Planning commission previews new rules for contractor yards to limit dumping and visual impacts

Planning staff presented a draft code amendment to regulate contractor yards, proposing standards and explicit prohibitions intended to prevent yards from expanding into de facto gravel pits or transfer stations.

Ryan, planning staff, told the commission the draft would require an applicant to provide a site plan and meet a minimum lot size of one acre so yards can accommodate a buffer and screening. "You have to have at least an acre" is the baseline, he said, and the draft would also require a minimum 300‑foot distance from any residence, dust and erosion controls to prevent mud tracking, appropriate screening, compliant lighting and an impervious pad with borders and filtration where heavy equipment is stored. The draft relies on limits in the International Building Code for hazardous‑materials storage rather than specifying gallon amounts in the ordinance.

The draft lists explicit prohibitions: no placement within a platted residential subdivision; no disposal of construction waste on site; no open burning of cleared vegetation; no acceptance of contaminated soils from Park City; no vehicle sales; and a clarification that the use is not a gravel pit. The intent, staff said, is to give enforcement and decision‑makers a clear set of conditions they can attach to conditional‑use permits.

Commissioners broadly supported the direction. One commissioner said the standards are "really good" because they give the commission conditions to pull into conditional‑use approvals. Several commissioners asked whether the prohibition should apply in AG‑5 and AG‑10 zone districts; concern centered on where contractor yards are appropriate in the county’s agricultural zoning matrix. Multiple commissioners said most existing yards are larger than one acre (commonly 1.6–2.5 acres) and that AG‑5 may be too close to residential areas, whereas AG‑10 could be more appropriate if additional restrictions are added.

Members pressed staff to add clearer highway‑corridor rules and a practical way to exclude yards from prominent entryways. One commissioner suggested a setback or a "donut" exclusion around major routes such as Highway 32 so yards cannot sit immediately adjacent to entry corridors. Another commissioner, citing problems in Browns Canyon with hauled‑in contaminated material and large tanks, proposed explicitly prohibiting the receipt of hauled materials and noted previous yards had become places where materials were rescreened and sold.

Several commissioners recommended requiring fencing and/or a maximum yard size to prevent gradual expansion beyond the approved use; one suggested a maximum of about two acres and emphasized fencing is more durable than berms or vegetation that heavy equipment can run over. Staff confirmed that existing conditional‑use permits would generally remain in effect unless the use were abandoned, but that new permits should include conditions preventing expansion into transfer‑station or gravel‑pit uses.

Ryan said staff will rewrite the draft to reflect the commission’s feedback — adding clearer setback language for entry corridors, strengthening the prohibition on hauled‑in materials, clarifying screening/fencing requirements, and considering a maximum yard size — and will return the item for a public hearing.

The commission did not take a formal vote on the code amendment at this meeting; staff will bring a revised draft back for a noticed hearing.