Seven years ago, as Woods Cross officials contemplated approving the Morningside Estates subdivision, their biggest concern was whether a wall would protect homes if a passing train ignited weeds along tracks at the edge of the Silver Eagle Refinery.

The minutes from an August 2002 Planning Commission meeting refer to "some discussion" on other issues: "flare tower noise," light from a burn-off flame and "the safety of the subdivision being located so close to a refinery."

But those concerns were brushed aside based on a safety study conducted by Psomas Engineering for the developer. That study, the minutes note, said homes could be built as close as 175 feet from the refinery without "any encroachment into the subdivision if a potential problem happened."

For reasons that are unclear, the study looked only at a refinery tank fire -- not an event like the processing unit explosion that reverberated through the neighborhood with destructive force on Nov. 4.

There is no mention, either, in those minutes of an earlier report -- one completed in October 2001 for the city by REDD Engineering & Construction Inc. -- that recommended a buffer zone four to five times bigger to shield residents from any mishaps at the refinery.

The conflicting reports are among documents safety officials are reviewing as they investigate the November explosion, which damaged more than 100 homes in the subdivision. Safety officials say it was a "miracle" no one was injured or killed.

Among the questions the U.S. Chemical Safety Board hopes to answer: Why did the city allow the homes to be built so close to the refinery and what distances should there be to prevent the kind of damage that occurred?

"By understanding what happened, we'll formulate preventative measures so this kind of thing doesn't happen again" not only here but in other places, said Don Holmstrom, lead investigator.

Woods Cross City Manager Gary Uresk said the minutes don't reflect the depth of discussions that took place. City officials, he said, relied on "all the facts, what we could enforce and what we could make a property owner do" -- not just the Psomas report.

In the end, the city had little choice but to allow the subdivision given zoning standards then in place, property rights and its limited regulatory authority, he said.

"We could only go with what we had," said Uresk, who held the same post at the time the development was approved.

Back in January, after a fire at the refinery required evacuation of the Morningside neighborhood, Uresk defended the city's decision to allow homes so close by, according to Woods Cross City Council minutes. He referred to Psomas' "very detailed report" and said city officials felt "comfortable" approving the project based on it.

Lowry Redd, owner of REDD Engineering, agrees the city was stuck between the property owner's rights and guidelines that went farther than existing safety codes.

"From a high level, this incident points out the fact that society isn't very clear yet [about] who is responsible for making some of these decisions," said Redd, pointing to problems not just with housing near refineries and chemical plants but also on sliding slopes and in flood zones.

In Woods Cross, the two safety reports came up with differing buffer zones between the proposed homes, the existing oil refinery and a pipeline tank farm because they relied on different standards in their evaluations.

Notably absent in the discussion that took place nearly eight years ago: The refinery.

"They were fairly quiet," Uresk acknowledges. "We were a little frustrated there wasn't any discussion."

The REDD study used HUD recommendations for housing projects near hazardous facilities. It noted that while the guidelines were required for federally funded projects, HUD suggested they could be used by anyone "concerned with the safe siting of a new residential development."

REDD said the "acceptable safety distance" between the plants and the homes ranged from 760 feet to 825 feet; the shorter distance was acceptable in combination with a 20-feet berm or barrier wall.

The most damaged home is 420 feet from where the pipe burst on Nov. 4, according to the Chemical Safety Board's investigation. The farthest damage -- a broken window -- occurred half a mile away.

Woods Cross Mayor Kent Parry, who was not in office when the subdivision was approved, said the guidelines in the REDD report would have eliminated 18 to 24 homes from the subdivision.

The Psomas report, done for developer Marv Blosch of B&G LLC, noted that following the HUD guidelines would create "an enormous burden for the landowner." Because the city had already permitted development within that safety zone, it faced a dual predicament: potential claims for damage caused by fire or explosion or claims from denying an owner use of his property.

The Psomas report's conclusions relied largely on a single erroneous statement: That the Silver Eagle Refinery was "merely a storage facility" and the company had no plans to refine fuel at the site. The U.S. Chemical Safety Board is examining those claims.

The claim was repeated several times as Psomas dismissed the need to comply with the federal Clean Air Act and other standards.

It referenced, for example, the American Petroleum Institute's recommendation that "consideration should be given to the nature of adjacent property and its location relative to the refinery" given potential mishaps. But Psomas said the institute offered no safety zone guidance and the issue was "not particularly relevant" because the refinery wasn't operating.

It applied International Fire Code standards, which said 175 feet was adequate to safeguard residents from fires.

Using HUD guidelines was inappropriate, the Psomas report said, because the project was not federally financed and the city had not adopted HUD standards.

Psomas said the city could have adopted more restrictive codes but had not done so.

"To do so now would be a 'taking' of portions of the Morningside Estates property," the Psomas report warned.

Holmstrom said it is also puzzling that both reports looked only at safety issues surrounding tank-related fires and explosions -- not the plant's processing units, which would have included its pipe infrastructure, nor the plant's emissions.

Redd agreed that not all potential impacts were addressed in either report. "We weren't hired to go any further than we had gone," Redd said. "We showed the heat from fire incidents, and we analyzed one case of overpressure. But we did not look at all cases of overpressure or toxic releases or shrapnel from an explosion."

By the time the Planning Commission approved the subdivision, the developer had agreed to build a 14-foot berm or concrete wall along the west boundary of the subdivision; the resulting wall stands at 20 feet, according to the city. Both Parry and Uresk credit that wall with preventing greater damage.

brooke@sltrib.com