OCR Text |
Show CASTLE VALLEY TIMES The Planning Commission added limits so that the sales and marketing were for Randy’s work only. Another FRAGRANT TIMES been prosecutedfor his present viola- condition was that noise not leave the property between the hours of 9 pm and 8 am. Quiet activities could be done at any time. Dave and Joan sug- tion. Ed. Note] Darr did not want there to be any limit on the size of any of the additional dwellings on a lot. Randy Jorgen said Darr’s proposal needs to be clarified and that the onus was on Darr to find a way that a guest gested adding the condition that “all activities permitted through this permit must be conducted so that neigh- house can‘t be used as a rental or as a way to ultimately increase the population in the valley. bors are not disturbed by noise, dust or Dennis Willigan opposed the amendmart and pointed out that over 75% of the recent survey respondents were opposed to more than one dwelling on a lot. He said it would lead to a traffic.” Randy objected to the requirement that he not disturb his neighbors, and claimed that he was being singled out. Joan listed several other instances - MAY 15, 1998 - 7 of employees with the included language. [Existing businesses with employees would not be aflectedJ PC voted unanimously to send the new draft with attorney's deletions to the TC with a favorable recommen— dation. REVIEW OF DRAFT CONTRACT FOR TEMPORARY DWELLING DECOMMISSIONING: In order to allow someone to build a their house while living in a temporary dwelling or build a replacement house, but not have multiple dwellings on a lot, a property owner where a potential noise producing conditional use had similar conditions radical change in the nature of the community, would increase the num— ber of people, noise. air pollution, and attached. increase possible aquifer damage. More for human habitation. Mayor Bruce Jack Campbell pointed out that this is primarily a residential area and businesses are a privilege within the area Priority and preference should go to the quality of the residential area The “do not disturb neighbors” clause water would be drawn and more sewage emitted. He wanted to look at the broader consequences and said this was a radical proposal. Dari responded that since 75% of the people didn’t want there to be Keeler and PC Chair Joan Sangree worked out a draft contract. The PC suggested several additions and the draft contract was passed back for more work and eventual review by the Town attorney. Proposed Hunting Ordinance: There was general agreement about need for hunting restrictions. PC worked on draft last meeting. Discus- must sign a binding contract stating that they will not use the old dwelling is an incentive for business owners to second dwellings, the problem would conduct business so that nobody is be limited to the 25% who did. disturbed. The Planning Commission recom- Hertha Wakefield made the motion that the PC recommend that the Town mended that the TC approve the Premise Occupation permit with the condi- Council reject Darr's proposal. Dave seconded the motion. Hertha Wakefield felt that Darr’s amendment was premature and was sion revolved around issue of whether to ban discharge of firearms within 600 feet of a house. It was pointed out worried about sewage and water. Rick Lamb said this wasn’t a that condition if they wanted. simple issue; it was highly contentious. Anything near a second dwelling amendment would need many condi- sending the hunting proposal to the Town Council with the special note that the TC can look into concerns of tions if it could ever work at all. the DWR and the State of Utah, if tions discussed attached. Accessory (Multiple) Dwelling Amendment (Darr Hatch): Town Council Member Darr Hatch has submitted a roposed zoning ordinance amen cut to allow an unlimited number of dwellings per lot. [Barr has been in violation of the zoning ordinance for several weeks. since he illegally moved a second dwelling onto his property without a permit to do so—this situation changes by the moment, so it will likely be difi‘erent by the next issue. ] The essential part of Darr’s amendment is that it allows additional dwellings on each lot with no restrictions except that they not be rented out or used commercially and that they conform to the Utah Building Code. Darr wants a second dwelling for his parents and for a guest house. In describing his proposal, Darr stated that he felt that multiple ' dwellings would have no impact (with our large lots). He said that he wanted the second dwelling to remain on the lot and in use even after he had sold the lot. Any subsequent owners could use it the same way. Darr said that he felt the main problem was enforcing the rules, and that if the rules were Dave Porterfield pointed out that it’s possible to add onto one’s house for parents or guests. He expressed strong support for one dwelling per lot. Joan observed that other communities had gotten into trouble permitting guest houses and “granny cottages.” Multiple dwellings can very easily lead to the subdivision of lots even if that was’t originally intended. PC Vote: Motion recommending that the Town Council reject the proposed amendment passed unanimously. Proposed Home and Premise Occupation Amendment: PC has been working with TC on revising home and premise section of the zoning ordinance. Last draft was presented to Town attorney for review. The attorney strongly urged that the sections permitting exceptions for enforced there would be no problem employees not residing on the property with his amendment. [Ifit were easy to enforce the rules, he would have be deleted. He said it would be impossible to ever set a limit on the number that the Town Council could delete PC unanimously recommended they so choose. [See article on p. 1] Animal Control 0rd: Dave Porterfield has reorganized the ordinance into categories and made it easier to work with. The ordinance basically addresses the nuisance of barking dogs, with some conditions for dogs running at large and the requirement that livestock be fenced in effectively. Hertha made the motion that the draft animal ordinance be sent to the TC for their review and any changes they’d like to make. Hertha felt that it may need more work, but would like the TC’s input at this stage. Motion passed. Building Height: Attempt to reduce house height won’t be supported by TC. Dave Porterfield is checking out other ordinances that may help with development criteria on the steeper lots. Issue tabled pending new info. —Jack Campbell |