Planning Commission

P a g e 1 144 I. Call to Order: The Planning Commission of the City of Athens, Alabama was called to order by Gina Garth, Chairman, at 5:45 p.m. on February 21, 2017. II. Roll Call. Members present: Members Abscnt: Gina Garth, Chairman Rick Johnson, Vice Chairman Jerold Blaxton Rod Huffman Venard Hendrix Chief Brian Thornton Councilman Harold Wales Robert Malone Mayor Ronnie Marks Also present: Mac Martin, City Planner James Rich, Secretary APPROVAL OF MINUTES: III. Resolution. The Chairman called for a motion to accept the proposed minutes from the January 24, 2016 meeting as presented. Mr. Blaxton offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: "BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATHENS, ALABAMA, to approve the minutes of the meeting of January 24, 2017 meeting as corrected." Mr. Huffman seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous of the voting members present. NEW BUSINESS SUBDIVISIONS IV. Public Hearing. Request of Lynn Persell for Approval of a Certificate to Subdivide 0.03 acres of property located 21719 Silver Oaks Cir. (Lot 13) in the R-1-1 Single Family Residential District. Public Comment: Mr. Martin stated that the certificate to subdivide and the following certificate to consolidate had been reviewed by the City. He said the purpose of the certificates was to shift a property boundary between the subject lots to the east to allow for the home on Lot 14 to have the required 10ft side yard setback. With no additional comments, the public hearing was closed. V. Resolution Mr. Huffman offered the following resolution and moved for its adoption: "BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATHENS, ALABAMA to Grant the request of Lynn Persell for Approval of a Certificate to Subdivide 0.03 acres of  P a g e I 145 property located 21719 Silver Oaks Cir. (Lot 13) in the R-1-1 Single Family Residential District. ' Mr. Malone seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous of the voting members present. VI. Resolution Mr. Huffman offered the following resolution and moved for its adoption: "BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATHENS, ALABAMA to Grant the request of Zachary Mucci for Approval of a Certificate to Consolidate 0.03 acres of property located 21733 Silver Oaks Cir. (Lot 14) in the R-1-1 Single Family Residential District." Mr. Marks seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous of the voting members present. CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATIONS VII. Public Hearing: Request of Billy Sickler for Approval of a Conditional Use application to operate an animal crematorium at 1500 US Hwy 72 West in the B-2 General Business District. Public Comment: Mr. Martin made a report to the Commission regarding the proposed use. In it, he stated the following: Defining the Use Animal crematoriums are classified differently from solid waste incinerators, which would not be permitted in the B-2 Zone. This classification is informed by the EPA. "EPA has determined that the human body should not be labeled or considered 'solid waste.' Therefore, human crematories are not solid waste combustion units, and are not a subcategory of OSWI for regulation." Animal crematories are also excluded from this rule." -EPA Website Therefore, crematoriums (pet and human) should be treated as a different use classification unto itself. Observations in the Field Staff visited the animal crematorium presently located at 15707 Quinn Rd on February 16, 2017 at 1PM. We witnessed the various phases of the cremation process. We made the following observations with all 4 units on site in operation at the conclusion of our visit: • There was no perceptible odor specifically coming from the incineration units. • There was no visible particulate matter being expelled from the vents. Heat from the units was reflected in the sunlight. • The noise from the units perceived outside of the facility seemed to be equivalent to a commercial HVAC unit. • There was no vibration felt outside of the facility. • There was no dust produced that escaped the facility throughout the cremation process. • Animals were stored in freezers until cremation. • The facility was exceptionally clean- free of debris and garbage. • The only inorganic material incinerated with the animals was the plastic bag each was individually contained in. The animals arrived from vet offices in these bags.  P a g e 1 146 • Medical waste (needles, etc.) were removed from the animal and deposited in a separate marked receptacle for pickup by a medical waste disposal service. • Each incinerator had a filtration system by which the air within the chamber was burned at a high temperature by an "after-burner" and forces through the bottom of the unit before proceeding through the vent. In short, we witnessed no perceptible evidence of noxious impacts. There were some items of discussion with the owner as to the operation at the proposed location on US 72. The owner made the following statements . . . • The business would add a fifth unit at the new location. The owner could not predict the growth of the business (i.e. how many units could occupy the building in the future). • They need to be able to operate at some degree 24/7. The owner mentioned the need to be on call and help a customer in the event their pet passes away during the night. The facility would need to be able to operate to cremate the pet so there is no storage required of the facility or the owner until normal business hours. • There is currently no contract to take municipal or county animal waste. All animals cremated at the facility are individually owned, or are transported from vet clinic. • Animals are cremated individually or in groups. Individual animal ashes are returned to owners in heat sealed bags within urns. Ashes from group cremation are scattered on his property. • The facility will handle small animals only. • The facility will take up the front 1/3 to 112 of the building. The rear portion of the building will be considered for a different use at a later point in time. Considering the facts of the case, material presented to the City by the ownerI operator, observations in the field, and discussions with the owner/operator, the City recommends in favor of granting the request of Mr. Sickler to locate a pet crematorium at 1500 US Hwy 72 West with the following conditions: 1. That the operation applies for and receives air permits on each machine from ADEM in order to ensure that the emissions from the facility (particularly with the incineration of the plastic bags housing the animals on arrival) are not above limits prescribed by law and harmful to the surrounding neighborhood. However, if ADEM states that no air permit is needed for the units operated at this business, the owner/ operator shall forward said communication to the City Planner prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 2. Any and all ashes not retrieved by customers are either bagged and disposed of through City sanitation services or transported to a location outside of the city limits in a fully enclosed container. 3 . Additional approval by the Planning Commission will be required for an expansion beyond eight (8) cremation units to ensure that what impacts the facility does have on surrounding properties is not magnified to the point of being noxious. 4 . The facility may be able to operate up to two (2) units past normal business hours of 8 AM to 5 PM for emergency cremations for individual customers. Group cremations shall occur during the normal business hours mentioned herein.  P a g e 1147 s. The business shall not engage in the incineration of municipal or county animal waste, such as "road kill". All animals cremated at the facility must either be pets delivered by individual customers, or from an animal hospital, vet, or pound. 6. The business shall not engage in the cremation of animals greater than 250 lbs. 7· All animals delivered to the facility must be transported from the delivering vehicles to cold storage or the cremation units entirely within the enclosure of the building. 8. The facility shall operate in a clean and tidy manner. 9 . The conditional use approval is subject to revocation by the Planning Commission upon its finding that any of the above conditions have been violated, its finding of any violation of federal, state, or local laws/regulations in connection with the conditional use, and/or a change in the zoning ordinance that is applicable to the zoning laws concerning conditional uses that would prevent, limit or otherwise restrict this use. 10. City officials may visit the property from time to time, upon reasonable advance notice, to review and audit compliance with these conditions. The floor was opened to individuals wishing to address the Commission: Robert Pittman- Owner of vet practice at 1701 US Hwy 72 E. Said his practice needed a service like this since they stopped doing cremations at their facility. Recommend approval for PAWS to operate. Stated that it was a very clean and professional operation. Billy Sickler - Applicant Thanked the Commission for considering his case. Been in operation for 9 years. Utilizes Matthews Cremation units. Company has specialized in manufacturing this equipment for 50 years with over sooo installations. Applicant currently operates 4 Matthews units at the present facility. Have had a desire to move to the City, and into this property in particular. Saw the building sitting empty and deteriorating and decided to purchase it to fix up to latest codes and operate PAWS there. The location would allow for PAWS to have more visibility and be easier to navigate to for customer base. Mr. Sickler spoke about an incident involving a personal confrontation with trespassers on the property operating a meth lab. Said having a business occupying the building would make things much better for the property and surrounding neighborhood. Ernie Cuzacts- Sales rep. from Matthews, manufacturer of the cremation units used by PAWS Memorial. Stated that all Matthews machines have been tested and approved to rigorous environmental standards across the country. The machines operating at PAWS have been approved by the EPA and Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) for operating with emission less than o.o8 ppm. He said the machines actually put out just under half that acceptable amount. He said that the machines have a filtration system that includes an afterburner, ensuring that the air within the machine is cooked twice at 1600 degrees and filtered through chambers to extract gasses and particles out of the emissions. The machines do not produce odor and the noise is not perceptible 100 ft away. The machines have safety mechanisms that shut them off if emissions/smoke are detected leaving the filtration system. Studies have concluded that the machines give off less emissions that cars and diesel trucks. Jason Black- District 3 County Commission Representative Stated that he visited the current PAWS facility many times and had no concerns about pollution or other impacts. He said that he owned property close to the proposed site and felt that values would increase in the area. He also said he supports the investment in the  P a g e [ 148 neighborhood the business would bring. He conceded that he did not live next to the site, just owned property. Randy Miles- Next door neighbor on Quinn Rd. Stated he has lived next to the Sicklers for the entire 9 years the facility has been in operation and has never had a problem. Lisa Albritton- Employee of the business Stated that the business operates with the highest standards of care in mind as it relates to both their customers and neighbors. Ricky Smith- 27168 Vivian Dr. Has known the Sicklers for a long time and spoke favorably on their business practices. Billy King - 1425 12th St Lives close to the facility. Stated he was opposed to the business, claiming it would lower property values, create harmful fumes and particulate matter. He presented 3 studies conducted in British Columbia that he said spoke to the harm of having animal crematoriums in neighborhoods. He also stated that not everyone within 500ft of the proposed site was notified. He also said that noise would be a concern. He said that the increase in machines and pets cremated would increase the problems. He said he didn't believe there had been enough independent testing to ensure no problems would present themselves and he was not convinced by his tour of the facility that they neighborhood had all of the answers. He said there were too many unknowns for the business to be approved. Mr. Martin stated that he did receive inquiries from property owners that received the letter, one from as far away as California. He said Mr. Sickler included the list of property owners he mailed notice to. He also said it was possible some properties changed ownership since the data used were published by the County. The City has 2015 parcel data it uses. Will Woodruff- Christine St Questioned why PAWS would move into the City when his current location did not present problems. He said the City shouldn't allow the business based on money. He said the Commission should deny the request because of pollution concerns, and that other businesses could locate there that would be less offensive. Ms. McLin- 1702 Brownsferry St. Asked if any soil samples had been collected on the proposed site or the site where PAWS currently operates. She felt that the soil needed to be tested and cited concerns with groundwater pollution. Mr. Huffman responded that the Commission would consider a condition requiring Mr. Sickler to dispose of ash off-site. Michael Griffith - Resident of Schilling St. neighborhood Shared concerns of particulate matter being emitted over time. Questioned the rate loading of the particulates and if there was a study to conclude what total emissions would be over a 20 year period. He said that since pets are receiving treatments for diseases, he questions the amount of chemical load over time released into the atmosphere. He also stated that he was concerned about lower property values. Valerie Peoples- 1403 Brownsferry St.  P a g e Jl49 Said she would live closer to the business than anyone and is concerned about pollution. She said a petition had gone around and virtually the entire neighborhood was not against his business, just it locating in their neighborhood. She also questioned why work had already begun. Mr. Martin stated that the only work the City was aware of and had approved was the owner's cleaning of the building, removing existing walls and flooring, and temporarily storing cotton seed in one of the outbuildings. Mr. Sickler confirmed that was all that was going on at the building and the City's Building and Fire Departments were aware. The following members of the audience also spoke with objections to the business locating at the proposed site with concerns about pollution, property values, and other potential impacts: Cathy Evans 215 Gordon Dr. - Kathrine Bradley - Brownsferry St. Rev. Tina Swann Branch 1108 Hine St. - Lee Matthews 1300 Plainview Cir - Sue Harris 1416 12th St - David Malone 1300 Summerset Dr - Joice Pryor- 1204 Brownsferry St With no additional comments, the public hearing was closed. The Commission discussed what the proper next steps may be to address concerns. Mr. Martin stated that the City already had written statements from ADEM stating that the agency had no issues with the machines if they were properly operated. Mr. Blaxton asked Mr. Sickler if he could say how many cremations they do and how long they take. Mr. Sickler stated that the machines process at a rate of 75 lbs per hour. He said that PAWS cremated 569 pets the previous month, with 316 being private cremations (1 pet). VIII. Resolution Mr. Hendrix offered the following resolution and moved for its adoption: "BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CI1Y OF ATHENS, ALABAMA to postpone decision on the application for Mr. Sickler's conditional use until the March meeting to allow for more information to be gathered and adequate testing to be done if necessary." Mr. Huffman seconded the motion There was some discussion about who would do testing or what agency would be qualified to speak on the matter. Mr. Hendrix indicated that ADEM was the agency he had in mind. The vote then took place and was unanimous. SITE PLANS. IX. Discussion. Mr. Martin presented a site plan for the proposed Athens-Limestone Garden Outdoor Classroom, a proposed park space to be located south of the main library on Jefferson Street. He stated the City had reviewed the plan and had no issues. He said it  P a g e 1150 required Planning Commission approval since it was to be a public park space, citing Sec. 11-52-11 of the Code of Alabama. X. Resolution. Mr. Marks offered the following resolution and moved for its adoption: "BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATHENS, ALABAMA to approve a site plan for the Athens-Limestone Garden Outdoor Classroom, to be located on property just south of the parking area for the Athens­ Limestone Library on Jefferson Street. Mr. Malone seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous of the voting members present. XI. Discussion. Mr. Martin presented a site plan for the expansion of the Athens-Limestone E911 facility on Elm Street. The addition proposed would house a conference room and additional office space. He stated the City had reviewed the plan and had no issues. He said it required Planning Commission approval since it was an improvement to a government (public) building, citing Sec. 11-52-11 of the Code of Alabama. XII. Resolution. Mr. Malone offered the following resolution and moved for its adoption: "BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATHENS, ALABAMA to approve the revised report to the City Council regarding the proposed Zoning Ordinance and recommend its approval. Mr. Marks seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous of the voting members present. XIII. Adjournment: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. tf!!�o 4·frd �sti�