[{"_1":2,"_95":-5,"_96":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,85],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6690640,"mediaKeyId","2393380-efef61d87f0948bbd3406757e65ac964","parentId",2393380,"title","Duchesne County Commission approvals: approach permit, TRT advisory board, licenses, tax adjustments and building fee resolution","audioSeconds",9298,"startMs",1106000,"endMs",10404000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2393380-efef61d87f0948bbd3406757e65ac964&start=1106&end=10404","thumbnailUrl","https://d352y6ypj4mjo3.cloudfront.net/AudioPlaceholder.png","articleUrl","/articles/6690640/Utah/Duchesne-County-Commission-approvals-approach-permit-TRT-advisory-board-licenses-tax-adjustments-and-building-fee-resolution","mediaUrl","author","Duchesne County Commission","date","2025-01-06T09:00:00Z","article","The Duchesne County Commission unanimously approved a slate of routine permits, appointments, licenses and financial items at its Jan. 6, 2025 meeting. Commissioners also adopted a building‑fee schedule by resolution and recessed a separate public hearing on transportation and land‑use fees for further staff work.

Highlights and formal outcomes from the meeting:

- Commercial approach permit: The commission approved a commercial approach (access) for a tower near the covered arena improvement in Altamont; the motion passed unanimously and the chair signed the document.

- TRT/TRCC advisory board: Commissioners appointed a Travel, Recreation and Tourism (TRT/TRCC) advisory board with named representatives from restaurants and destination resorts (Ashley Coolin representing restaurants in Roosevelt; Hal and Terry Giles representing destination resorts; Diana Giles representing Best Western management) and county ex‑officio members; the motion passed unanimously.

- Business licenses: The commission accepted new business licenses issued by the clerk/auditor’s office, including KDIR Productions LLC (Duchesne City), AR Services (construction), S & JJ Enterprises doing business as Keep Safe Today (online jewelry sales), Langford’s Exterior Design LLC (contractor) and Country Boy Services (landscape/snow removal); approval was unanimous.

- Beer license renewals: The commission approved beer license renewals submitted to the clerk/auditor’s office after sheriff’s office sign‑offs; one license (Mount Home Lodge) was pending receipt of paperwork. The commission approved the renewals as presented; vote unanimous.

- Vouchers and budget closeout: The commission approved vouchers and signaled final runs for the 2024 budget; the motion to approve vouchers passed unanimously.

- Tax abatement and tax adjustments: The commission approved individual abatement requests for two veterans (Leon Healy and Christopher Oaks) that were received after year‑end and authorized staff to process refunds where mortgage companies had paid. Commissioners also approved assessor‑recommended tax adjustments for a property where the improvement (a tiny home under construction) was reclassified; the commission approved the adjustments as presented.

- Volunteers and board appointments: The commission approved volunteer appointments (motion passed unanimously) and reappointed several board members and commissions during the swearing‑in and transition (including reappointment of Jeff Crozier to a transportation committee slot and appointments to regional and medical center boards).

- Resolution 25‑01 (building fee schedule): After a brief presentation comparing last year’s fees with proposed changes, the commission adopted Resolution 25‑01 setting the 2025 building and construction permit fee schedule. A staff example showed a modest net change (the sample single‑family house permit rose from about $2,085 to $2,209 under the proposed schedule). The resolution passed on roll call: Commissioner Killian — aye; Commissioner Chug — aye; Commissioner Miles — aye.

- Swearing‑in and leadership: The commission conducted the oath of office for newly elected officials and, after the swearing‑in, the commission approved a motion that Commissioner Greg Miles finish the meeting as acting chair; the motion passed unanimously.

Most motions on routine items were unanimous voice votes recorded on the meeting minutes. The only substantive policy issue left open for further work was the transportation/land‑use fee ordinance discussed at public hearing; the commission recessed that hearing to allow staff and counsel to revise the draft and re‑advertise a continued hearing.","mediaType","Audio","parentTitle","NOTICE OF COMBINED WORKING & REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DUCHESNE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS - Meeting 01-06-2025","oneSentenceSummary","At its Jan. 6 meeting the commission approved several routine and administrative items — including a commercial approach permit, Travel and Tourism advisory appointments, business and beer license renewals, vouchers, tax abatements and a building‑fee resolution — and recessed a larger public hearing on road‑impact fees for staff revision.","taxTitle","Duchesne County Commission, Duchesne County Boards and Commissions, Duchesne County, Utah","taxId",74961,"location","Utah","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":50,"_51":82,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":83,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":84,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6690643,"Duchesne County continues public hearing on road‑impact fees after resident complaint over damaged Smiley Road",2468,8641000,11109000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2393380-efef61d87f0948bbd3406757e65ac964&start=8641&end=11109","/articles/6690643/Utah/Duchesne-County-continues-public-hearing-on-roadimpact-fees-after-resident-complaint-over-damaged-Smiley-Road","The Duchesne County Commission recessed a public hearing on proposed road‑impact and land‑use fee ordinances after extended discussion and public comment, directing staff to rework the draft and return in roughly two weeks.

The hearing focused on ordinances that would establish fees and options for road mitigation tied to energy development and other large users. County staff said they have discussed a minimum fee that would apply to users’ impact on local roads — commissioners and industry representatives in earlier conversations had suggested a one‑mile minimum with a three‑mile cap for calculating mitigation costs.

A small but emphatic public comment came from John Hancock, a resident, who described severe deterioration on Smiley Road — a county class‑D road — and pressed commissioners for a clear path to repair. “I can’t ride my bike to the highway; I’ve dumped it three times,” Hancock said. He said his road serves several elderly residents and families with children and that county maintenance is insufficient. Hancock asked whether county taxes or other county funds could be used to fix a road that he said had been damaged by industrial traffic.

County officials responded that class‑D roads are generally not maintained to the same standard as higher‑class county roads and emphasized past practice: developers and residents commonly share responsibility for upgrading private or lower‑standard roads before the county will accept maintenance. Staff and commissioners said options in the draft ordinance include a road‑maintenance agreement (a negotiated, site‑specific approach) or a fee in lieu of a maintenance contract; staff reported that several companies preferred a defined minimum/maximum fee rather than open‑ended maintenance agreements because the latter can leave uncertainty about future county acceptance and standards.

Commissioners and staff discussed whether to exempt vertical wells, compressor stations and water‑handling facilities from the fee; staff said they sought more data (well life, traffic profiles and industry input) before finalizing categories and rates. County staff also said they will re‑advertise the ordinance and submit a revised draft that includes clearer definitions for gravel roads, a minimum/maximum fee structure and explicit language clarifying that the county is not committing to reconstruct existing roads solely by adopting this fee.

The commission did not adopt an ordinance at the Jan. 6 meeting. Instead commissioners voted to continue the public hearing and return with revisions after additional review and consultations with county staff and counsel.

The county attorney and planning staff will return a revised draft with clarifying language on: the one‑mile minimum and three‑mile cap option, the mechanics and limits of road‑maintenance agreements, whether and how to treat vertical wells and ancillary facilities, and how to document enforcement and reimbursement. County leaders said they will also analyze pavement and road‑condition data to better match fees to observed impacts.","Commissioners recessed the public hearing on proposed transportation impact and land‑use fees to allow staff to revise language. Residents pressed the county about responsibility for damaged class‑D roads and requested clearer guarantees that industry traffic will fund repairs.",{"_33":86,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":87,"_41":88,"_43":89,"_45":90,"_47":91,"_49":50,"_51":92,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":93,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":94,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6690647,"Duchesne County officials review emergency response after large oil-field tank fire; no major injuries reported",495,1862000,2357000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2393380-efef61d87f0948bbd3406757e65ac964&start=1862&end=2357","/articles/6690647/Utah/Duchesne-County-officials-review-emergency-response-after-large-oil-field-tank-fire-no-major-injuries-reported","Commissioners heard an update on a major oil‑field tank fire that required a multiagency response and burned for roughly 13 hours on Friday, Jan. 3, county emergency staff said at the Duchesne County Commission meeting on Jan. 6.

The fire response carried implications for public safety and county preparedness. The fire department representative said the blaze produced substantial product loss, highlighted gaps in foam supplies and prompted plans to order more foam and review equipment and response coordination.

Josh, a fire department representative, told commissioners the incident at a Javelin (spelled variously in reports) lease was still under investigation by state and company investigators. “So far, nobody’s injured on that fire. We did have one minor firefighter injury,” Josh said, describing a laceration that required stitches. He said crews worked about 13 hours to control the blaze and estimated product loss at “just under $500,000.”

Josh and commissioners described the agencies that responded: Duchesne City and County crews, Altamont City, Midton, Bennett County Fire District (which provided foam and engines), and a unit and foam supply from Marathon refinery in Salt Lake City. County staff said Marathon’s equipment arrived after the fire had been brought largely under control but the refinery crew assessed the scene and provided technical advice.

County staff reported that foam supplies ran low during the response. Josh said the event exposed a vulnerability: the county’s foam inventory was not sufficient to shorten the burn period. He said the county will order foam to replenish stock and that bills generated by the response will initially be invoiced to Duchesne County; county staff plan to pursue reimbursement or reissue invoices to private parties responsible for the site.

County and fire officials described how tank design and firefighting tactics shaped the response. Officials said modern tanks use pressure‑relief systems that vent rather than catastrophically fail; crews credited that design with preventing catastrophic tank explosions but said the configuration meant firefighting presented unique challenges as product migrated from “manways” and backside areas of tanks.

Commissioners and staff said they will hold an interagency debrief with local and industry partners, examine communications and command coordination, and consider equipment or mutual‑aid options (including a foam‑capable tender) to improve future responses. Josh summarized: “The system worked, but it showed us where the weak link is — foam and some equipment. We’re ordering foam and will re‑evaluate capability.”

County leaders said they will get a formal incident report after the state investigation and will return to the commission with recommendations on equipment, mutual‑aid agreements and any budgetary requests.

No formal action or vote was taken by the commission at the meeting on the incident; commissioners directed staff to follow up with a report and to pursue replenishment of foam and after‑action review.","County and mutual-aid crews fought an oil‑field tank fire for about 13 hours Friday. Fire officials reported no major injuries, about $500,000 in product loss and plans to replenish foam supplies while the incident remains under investigation.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Duchesne County Commission approvals: approach permit, TRT advisory board, licenses, tax adjustments and building fee resolution

Duchesne County continues public hearing on road‑impact fees after resident complaint over damaged Smiley Road

Duchesne County officials review emergency response after large oil-field tank fire; no major injuries reported