Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

Thanks.

I'd like to call this meeting of the Morgan County Planning Commission to order. It's Thursday, June 25th, 2026. I'd like to welcome all those in attendance tonight. We will start our meeting with a word of prayer by Member King, and then if you all rise and join us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Our beloved Father, we're so grateful for the chance that we have to be here. wonderful valley we're grateful for the blessing it is to live here and also to live in our wonderful country grateful for the chance that we have to serve pray that we'll be able to be kind to one another and to enjoy this we need to see grateful for the precipitation which is falling pray the valve blesses with all the gas and bus firefighters who are fighting fires at this time that they may be kept safe

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. The next item would be the approval of the agenda. And so with that motion, can we move the administrative items before the legislative item? I have a motion by Member Taylor and a second by Member King. All in favor?

Aye.

Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimous. Declaration of any conflict of interest with any item on the agenda? I don't have a conflict, but I'll just state that I am a shareholder in Peterson Pipeline, who is an applicant tonight. OK, so we now move on to public comment. We have one legislative item, a code text amendment. If you'd like to speak to that, we ask that you wait until its own public hearing, you'll have a time to speak to that. Or if you'd like to speak on any of the administrative items or anything else you'd like to address the Planning Commission, now would be your time if you could come up to the lectern and state your name for the record. Okay, seeing none, we'll move on. We just rearranged agenda to make sure you would be here, but we'll move on to the administrative items. Number seven, this is Peterson Pipeline CUP Well. Number two.

Commissioner, this is a request to approve the conditional use permit that is required for a public facility or public service facility. This is located approximately at 4150 Mahogany Drive in the Peterson area. Staff has reviewed the conditional use permit application for a proposed public facility on the 1.75 acre property. And a public facility in the A20 zone requires a conditional use permit granted by the county commission. It is a C3 level CUP. The project site is vacant except for a non-operational well. The proposal is to build a well house around the well, which would be called Peterson Pipeline Well Number Two. and pour a 5x7 concrete pad for a transformer, an 11x6 concrete pad for a generator, and supply a 1,000 gallon propane tank. The result will be an operational well. The parcel is accessed through a right-of-way on the existing dirt road located off Mahogany Drive in the Peterson area. A floodplain permit has been issued and reviewed by staff and the county engineer. Staff finds that the proposed CUP maintains compatibility with the surrounding area and the intent of the A20 zoning district. The existing well is approximately 250 feet from the closest residence. The proposed well house will partially block the noise from the generator to the closest residence. The applicant addresses the noise of the generator in the following, it'll only be operational occasionally for maintenance anticipated being for a few hours every three months the generator will have a maximum operational decibel level at full rated load at 75 decibels at seven meters from the generator and the existing well in this location is currently only a wellhead it is not operational so there isn't currently a generator at this location so If you have any questions, I'll be glad to try to address those at this time regarding this application, but staff recommends approval of this conditional use permit with the findings and conditions in the staff report.

Any questions for staff? Other than that, I don't know if a pump house really needs a C3, but...

I think we're probably going to be working to change that.

Yeah. So is applicant here? Do you have any questions for the applicant?

I was looking back at the other item, which had a 70 decibel limit on it. I didn't see a distance on that.

That would be the property line that would be enforced.

So these guys are 75 decibels at 7 meters. Do you know how close that is to the property line?

I don't off the top of my head. I do not. But it's some distance. I can't qualify some distance. I should have a map up, but I don't have that map.

The IM tube. Yeah. That's the nearest dwelling.

Kent, is that considered a condition of the permit? That they won't have a generator over the 75 decibel?

we have it listed as a condition but we could they've stated it if you'd like to come forward and just state your name you know speak into the mic so it can pick up on the recording

Matthew Hermes. I'm with Sunrise Engineering. That 75 decibels at 7 meters was in the contract documents and in the specs. So that is a requirement we are having the contractor meet when supplying the generator.

Do you have any idea what that is at the property line, how fast that falls off?

I don't. The generator will be equipped with a sound dampening shroud to hit that 75 decibel at 7 meters. So I don't know how that will affect the sound as it goes further than that 7 meters, but that's just what it's rated for.

And you're designing this, Sunrise is designing this? Yes. Is this really gonna only operate for a few hours once every three months? You're gonna exercise this thing once every three months?

Yeah, so the generator will be there for emergency uses. So if power goes out, it will kick on. Other than that, per the manufacturer's recommendations, you run the generator. just a few hours. Depends on what you want for maintenance, but yeah, it's usually recommended that you run it for at least a few hours every two to three months and just to make sure that the generator maintains a good working order.

I guess this is for staff. Is there a county code? What does the county code nuisance ordinance restrict noise at the property line at now? I guess, is this a redundant thing if we've already got it covered in the code somewhere else? Could you please state your name, your date of birth?

There's nothing specific in there with decibels and that's why we put it into, decibel reading anyway, that's why we put it in specifically with the power generation. there's nothing just generically in the nuisance ordinance yeah it's just what a nuisance complaint would come by so but that's when you're using a decibel reader doing nuisance or investigating nuisance complaints it's done at the property line that way it's it's coming from the complainant's side That way you don't have to trespass in order to obtain your information. And that's why it's specifically. That makes sense.

Did you pull that standard from Ogden by chance? That's weird. The level at certain feet comes from industry standards. It's normal. So this 75 at seven feet wasn't pulled out of a hat. That's a normal way of measuring on a schedule. noise ordinance. Law enforcement carry decibel meters to do these types of things. Zone ordinance people do as well. And if it meets that, that's how we measure them.

Thank you. Any more questions? Seeing none, I'm ready for a motion.

we would like to make an approval to the . based on the findings of the conditions listed in the staff report . Second.

Okay, I have a motion by Member King and a second by Member Watt. Any more discussion?

I have another question. What happens, it sounds like our nuisance ordinance is a little underwhelming. What happens in the future if you codify something that says 70 decibels at the property line, or whatever it is that we come up with, and something like this exceeds it, but it was approved at 75 decibels at seven meters, What happens then? You go out and measure it and then it's 72 decibels at the property line, but we approved it at 75 decibels at seven meters.

That's a really good question. And quite honestly, if you look at our nuisance statute, it says nothing about sound. It's about abandoned vehicles, garbage, that kind of stuff. But if we changed it and added the sound?

So you would normally, right, you would normally, if we create an ordinance, normally have an implementation date, anything behind his grandfather. Exactly. So we wouldn't touch this one.

The CUP. It would be from then forward. On the conditional use. Yeah.

and if I can just bring one other thing up is it a negative detrimental impact to the community if I can determine that like if they put up to this point they were supposed to have a conditional use permit period to be able to put a personal power generation you know equipment in but you know all of those they all have industrial industry standards that they follow if it was not operating correctly i might be able to respond off that where they have to provide maintenance for it in order to get it back into working order there's there's a few different things but it just comes down to communication with them okay all in favor aye aye any opposed motion carries unanimous

We'll move on to item number eight. This is the Peek's plat amendment number one.

Commissioner, the applicant is Blair Gardner. The property address is approximately 5360 West Old Highway Road in the mountain green area. The area affected by this plat amendment is 13, excuse me, .306 acres or 13,338 square feet. These townhomes were built a little bit too far north, farther north than the legal description was made. So there are many of the plots, so the legal description matches where the actual location of the townhomes is located. There are four townhome buildings in the 15 units that this is affected by. It's off of Jeter Road, off of Old Highway Road, and staff recommends approval.

Any questions for staff?

Well, I'd like to say this has never happened to me before.

But it's happened to me before.

Does this violate any setbacks or spacing between the buildings or anything like that?

No, it doesn't. The movement of the townhomes is just about five feet straight to the north, so it doesn't violate.

They all moved uniformly five feet up.

So it doesn't violate any front or rear setbacks.

If this is the one I'm thinking of, there are fair ways into this, right?

Surveyors are not always perfect.

This was caught way early in the process, so we were able to make that. OK.

Any other questions for staff? Are you the applicant? The applicant is here if you have any questions for the applicant on this one.

It's a nice looking project. no more questions or discussion i'm ready for a motion i'll move to show the motion on the screen first i got it i got it i got it i got it on my ipad I move we recommend to the County Commission to approve the Peek's First Amendment, application number 25.060, adjusting the property lines of 15 townhome units located along Jeter Drive at 5360 West Old Highway Road in Mountain Green in unincorporated Morgan County, based on the findings and with the conditions listed in the staff report dated June 25, 2026.

We have a motion by Member Taylor. And a second by Member King. Any more discussion? All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries, unanimous. We will now go back to our legislative item. This is personal power generation code text amendment.

Good evening, Commission. Since this is my first time formally presenting to you, I'd like to introduce myself. I am Brinley Savage. I am the Planner 1 for the Morgan County Planning and Development Services Department. Commission staff was directed by Morgan County Commission to amend Morgan County Code and modify sections 155.082 of use regulations and 155.008 of definitions. or a personal power generation code amendment. The current process requires that an applicant obtains a conditional use permit in order to use a personal generator. It was found that this permitting process was too complex, so the proposed text amendment will make that process straightforward with the issuance of a building permit. So specifically the text amendment removes a portion of the 155.082 use regulations and adds the personal power generation permit issuance to 155.008 definitions. So at this time I'm happy to take any questions that commission has about this text amendment.

And if you've noticed you have a paper in front of you that some changes were made since the packet went out, probably.

That page is from a previous review meeting that we had, just kind of going over some ideas of what could be better used, better presented for a permit of a generator.

Legal panic there for a minute. What it is, in our code, it's 155.063, it's authorized uses in districts, and it says the uses of land allowed in each district shall be plenary, and uses of land not specifically allowed as set forth therein shall be prohibited in the respective district. So if it's not listed here in the table, it means it's not allowed, and so when they They wanted to make it permitted, but they just, it was stricken. So we decided to put the P in for personal use to make it, that it's permitted, that it is allowed. And then after discussion, that commercial maybe still needs to come. I don't think we want a 50-acre solar farm coming under a permitted use. So maybe the commercial can be a C2.

So, and I agree wholeheartedly. I have some concerns. What are the, and where are they contained, the standards for this? Well, first. Is this a separate permit, or is it automatic when I get my permit and my plans include power generation? Or is it a separate permitting process?

It would be a separate permit, wouldn't it?

Just for the power generation, OK. And then if my neighbor decides to put up an 80-foot wind turbine on his property between me and the beautiful view across to her side, Where are the standards contained to discuss the specifics of their request for that type of power generation? And what pushback does or what discussion or what dialogue does any resident in this county have about a neighbor doing that?

Chris, do you have something to add?

So we would be able to go over a few things such as height regulations with that. That would be 35 feet, no higher than what the house is. That would fit into that. The building permit specifications are mainly for like electrical wiring and different things like that, which would require a building permit, which is a utility permit. obviously a separate permit that would have to be approved by planning by our by planning review our plan review and the building official and then obviously the on-site inspection so we do get eyes on it to be able to verify to make sure they're not going over height regulations and different things like that do you think there are sufficient rules regulations contained in

the general building codes and the general ordinances that you utilize now that would cover this and people would have an opportunity to come and discuss it in front of us and then we would have some decision authority about whether or not we should recommend that approval.

I would agree with that and mainly focusing with the height. So the same time that you're giving people the opportunity to be heard, to be able to put what kind of power generation they would like, you're also putting the same rules that would allow people to say, okay, I'm not going to let them go higher than their house.

So I think this would be, as part of this discussion, maybe a good point to say maybe we really need to look at a set noise ordinance somewhere in this. Some person goes down Smith and Edwards and buys a surplus military house generator and pours a concrete pad and puts it on there we're gonna have neighborhood problems and so maybe there's a I think is that something we would ask staff to do to investigate a noise ordinance with specifics on decibels and sound

and that that's thank you for bringing that up because that is exactly why i wanted it in this until we get it written in specifically in our nuisance ordinance okay thank you additionally 155.322 is special antennas and energy equipment and it addresses satellite dishes solar wind

anything like that so there is planning commission and county commission review there in the 155.008 it does say maximum decibel readings for many power generation units shall be 70 decibels but that can't that's not right it should be at the property line you can't i mean reading that i would hold my microphone up to the generator and say you're louder than 70.

I understand where you're seeing that. From the enforcement side, I would not be able to trespass onto somebody's property to be able to get that reading. And so I would have to read it from property lines from any complainant that would have issues with it.

I would still make that clear here.

I agree.

Which definition were you looking at?

The last sentence.

So maybe.

So the next one, I understand the conversation we had a few minutes ago. We could move forward with that other one. It's a 75. It's not going to affect the security. But where do we get this 70 messages? Since we just had a case study, that's 75.

If you would like, would you like an example of what about 70 decibels is?

yeah i'm just oh yeah that's way different something's wrong with that um i just had that question because if we have engineers right now designing to 75 or whatever it may be and then they're going to have to go design back to a 70 is that going to affect the systems that they're designing and cause a whole bunch of problems i'm just asking where that came from

One thing I can answer with that is the unit that is being used by for example the Peterson pipeline is a commercial unit that would not be in a residential area. So that is one thing that definitely helps us out there. We looked at several manufacturing outlines of different manufacturers that supply the Mayor Mrakas, diesel generators, we specifically looked at those to get that average of 70 decibels and and there were some older styles that were more, but most of the the the newer styles are all decreasing with their desktop readings.

Okay. Mayor Mrakas, And I did a quick search for other counties and it's looking like. salt lake city the city code um they differentiate between property type like residential and commercial and daytime is 60 decibels nighttime is 50 for residential and commercial looks like 70 daytime 60 nighttime this is in their nuisance code correct well for their noise code they're specific yep But that's in the city, so I would guess they'd be a little bit lower with all the accumulation of noise.

Pretty much every established municipality has some form of a noise ordinance that has a number for that reason. You get a lot of complaints in municipalities.

I would think that there'd be a difference between sporadic periodic use and constant, never ending, drive you crazy.

I agree. And I also think sometimes it's when you put the decibel level in there, it also kind of depends on the noise. It depends on distance. You mean the type of noise? Yeah.

Whether it's a screech or a low hum.

A nuisance can be a lot different.

It depends if I have a car driving by. If it's an electric car versus a diesel truck. If car wash fans are, you know, very well 21st Street in Washington, car wash fans are the blowers, are major nuisances. And that's why it is important to have specifics.

I think most generally they look, are we disturbing your quiet enjoyment of your property and your comfort and peace? I think that's kind of what a nuisance comes down to.

And also, in my discussion before this meeting with staff, power generation personal use is only listed in this section of our code for the MU 160 A20 Rural Residential. It's not listed in the residential use code or in the commercial. So we may need to address that in the future. So those that live on half acre lots can have a generator for their home, which probably a lot of them already do. but it's not listed in those other tables. It was just in this one table.

Just for a point of reference, you just hit 63.8. You mean me talking? You talking right there. That silence is 36.

A vacuum cleaner's 80, correct? 64.4.

back away you need to tone it down a little bit tone it down i think right up next to the vacuum cleaner yes but from what i what i researched um it'd be 70 decibels would be a vacuum cleaner but like a few steps away from it like maybe in a different area

I think it's a matter of establishing it and fine tuning it in the future. I don't have any problem with this.

Forcible, yeah.

What's the point of, I guess if you're building a new house and you have on your plans that you've got a backup generator there and it runs off of natural gas, what's the point of having a separate building permit there?

They have to have a separate building permit to inspect the gas lines. They have to do like any fuel gas line increases.

If you submit that with your building permit plans. For a new home. For a new home, you have your plans reviewed. It includes the backup generator. You got your transfer switch and all that stuff is already included in your house. Why would you have a separate permit for that?

In that situation, it would be allowed. It would be under the single family dwellings building permit, but it would be addressed at plan review.

You just pay the additional fee, right?

Actually, it's no. There is one. No. Really the only ones that would require an additional permit when you're building a new home, no matter what, you have to have a swimming pool permit. And no matter what, you would have to have a solar permit. panel permit because it requires two separate stamps engineering stamps there would be a which one am i missing oh multiple houses so if they've got an accessory that's separate from the single family dwelling that would also require a separate building permit

If there are no more questions, I will entertain a motion to move into a public hearing.

So moved.

Second. Motion by Member Taylor and a second by Member King. All in favor? Aye.

Tina Kelly, Mountain Green. I appreciated Member King's questions about the decibel level and where that came from, because that was also a concern of mine. I had a concern going into this meeting about why the commission entertained this ordinance change if it was to be punitive or to be helpful in the building process. I live in a WUI in a half acre zone, R120. A lot of the neighbors have generators already. And I'm not sure what their process was in getting them. And I'm not sure what decibels they are. But Rocky Mountain Power has notified us that because we live in a WUI, that we are subject to having power outages during high winds or whenever they deem necessary because of fire danger. So a lot of people have those. I live in an elderly community, a retirement community. There's very few younger people there. Many of us are on oxygen at night and that runs off of power. So backup generator for our oxygen equipment and our emergency equipment. They don't run generally all the time. They run during an emergency situation and I do believe that you have to run them if they're certain, like gas-powered ones. They have to be run for routine maintenance. So I don't want to see this as a punitive. I hear the discussion going back and forth. I'd like to hear more about how the decibels are, if that's the industry standard. And those were the concerns I had coming in here. Thank you.

Thank you. And I can address part of that. I do believe that currently there's an exception to the permitting process if you need it for medical reasons. So you've got medication that has to be chilled or.

What do you mean by that?

so you don't have to get a permit right now for a generator if you have a medical need for it this would change that or not change i i just a little change to that you wouldn't have to go through the conditional use permit part of it but you would still have to get a building permit for it yes and and i really appreciate the comment comments that were made The main reason it got brought up was we had an elderly, actually there was like three of them at the same time. A few people came in and man, when we looked at the process, we're like, this just doesn't sound right. And then it went to the county commission from the applicant. And so that made us look at it and say, there's probably a few things that could be tweaked in it. And that's what led up to this portion. So thank you for everybody that brought that up.

So we're actually making the process more streamlined, more straightforward, easier. You can't skip the building permit. But there's power hookups, there's other things that have to be inspected. But no rigmarole, no coming to this meeting and begging for something that you shouldn't even be asking for. Just a straightforward permit. Thank you. You either comply with the code or you don't comply with the code. Change it until you comply with the code and you're good to go.

Yep.

And by code, I mean NEC, IRC, whatever.

Bingo. I need a motion to go out of public hearing. Motion. Okay, motion by Member King, second by Member Watt. All in favor? Aye. We're out of the public hearing. So any more discussion or questions for staff? For Janet?

I guess the question is, do we want to add any language to the end of that before we send it over to council?

I would add the 70 decibels is measured at the property line just to clarification.

I would agree with that. I think it just makes it more clear and simple.

And just to be clear too, this visual impairment or whatever, if somebody comes in and they want to get windmill, farm, next to Randy. They still have to come in for a conditional use permit.

That would still require a conditional use permit.

So thinking ahead, what he's saying, maybe that is 70 decibels at the property dwelling nearest to an established residence dwelling. because if the property line per says it's 70 next to the back pasture but it's only the property line closest to the complainer right i would appreciate that that is that is great outside the box thinking so thank you and then do you want a recommendation that applies in all zones or

I guess the advertisement was pretty generic. I read back and read it. I don't think other than in the packet, there was no information error. So is that okay?

I think it, when we're looking at a conditional use permit, yes, I think where we're amending, I think we need to make it consistent throughout the code.

or however you want to do it.

You could just make the recommendation to the County Commission. They add it and they can deliberate on it.

That it applies to all. So the motion needs to be that this amendment would apply to all zones is what you're saying?

Is that a question?

Is that a question? Does it apply to all zones? No. Is that?

Well, I think that's what you had kind of indicated. So I'm just bringing it up if you want to do that. I'm not recommending or not. Well, no.

From a legal standpoint, we're OK with how it is agended. Correct. Sorry. My question. No, no, no. So what does the commission feel? Should we apply it to all zones, make that recommendation? Because it is being used in residential zones now.

Is there a zone that makes sense that we wouldn't apply it? I can't think of one. I can't. Yeah. So I think that answers the question. Yeah.

I've experienced, I don't know how many power outages this year in the last eight months or so. So many.

It's going to get worse. Because Rocky Mountain Power has, if there's anything, they just have to shut it down until they physically get there to look at it. Yeah. Yeah.

So is it just the two then? Or is there three? I have two. I've got two. I've got the property line and apply to all zones.

Property line closest to the complainer. Closest to the complainer.

And applies to all zones. So there's three.

No, no. The 70 decimals at property line closest to the complainer.

Is the complainer the right word?

I would put closest to the property line containing the nearest dwelling. The nearest house, the one.

OK, think about this, though. What if I have this beautiful patio area right next to your property line where I have birthday parties with my kids and your generators?

Right there. Yeah, but my house is way over.

I like the closest to the complainer. Because I think that takes into account or a complainant. Complaintant.

It would be complainant. Complaintant.

So that becomes predicated on a complaint, though.

Yeah.

We want to predicate it on a complaint. It's fine.

If nobody cares, nobody cares.

It's not a nuisance if I don't complain about it.

I mean, how else are you going to know anyway? Okay. All right. I'll concede.

I like the closeness to the complainant because if you have a gazebo in your backyard, whatever, your pool area, whatever it is you're using, and that thing is driving me crazy.

So, Commissioner Watt, you had a question about coverage area? Yeah. if your neighbor has multiple windmills on their property, how that could affect your property. We do have limits of coverage based on each zone. It could be 25% of the lot could be covered in the structure. But still, you could have multiple windmills that have a relatively small footprint. but they could have quite the impact. So I don't know what the likelihood of that would be, but I can only think of one property in my experience that had an affinity for windmills, I guess, so they had quite the collection of their property. But to my knowledge, it didn't violate any zoning requirements.

So that would require a conditional use permit after this tonight or after the county commission rules on this or not?

If it's personal power generation that would be permitted, that's my understanding of what we're leaning towards.

I think there's some different things here. I think a backup generator, simple, straightforward. Most people are going to gravitate towards that and it's done. Solar, I get it. You may or may not like it, but it's just the thing sitting on your house. But if you put a ground mount system in, I assume that that's got to be a conditional use permit after this goes. And the windmill, there is no old person that says, hey, I got to have my oxygen running. I need this stupid windmill in my yard to keep this going. And by the way, if the wind stops, then I'm going to die. That's just not going to happen. So I don't see the same urgency on a hydroelectric plant as I do on a backup generator, as I do on a windmill or some wind turbine. You know, these things to me could be treated different. And the wind turbine especially can be visually annoying. So I'm not sure why it should why that one in particular should be taken out of the conditional use permit and just done under a building permit. Whereas the other ones, I think solar is pretty well covered. State law covers the crap out of that. And then the backup generator. I think this is really THIS IS AN IMPORTANT THING, AND I'M GLAD THIS IS BEING ADDRESSED. SO I JUST DON'T SEE THE SAME, I DON'T SEE IT ALL THE SAME.

DO WE WANT TO LIMIT TO BACKUP GENERATORS? IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING?

WELL, ONE IS BASED ON NOISE. ONE IS WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT BECAUSE OF THE NOISE. THE OTHERS HAVE OTHER ISSUES.

Yeah, which would put them in the nuisance category more than the sound ordinance. Maybe. I don't know that I see it.

Well, we have a collective definition of nuisance that everybody has. But nuisance, as is referred to in a code, has to have a specific definition. A nuisance would be attributed to noise, or be attributed to a visual, or be attributed to something in order to be a nuisance under an ordinance. It has to have specific factors. But you've opened up another line of thought here, because when a person is considering power generation from non-fuel based generation wind natural wind sunlight so on the concerns are different than the person who puts in a mega kilowatt backup generator to run their 46 000 square foot home it's different i guess with this would be my preference just to leave the solar or sorry the wind off of it

micro hydro generation is nothing but that affects three people in the county and you're not going to hear that you don't even see that and that's under a completely different set of rules solar is under a different set of rules i don't see a problem with that but the wind i think is annoying it's so stupid just generally It does not look good. It's my thought. Kills birds. I'd yank that thing.

We don't want wind farms in the county.

I'd yank that and leave it in a conditional use permit. But is there a problem with that, Janet?

I agree with you 100%.

Could we limit it to just fuel-based personal generation?

I don't think I have a problem with the other three, micro hydro, solar, and backup generators. I think this is adequate for that. I just think the wind, I don't know. You want to remove the wind from the definition? I would remove wind from this and then just leave it under where it stays under a condition. That's reasonable.

I think it's reasonable. Me too. I actually think you could remove solar.

So I have a question for Chris about solar. If the solar is off of the rooftop, you're saying that our current code requires that to be a conditional use?

current code would say that a solar array would require a conditional use but um if we're not specific in here i i would say maybe built building mounted solar would save us on that if if you see there's there somebody opened up the box yeah and it just gets you thinking it gets you thinking and you're like you don't want to cause i don't want to cause a nuisance um harm to anybody right and when you get thinking about the wind and think the potential of what that could lead to or even the um solar arrays which could be mounted in a backyard i i would I would agree. I think that those still need to be under conditional use.

If I walk in tomorrow and this passes and all of a sudden my limitations on solar are 35 feet and that the footprint be no more, take up no more than whatever, I mean I can make a gargantuan mess in there. I'm not saying it shouldn't ever happen, but it just seems like it should go through that conditional use process. I like that. I'd probably yank wind completely out and off house or off structure, off. So, or building mounted. Off main building, primary building, off primary building solar.

But it says this includes. You want to say building mounted?

Non-roof mounted solar? Because you could have it on your primary structure or your accessory structure. If it's roof mounted, what?

Oh, yeah. On primary structure, mounted. Well, I guess it could be. Either one.

It could be your detached garage or whatever. Yeah.

Yeah, so anything off of the roof.

Yeah, non-roof mounted.

For to prohibit?

Yeah, this personal power generation does not include non-roof mounted solar.

This includes solar. Do you want to just add the building mounted in front of it that it includes that, or do you want to have another sentence saying it does not include?

I think it'd be straightforward to say roof-mounted solar is.

So this includes roof-mounted solar, leave-off wind, and it includes micro-hydro generation.

Whoever's gonna do that.

Or other type of power generation.

I'm okay with that.

And then measured at the property line closest to the complainant. That it applies to all zones.

Yeah. All right. Take a stab.

You've got the notes that I kind of ended.

Okay, I move we recommend approval to the County Commission for the personal power generation code text amendment based on the findings listed in the memorandum dated June 25, 2026 with the following additional conditions. That the maximum decibel readings from any power generation unit shall be 70 decibels at the property line closest to the complainant. and that this applies to all zones. And let's see, okay. Under the power generation definition that it read, the installation of any type of power generation shall be permitted with the issuance of a building permit. This includes, this includes roof-mounted solar, micro hydro generation or other type of power generation within or for residents or commercial structure with the exception of non-roof mounted solar and wind. And then continuing on, diesel or fuel driven generators shall be restricted to fuel storage allowances by the fire code and approved by the local fire department having jurisdiction. And then the last sentence as currently read. Or it's previously read, not currently read.

Okay, when you said with the exception of non-roof mounted solar or wind, does that mean non-roof mounted?

Well, I. Wind.

So can you put the wind on your roof? I'm just.

Okay, so, well, I just read, or any other type of power generation. I saw that. So it just made me think, that's too broad. So I need to specifically say that it does not apply to wind or non-roof mounted solar. So I was just afraid of that catch-all sentence there.

Okay, we'd remove the catch-all.

Oh, I guess we could remove the catch-all. less what would that i mean that'd be like nuclear what what would the other be i don't know what that is durable durable powers yeah i don't know human bicycle yeah okay let me let me back up then is that what if we just take that out i don't know what those would be but the catch-all is bothering me i'll amend my motion I'm going to amend my motion. All right. Start over.

Is there a better way to define it? I mean, the difference is that it's kind of portable. It's what? A generator. It can be portable. It can be portable, but I don't know.

We don't care as long as it doesn't exceed the sound, whether that's portable or fixed.

It's all about sound for the generations.

OK. Can I just amend my motion or restate my motion? Will you scroll back to the motion then, the page, and I'll keep this text up.

Okay.

I move we recommend approval to the County Commission for the Personal Power Generation Code text amendment based on the findings listed and updated June 25, 2026 with the following additional conditions. Let's see, number one, that it applies to all zones, and number two, that the power generation definition reads as follows. The installation of any type of power generation shall be permitted with the issuance of a building permit, including roof-mounted solar Micro hydro generation. Or diesel or fuel driven generators. Period. And then diesel or fuel driven generators shall be restricted to fuel storage allowances by the fire code and approved by the local fire department having jurisdiction. Maximum decibel readings from any power generation unit shall be 70 decibels as measured at the property line closest to the complainant.

I have a motion by Member Taylor.

Second.

Second by Member Watt. Any more discussion? Staff.

Just a clarification for the table we're talking about is the amended table that we were presented, right?

Yes.

Yes, the amended table that was on the printed version and not the electronic version.

OK, all in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries, unanimous. OK, now on to business staff. Question, you wanted to bring up about a possible work meeting.

Yes. Josh is wondering if the Planning Commission would be amenable to having a work meeting or work session at 5 o'clock before our next Planning Commission meeting. And if you are, he's willing to provide dinner.

What's this for specifically?

Oh, it's for food truck text amendment.

Oh, food truck. Because there won't be a food truck here.

Well, that might be.

Do we satisfy training hours with this, or? Oh, come on, Janet. Well, wait a second.

So I talked to Josh about that training that I sat through in Harriman, where they have their work meeting an hour ahead. And if they just run short on items to discuss, they pull that.

We can pull up that land use academy.

Land use academy thing.

And hit one. OK. I think that's a really good idea.

It's easy. We're just sitting here eating and just watching them talk. And they pick up wherever they left off. It's easy.

We can totally do that.

Two birds, one stone.

I like it.

Is this the 9th of July meeting?

Yes.

Is that real? I don't have my calendar, but I think that is correct. I will not be in attendance, but that's fine.

I get his burrito.

Yeah. Yeah. Hopefully we'll have enough attendance for that time.

Yes. Maybe we can have our other two new appointed by then. That'd be nice. OK, any more questions for staff? Not. Motion to approve the minutes, the June 11 minutes.

So moved.

Motion by Member King to approve minutes. Seconded by?

Second.

Member Watt. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Motion carries. Adjourned. Motion by?

Motion.

Motion by Member King. Seconded by? Second. Member Taylor. All in favor?