| OCR Text |
Show Should Bountiful Council "Look The Other Way?5' By GARY BLODGETT ltjfl News Editor BOUNTIFUL -- When, if ever, should jty fathers "look the other way?" S THIS WAS a burning question facing jountiful City Council last Wednesday cht They wanted to help a couple in a "zoning problem, but didn't know how to proach the situation without taking im-,roper im-,roper action. i all started when Mr. and Mrs. Sam loss 470 E. 400 North, appealed to the city 3 ora'rezoning that would allow their single-ctamily single-ctamily home to be used as an apartment in ulr'jte basement. For several years, Mr. and ditiurs Ross have rented the unit to student eachers and more recently to LDS mis-iiunaries. mis-iiunaries. 7HE HOME, however, is located in a b Jrjct of the city which has been designed desig-ned for single-family dwellings only. The ordinance restricts renting of a home or any fjlirtof abuilding to anyone other than blood initiatives. X'j But in the situation of the Rosses, accord--jto neighbors who attended the city coun-iimeeting, coun-iimeeting, no one has objected to the home 1 1 ;ing rented. Li EyIT'S A big home," Mr. Ross-told the ouncil, "large enough that 12 children iere raised in it. Now there are only my :fe and myself." The council considered allowing the :m to be used as an apartment under 'conditional use" of the ordinance. But in atzone, apartments are not allowed even lender conditional use. . k A I THUS, TO accommodate the Rosses, the uracil would have to revise the ordinance which in effect would revise the entire strict of between 200 and 300 homes. I'This could open a can of worms," com-cnted com-cnted Councilman Bob Linnell. "Such a vision would allow two-family dwellings lywhere in the district." DOES THIS mean that duplexes could spring up in a single-family zone? Or families fami-lies could convert their homes to accommodate accommo-date basement apartments? It could, the council agreed. Except there is a possibility that restrictions could be applied ap-plied to the revised ordinance and under the conditional use provision each request for construction or remodeling as well as use of a structure must be approved by the Planning Plan-ning Commission and City Council. THUS, NO one could change the exterior appearance of their home, add to their home, or build a separate structure for multiple-family use without approval from the Commission. The council decided to send the proposal back to the Planning Commission for further furth-er study - but only after a few "tongue in cheek" remarks. COUNCILMAN Paul Allen suggested that the proposal be tabled "indefinitely, or until November, 1989." Councilman J. Dean Hill noted that the Missionaries actually are "brothers" and maybe that would qualify them for living in the apartment. MAYOR DEAN S. Stahle then commented, com-mented, "maybe if we delay it (ordinance) long enough, it will get lost in the shuffle." Neighbors of Mr. and Mrs. Ross applauded. ap-plauded. Throughout the public hearing they had spoke favorably about the arrangement. arrange-ment. "THE HOME doesn't have the appearance appear-ance of a duplex and there is no additional traffic because of them," said one neighbor. Another asked the council to ' 'let them continue con-tinue what they have been doing and just look the other way." Attorney Layne B. Forbes emphasized that the council can not knowingly "look the other way" or ignore someone in violation viola-tion of a city ordinance." He said the only alternative would be to revise the ordinance to allow for two-family dwellings as a conditional condi-tional use in the district - but that would open up the entire district to possible'use of apartments in homes. |
