. They are allowed in mixed use.
3. Background information given by Harry: The additional 5 acres came in

October. He took a step back when looking at hodgepodge of how the

original 5 acres were situated. Now that he has the additional 10 acres the

layout looks much better. He was looking for what would be the biggest

bang for the buck with this property. Having a recreational gas and

convenience store combo will bring in the biggest tax dollars for the town

by drawing people in to shop as well as get gas. This will NOT be a truck

stop. He plans on it being used by 40 foot motor homes, expanded cab

trucks with trailers and other vehicles with added snowmobile trailers, etc.

They plan for sufficient parking and an easy entrance/exit from and to

highway 40. The small business storage units and storage units for the

general public is for people with big toys such as boats, snowmobiles, etc.

This will be one of the most environmentally friendly buildings in the

valley with solar panels, thermal heating, climate controlled storage units,

etc. This will be aesthetically pleasing to anyone coming into our town. He

wants to put in “Welcome to Daniel” monument. He welcomes

suggestions from the board.

1. Gary’s recommendations: Look at the intersection, the traffic on

3000 S, and the storage unit problems. The RV storage will need

more storage area and entrance/exit space.

1. Harry: We are looking closely at these issues.

iii. Lynn: What will it look like coming into town? We don’t want

people seeing storage facilities as they enter.

1. Harry: The storage units will be hidden in the back section. He is

trying to make this as residentially looking as possible.

1. Barry is not resigned to the fact that we are just a recreation town.
2. Harry is not anticipating any diesel trucks to stop for gas.
3. Diane is concerned about the sharp turn off 189 onto 3000 south.
4. Paul Berg: They are working with UDOT to create and lengthen an

entrance/exit lane.

1. Eric: The main focus for the 5th of January combined meeting will be; Do

we zone extra acres as commercial.

1. Eric will take care of 14 day notice for the public hearing.
2. Mike Peterson (Commercial concept) Commercial zone Hwy 40
3. Mike Peterson: UDOT was the biggest issue but they have now approved

a 50 ft commercial access.

1. Paul Berg: Most plan issues are minor and will have them fixed by the

next meeting.

1. There is a concern about the lighting and how it will affect the residents

near the business area.

1. Ryan: There will be no spotlights shining into neighbors yards which was

a concern.

1. Paul: The light poles create down lighting effect and are decorative and

hooded.

1. Ryan: They will follow code. Look at Recommendations on first page of

Epic Engineering pdf file he sent to all the board members.

1. There is no name (signage) for this business area yet. The businesses will

be warehousing, manufacturing. Diane says they should put Daniel in

name some way.

1. There will have a burm along front that will be landscaped.
2. Diane: We have an opportunity to get part of the business that the city is

already moving out our way.

1. Mike: They are putting in a 300 ft acceleration & deceleration lane.
2. Ryan: There is concern about the retaining wall.
3. Paul: The retaining wall will only be 3 ft high. The purpose of wall is to

make the ground consistent with grade of the parking area. The wall will

not abut residential area.

1. Septic system was addressed.
2. Snow storage: 2 areas set aside for that.
3. Lot line adjustment is waiting to be recorded. Get recorded before next

meeting.

1. There is an abandoned driveway. how will it be finished? Could throw in

grass seed mix.

1. They are here for developmental commercial approval tonight. The next

time will be for the building permit.

1. Motion: Diane Grose
2. To approve the commercial development for the Mike Peterson

property located on highway 40.

1. Second: Barry Hobbs
2. Vote is unanimous. Motion carried.
3. Mike Klenk Building permit (Update.)
4. Ryan: Mike finally finished the plans and the fee is paid. The line dividing

the property has been eliminated.

1. Do we have a requirement list of what is needed when someone wants to

apply for permits? Ryan does have a list to give to applicants of the steps

to go through to apply for building permit.

1. If it’s not an agriculture building then don’t call it one. This creates

problems and increases the time it takes to get a permit.

1. Shelly Bunker: We handle building permits differently in that applicants

have to come before the board to receive permit.

1. We are harder but faster than the county.
2. Klenk never sat down with Ryan to begin with which created many

problems.

1. All applicants for building permits meet with Ryan first to get the process

started..

6. New Ordinance discussion.
7. We are going to look at the land use plan next year. Be prepared. In

January there will be a chair and vice chair election. Francis Smith has

resigned.

7. New Agriculture Permits
8. None
9. Administrative issues and reports
10. Some items have already been discussed. The Town now has the water

system. Lynn: The water board has adopted job descriptions. They have

retained funds to pay for lawsuit pending so won’t be burden on town.

1. Ryan: Been working on facility plan for water company. Looking at

existing and proposed. Plan documents repairs and expansion of system,

new lines, larger tank, more hydrants. Jon Blotter submitted an application

through CDBG for $400,000 to replace pump or line. They have put the

their name in the hat for extra funds through the Stimulus package.

1. Lynn: The county has been very supportive of what is happening. They

will help where they can. They will be tying the loop in near Barry’s

place and the county will probably help with this. County has been a

tremendous support. The State has also contacted Lynn about helping.

1. Diane: Currently there is only an 8” pipe to Weyandt property. Consider

10” pipe to accommodate business area.

9. New Year plan, land use plan, public works, etc.
10. Already Discussed
11. Minute approval
12. Motion: Diane Grose
13. To approve the minutes of Nov 19th, 2008
14. Second: Barry
15. Vote was Unanimous: Motion carried
16. Motion to adjourn.
17. Diane:
18. Adjourn
19. Unanimous
20. Next mtg Jan 5th @ 5:30.

Daniel Planning reserves the right to change order of, and add agenda items.

In keeping with the American Disability Act and all are invited to attend.

If you need Special accommodations please call Eric Bunker 654-0409 Forty Eight, 48

hours before the meeting.

Attachment:

Notes for the planning meeting 12/17/08

Oxford House v. City of St. Louis (8th Cir. 1996)

Reversed the lower court and held that the City had not had violated the FHA

by enforcing a zoning ordinance requiring group homes to house no more that

eight unrelated handicapped residents because a rational basis had existed for

enacting the ordinance and enforcement of the ordinance had not constituted

unlawful discrimination.

Bryant Woods v. Howard County (4th Cir. 1997)

Affirmed the lower court’s decision that the county’s failure to allow a group

home operator to house fifteen elderly disabled residents—when the zoning

code permitted a maximum of eight—was not a failure to make reasonable

accommodations for people with disabilities.

Groome Resources v. Parrish of Jefferson (5th Cir. 2000)

Held that the addition of one person to the four person limit—making a total

of five residents—was reasonable and necessary to allow the elderly disabled

an equal opportunity to live in a residential setting.

Keys Youth Services v. City of Olathe (10th Cir. 2001)

The Court held that the Youth Services’ requested accommodation—of

housing ten troubled youth instead of the eight that were permitted by city

code—was not “reasonable” in light of the city’s legitimate safety concerns.

The concerns were public safety concerns based on incidents at other Keys

Youth homes. The court also determined that the group home was not a

“family” because the guardians were not domiciled in the home, they just

worked there.

The court upheld the denial of the permit to allow 10 youth in the home

stating that the city had not discriminated against the group home on basis of

“familial status” and that the city had legitimate nondiscriminatory reasons for

the housing decision.

Data Points:

o P160 Single Family Residence has the same FHA rules applied to it as

RA5 Single Family Residence.

o Any zone in our Town that allows a Single Family Residence must allow

for disabled individuals

o Daniel Town allows up to eight disabled individuals to reside in a Single

Family Dwelling in RA5 and P160 Zones

o Our town census shows the average family size to be 3.45 individuals

o 2006 National census numbers

• 77.4 million family households
• Average family size 3.3 members
• Only 2% have seven members or more

o The town has reasonably accommodated disabled individuals by following

our code for eight individuals in Single Family Residence

o Increasing the number beyond eight would fundamentally alter the nature

and character of the P160 zone; be too intense of a use of the P160 zone;

increased traffic on a road that could not handle that increase; and other

safety concerns.