Fairfield planning commission tables revisions to Title 10, Chapter 16 special-use rules

The Fairfield Planning Commission reviewed proposed changes to Title 10, Chapter 16 — Special Use Regulations and agreed to send the draft back for additional technical work, then tabled formal adoption.

Commissioners spent the meeting working through detailed line edits to the special-use permit rules, seeking to reconcile local wording with state notice requirements and to add clarifying provisions on site plans, screening, hazardous materials and operational limits. They removed a sentence that would have required an additional public hearing for special use and conditional use permits, and directed staff to align public-notice language to state code rather than repeat varying notice periods in the town ordinance.

The changes were discussed item by item. On public notice, staff referenced a 500-foot notification distance in the draft; commissioners debated whether to require notification to “all property owners adjacent to the subject property” or to use whichever standard (adjacent owners or 500 feet) is larger. Commissioner Wayne Taylor said the town should “at least 500 feet” for notice because many lots are large; staff proposed the text: “Notice to all property owners adjacent to the subject property or to property owners within 500 feet, whichever is larger.”

Commissioners also considered whether special- and conditional-use permits should require public hearings. The group reviewed a memo noting that “special use permits and conditional use permits do not require public hearings under Utah code. However, municipalities may choose to have public hearings for these types of permits.” Commissioners decided to remove the line imposing an automatic additional public hearing in the town ordinance, with Commissioner David Reed saying, “I don't see any reason to have a public hearing for it if it's not required.” Stephanie (staff) was assigned to resolve the redline language.

On technical compliance and operations, commissioners left several standards in place but flagged items for follow-up. Those included: - Site-plan references: staff and Commissioners agreed to reference the applicable code and confirm cross-references. - Height limits: the draft allows some stacking of materials up to 16 feet in light industrial zones; commissioners noted that number had been previously debated and left it unchanged for now. - Fencing and screening: contractor yards and outdoor industrial storage were proposed to be enclosed with a secure fence or wall “at least 6 to 8 feet in height”; commissioners asked staff to choose a single standard (6, 7, or 8 feet) and to ensure consistent formatting across the draft. - Fuel and hazardous-material storage: commissioners asked staff to add language requiring compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations and fire codes and to research which minimum local controls (if any) the town should adopt. Commissioner Wayne Taylor emphasized the need to “verify” applicable fire and environmental rules rather than assume the International Fire Code alone is sufficient. - Alcohol sales and microbreweries: commissioners agreed the town should research local licensing limits and possibly adopt local consent provisions for alcohol licenses rather than rely solely on state rules. For microbreweries/distilleries, commissioners left the use in the draft but discussed potential odor and water-demand implications and mitigation such as rooftop exhaust and odor control. - Hours of operation: for fuel stations and convenience stores the draft proposes restricting hours near residential areas. Commissioners discussed options (5 a.m.–11 p.m., 5–10 p.m., or 6–11 p.m.) and agreed to refine language to allow more restrictive hours closer to homes (a distance-based approach) and leave “unless otherwise approved” for exceptions. - Definitions: staff and commissioners agreed to reconcile the ordinance’s definitions with Title 12 definitions so the ordinances do not conflict; the working plan is to merge and harmonize definitions before council action.

Commissioners repeatedly emphasized that where the town’s draft relied on external codes (state noticing rules, fire codes, environmental regulations), staff should verify the current external requirements and reference them rather than duplicate inconsistent or obsolete language. Several specific redlines were assigned to staff member Stephanie to implement.

Because several substantive items (fuel/hazardous-material controls, alcohol regulation, consistent notice language and cross-references to Title 12 definitions) require more research and code cross-checking, the commission voted to table the special-use regulations draft and return it to a future work session after staff resolves the listed clarifications.

The tabling was procedural; no ordinance changes were adopted at the meeting. Commissioners indicated they will continue the line-by-line review at a subsequent session once staff and legal review questions are resolved.