Planning Commission Recap

Announcement by Tom Dansie:

On Tuesday, February 17, we will be having a community presentation and information session on the wild land-urban interface zone and the establishment of the wild land-urban interface boundary in Springdale. The town government is preparing to adopt the plan; but, urges the community to learn and ask questions about this plan prior to its implementation. The presentation will probably begin at 5:00 PM in the community center. Please check the Springdale website for an exact time

Once, again, the planning commission struggled to reach consensus on what defines “performance of ordinary maintenance and repair of a non-complying building” and on what constitutes "removal of a non-complying building.”

Tom Dansie recalled to the commission members a proposal he had previously suggested to adjust the setbacks in a residential neighborhood to match the most prevailing noncompliance(s) in that area. This could reduce the extent to which an owner would need to adjust the dimensions of a new or remodeled dwelling on his/her property, allowing his/her home’s setting to more closely compare with his neighbors’. However, it would lead to the creation of several new residential zones.

Tom Dansie, then presented the definition of “removal” found in Utah state law: “removal of a non-compliant building [is] when a property owner voluntarily demolishes a majority of the non-compliant structure.” He encouraged the commission to refer to this statement in restating ordinance 10-21-3.

The commission did not accept the complexity of multiple residential zones to reduce non-compliance; but, believes it should consider modification of current setbacks in the subzones VR-S, VR-A and VR-B.

The commission appeared to agree that “voluntary” is a key word in the above state law on “removal of a non-compliant building.” An owner should have permission to rebuild an entire structure, on the footprint of the original house, if the building has wide spread damage, such as from mold, termites, fire or flood. However, if an owner wishes to tear down a structure only to build something more desirable, the new structure must follow the newest ordinances.

The Commission wishes to discuss the above issue further at its next meeting.

Second on the agenda, Tom Dansie requested the Planning Commission to review a drafted set of regulations that would control and modify the redevelopment of a non-compliant commercial building. The commissioners accepted the proposed regulations.

To view the meeting: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL62JrkQ2bw>