General Information

Government Type

Municipality

Entity

Amalga

Public Body

Planning and Zoning Commission

Notice Information

Add Notice to Calendar

Notice Title

Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Public Meeting

Notice Type(s)

Meeting

Event Start Date & Time

October 22, 2026 06:00 PM

Event End Date & Time

October 22, 2026 08:08 PM

Description/Agenda

AMALGA TOWN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Hearing Minutes - October 22, 2026 Date Thursday October 22, 2026 Time 6 p.m. Location Amalga Town Hall, 6590 N 2400 W, Amalga UT Meeting Type Planning and Zoning Hearing 1. Roll Call The notes identify the following attendees: Nate Noyes, Chair; April Hansen, Aaron Wood, Leann Campbell, and Kelly Noble, Planning and Zoning members; Shantrell Ritter, Town Clerk; and town members/public attendees. 2. Discussion of Potential Changes to the Amalga Land Management and Development Code Ordinance 2026-10 A. Definitions for Automotive Service Stations and Fuel Storage Facilities The Commission and attendees discussed potential code language defining automotive service stations and fuel storage facilities. Leann Campbell suggested retaining the term 'Automotive Service Station' rather than changing it to 'motor fuel station.' Mike Bouck commented that 'service station' could suggest a business that performs oil changes. Tammy Munk asked when the terminology changed to 'travel center.' Rayslyn stated that the wording was intended to include the range of activities that could occur at such a facility. A comment was also made that the wording concerning fuel dispensing did not clearly address the issue being discussed. Charlie Erickson thanked the Planning and Zoning Commission and Town Council for the time spent reviewing the matter. He described the proposed facility at parcel 13-04-0-0002, 2900 West Highway 218, Amalga. He stated that the gas station and convenience store would occupy approximately half of a nine-acre property, that the footprint would be regulated, and that the layout was being designed to accommodate different types of vehicles. He said access would initially be from UDOT and that a speed-limit reduction would not occur before the facility opened. He described plans for certified scales and a convenience store open from 5:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., with fuel pumps available 24 hours a day. He stated that he did not object to the provisions listed in the proposed ordinance. Jeff Broadbent expressed support for distinguishing a truck stop from a convenience store or gas station and suggested limiting the number of pump islands, removing provisions allowing above-ground pumps, prohibiting overnight parking, trucker showers and laundry, and reconsidering whether the convenience store needed to operate 24 hours a day. Nate Noyes commented that restrictions should not make the business unworkable. Stacy Rindlisbacher asked attendees to avoid name-calling. Paul Campbell acknowledged the frustration surrounding the issue and suggested that attendees review the proposed language and return with specific concerns for discussion at the next meeting, identified in the notes as November 4. Attendees discussed whether an earlier business license or zoning clearance affected the current review. Charlie Erickson stated that the public notice for June 24 had been short of the required 14-day period by nine hours and said the zoning clearance and code being considered would be the applicable ones. Rayslyn stated that, after consulting the Town Attorney, the previous action was considered null and void; the notes do not preserve the complete explanation. Tammy Munk asked whether the compliance issue meant the zoning clearance process had started over. Aaron Wood explained that the plot plan shown was a sample and that the Town's review focused on the site plan and setbacks. Questions were raised about the absence of architectural plans and the setbacks for fuel storage and pumps. Nate Noyes stated that building size was not the primary concern so long as setbacks were met. Discussion also covered natural drainage along approximately three sides of the property and whether updated drainage information had been reviewed. The notes record a reference to code section 3.31.8 and a statement that the facility must be 50 feet from other property; the exact application of that setback was not clarified in the notes. It was also noted that the Town has limited authority over Highway 218. Mike Bouck asked the Town to define the difference between a truck stop and a gas station and to clarify the meaning of light industrial and how it differs from heavy industrial. He also raised possible Sunday closures other than fuel sales, consideration of alcohol sales and their impacts, landscaping, infrastructure costs, and whether fuel tanks should be underground. Other comments addressed potential soil contamination from fuel spills, the risk of underground tank leaks, the role of the Environmental Protection Agency in determining tank requirements, and concerns about vandalism of tanks. Attendees discussed whether the Town should plan for future development by creating or adjusting zoning districts, whether additional truck stops or fuel stations could be built, and whether the proposed use fit the Town's general plan. Nate Noyes commented that limiting the number of truck stops could limit competition. Dave Lee supported considering another zone for the use. Nate Noyes asked whether a use placed in a light industrial zone could later be moved to a retail zone. Dave Lee clarified that zoning clearance is based on setbacks and that building plans are submitted for a building permit through Cache County. Marilyn Munk urged the Town to make the code clear and comprehensive and asked whether an environmental study would be required. Charlie Erickson responded that this would be addressed during the building-permit process. April Turner stated that she felt the Town was listening and said a notice of objection would be filed with Shantrell Ritter. She identified concerns with the draft language, including the lack of a clear limit on the number of truck stops, definitions that could allow additional businesses, no numerical noise limits, insufficient lighting and water-use provisions, overly general environmental language, and the absence of cumulative review. Shane Munk suggested reviewing permit fees in comparison with surrounding communities and recommended that the Town be compensated for Planning and Zoning work. Daren Rindlisbacher asked whether new sound and landscaping requirements would apply to all businesses and whether existing businesses would be grandfathered. Tyler Bentley discussed the need for compromise, existing industrial uses, seasonal truck traffic, the Town's water system, and the potential revenue from the proposed facility. He stated that some truckers already traveling on the highway might use the facility. B. Amendment to Include Automotive Service Stations and Fuel Storage Facilities as an Acceptable Use in the Light Industrial Area The proposed amendment to include automotive service stations and fuel storage facilities as an acceptable use in the light industrial area was discussed as part of the broader zoning-code review. There was no motion, vote, recommendation, or final decision on this amendment. 3. Appeal Hearing Notice / Appeals Process Ordinance 2026-11 The notes refer to proposed changes to the appeals process and an appeal-hearing notice identified as section 1.15. Attendees discussed whether the revised process could discourage public participation or be perceived as retribution. April Turner and Mike Bouck raised concerns about how the matter had been handled and about trust in the Town. Nate Noyes stated that a prior hearing had been held and the ordinance reviewed line by line, and that the process should remain available to citizens while preventing repeated appeals from indefinitely delaying a matter. Penny Cowley suggested that a person considering an appeal meet with the Town Attorney beforehand to determine whether grounds for an appeal exist. Stacy Rindlisbacher suggested finding a different way to move forward. Other comments questioned why the proposal had not previously been discussed by Planning and Zoning or the Town Council. There was no motion, vote, or final action regarding the appeals-process proposal. 4. Follow-Up Items - Attendees were encouraged to review the proposed land-management and development-code language and bring specific concerns to the November 4 meeting. - Issues raised for further consideration included definitions of truck stops and gas stations, permitted uses in light industrial areas, pump and tank requirements, setbacks, drainage, lighting, noise, water use, environmental review, landscaping, infrastructure costs, and permit fees. - A notice of objection was stated to be forthcoming from April Turner. - The appeals-process proposal remained under discussion; no final action is recorded in the notes. 5. Adjournment At 8:08 p.m. Minutes are not official until approved by Planning and Zoning

Notice of Special Accommodations (ADA)

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals needing special accommodations (including auxiliary communicative aids and services) during this meeting should notify: Dianna Broadbent, Planning and Zoning Commission Secretary dbroadbent@amalgautah.gov 435-232-6291

Notice of Electronic or Telephone Participation

NA

Meeting Information

Meeting Location

6590 N 2400 W
AMALGA, UT 84335
Show in Apple Maps Show in Google Maps

Notice Posting Details

Notice Posted On

October 29, 2026 10:30 AM

Notice Last Edited On

October 29, 2026 10:30 AM

Subscribe by Email

Subscription options will send you alerts regarding future notices posted by this Body.