[{"_1":2,"_95":-5,"_96":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,85],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6614602,"mediaKeyId","3383083-d61daf23a152410d4e55f9de0ae496a0","parentId",3383083,"title","Planning commission continues RV campground review; commission and owner discuss 90‑day rule and possible ordinance changes","audioSeconds",1550,"startMs",4014000,"endMs",5564000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3383083-d61daf23a152410d4e55f9de0ae496a0&start=4014&end=5564","thumbnailUrl","https://d352y6ypj4mjo3.cloudfront.net/AudioPlaceholder.png","articleUrl","/articles/6614602/Utah/Planning-commission-continues-RV-campground-review-commission-and-owner-discuss-90day-rule-and-possible-ordinance-changes","mediaUrl","author","Willard Planning Commission","date","2025-03-06T18:30:00Z","article","The Willard City Planning Commission continued review March 6 of a conditional use permit issued Feb. 7, 2020 to Marvin Neff for an RV campground at 769 North Main.

Neff and representatives argued the campground has operated in compliance with its conditional use permit since 2020 and asked the commission to accept that compliance, to consider amending the existing permit to reflect current operations, or to pursue ordinance changes to accommodate the site’s current model. \"We have been in strict compliance with our conditional use permit,\" a representative for the campground told the commission.

Background and concerns: Commissioners and staff recalled that the campground site had produced public‑safety and nuisance problems under earlier ownership and that the current owner tightened permit conditions when he acquired the property. After concerns surfaced about the potential for long‑term residents, the city adopted a stricter ordinance that includes a 90‑day limit per site in a 365‑day period. At the hearing, the owner and multiple commissioners said the current operation has not produced the problems that occurred previously and that operations today appear to be well managed.

Key points of discussion:
- Compliance and enforcement: The owner said he has addressed past concerns and provided documentation and police input suggesting problems have declined since 2020. Several commissioners asked staff and the police whether the property is being adequately policed and whether the current conditions give the city sufficient enforcement tools if problems reappear.
- 90‑day limit: Commissioners debated whether the city’s 90‑day maximum stay per site is the appropriate limit, noting that some users treat the campground as a semi‑permanent home base but move regularly. The owner suggested the conditions the city could place on longer stays (background checks, police notification, or other safeguards) may be more effective than a strict time cap.
- Protection against future changes in ownership: Commissioners said they want to avoid a return to the prior problematic operating model if the campground changes hands. Several commissioners proposed amending the permit or the ordinance so the current conditions — including maintenance, background checks and eviction authority — are explicit and enforceable if ownership changes.
- Legal and procedural questions: City staff and legal counsel said they would need to review whether the existing conditional use permit or the newer ordinance controls and whether changes would apply prospectively or to existing permits. One official recused themself from a portion of the discussion because of a prior involvement with the property.

Outcome and next steps: Commissioners did not take a final action at the March 6 meeting. They asked staff to provide a more detailed legal analysis and recommended a work session with council members and staff to determine whether to amend the CUP for this property, update the campground ordinance citywide, or both. Several commissioners asked the owner to propose, in writing, the permit conditions he believes should remain in place so staff and council can evaluate whether to codify those elements.

Ending: Commissioners said they appreciate the current owner’s efforts to maintain the site and emphasized the city’s interest in written, enforceable criteria to prevent future declines in operation should the property change ownership.","mediaType","Audio","parentTitle","Planning Commission Meeting - PC 03-06-2025 Part 1","oneSentenceSummary","The Willard City Planning Commission continued March 6 a review of the conditional use permit for the RV campground at 769 North Main, hearing from owner representatives who said the campground has complied with permit conditions and asking staff to study whether to amend the CUP or the city’s campground ordinance.","taxTitle","Willard, Box Elder County, Utah","taxId",79998,"location","Utah","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":50,"_51":82,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":83,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":84,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6614607,"Planning commission recommends MPZ amendments to city council, changes 'shall' to 'should' on minimum lot size",1167,2811000,3978000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3383083-d61daf23a152410d4e55f9de0ae496a0&start=2811&end=3978","/articles/6614607/Utah/Planning-commission-recommends-MPZ-amendments-to-city-council-changes-shall-to-should-on-minimum-lot-size","The Willard City Planning Commission held a public hearing Thursday, March 6, 2025, on proposed amendments to the Master Plan Community (MPZ) zoning chapter and voted to forward the revisions to city council with an administrative change requested by the commission.

City planning staff described the amendments as clarifications to tie the MPZ language directly to the city's general plan, standardize appraisal and valuation for fees‑in‑lieu of open space, and align MPZ procedures with other subdivision and zoning processes. \"The changes to the MPZ zone just tie it in a more clear way right in the MPZ to the rest of our code,\" a city staff presenter said during the hearing.

Why it matters: The MPZ provides developers flexibility in exchange for public benefits such as open space or infrastructure. Commissioners debated how prescriptive the code should be on lot sizes, density and the way the city measures benefits. Several commissioners said they support MPZ flexibility but want clearer, measurable benefits for the city.

Discussion highlights: Commissioners and members of the public discussed minimum lot size language in section 24‑24‑050, which currently sets a minimum lot size of 14,500 square feet (roughly one‑third of an acre) as a guide. Several commissioners proposed using \"should\" rather than \"shall\" in that provision to keep the MPZ flexible and preserve the commission’s ability to approve creative site designs with smaller lots offset by greater open space or other public benefits.

City attorney and staff explained that the MPZ rezone process remains a legislative decision for city council; commission recommendations are advisory. During the hearing, staff also noted other changes: clarifying which general‑plan policies MPZ proposals must meet, defining the appraisal process for fee‑in‑lieu valuations, and standardizing pre‑application and review steps to match the rest of city code.

Outcome: A commissioner moved to recommend the amendments to city council with the discussed edits — most notably changing the minimum‑lot sentence from \"shall\" to \"should\" — and to forward administrative corrections noted by commissioners. The motion passed unanimously; the commission did not adopt the amendments as ordinance language but recommended the package, with edits, for council consideration.

Next steps: Staff will incorporate the commission's edits and administrative corrections and forward the amended ordinance language and staff report to city council for a legislative decision. If council approves, MPZ language will be updated in the municipal code.

Ending: Commissioners asked staff to add clearer, measurable language about benefits to the city so future MPZ proposals show how they meet the general plan and provide enforceable public benefits rather than relying on subjective claims.","Willard planning commissioners held a public hearing March 6 on proposed amendments to the Master Plan Community (MPZ) zone to align the code with the general plan, clarify valuation for fees‑in‑lieu and standardize process steps, and they voted to recommend the edited package to city council.",{"_33":86,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":87,"_41":88,"_43":89,"_45":90,"_47":91,"_49":50,"_51":92,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":93,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":94,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6614613,"Developer previews Canyon Bay subdivision, proposes 3.5‑acre agricultural easement and MPC rezone",2287,388000,2675000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3383083-d61daf23a152410d4e55f9de0ae496a0&start=388&end=2675","/articles/6614613/Utah/Developer-previews-Canyon-Bay-subdivision-proposes-35acre-agricultural-easement-and-MPC-rezone","Kyle White, a representative of Western Land Development, presented a pre-application review of the Canyon Bay subdivision to the Willard City Planning Commission on Thursday, March 6, 2025.

White said the roughly 25-acre project, located near 600 South and 200 West immediately north of Deer Run, is intended as a transitional development that moves from higher-density housing adjacent to Deer Run to larger lots and significant open space as it extends north and west. \"The open space is a big focus for this project,\" White said, describing a central agricultural parcel he said the developer intends to protect with a conservation easement.

The proposal calls for a mix of lot sizes with the smallest lots about 6,000 square feet and an average lot size around 8,000 square feet, White said, with setbacks of 25 feet in front, 15 feet in the rear and 10 feet on each side. He said about 63 of the planned 84 lots would have direct visibility to open space and that the central parcel — roughly 3.5 acres — would be dedicated under an agricultural conservation easement to preserve farmland, views and a rural character.

Why it matters: Commissioners and residents have expressed continuing concern about how Willard transitions from higher-density subdivisions such as Deer Run into lower-density areas. The developer framed the project as a way to blend densities without creating the uninterrupted rows of houses some residents oppose, while still allowing relatively smaller lots near the existing dense area.

Commission questions and developer responses focused on timing, infrastructure and maintenance. White said the developer expects to build infrastructure concurrent with nearby projects and estimated infrastructure work could be ready in roughly 9–12 months if approvals move quickly, with home construction and sales taking another roughly 24 months after that. He acknowledged the project depends on critical sewer and road infrastructure and said part of the project timing would align with work in Deer Run and the Orchards at Willard. \"Some of the infrastructure would be done in tandem with that,\" White said.

Commissioners pressed who would maintain the proposed open space. White said the developer planned to work with land trusts and pursue grant programs — possibly including USDA programs — to facilitate a conservation easement and that parcels could remain in private ownership with easement restrictions or be transferred to a land trust. City staff and commissioners raised concerns about long‑term maintenance costs for large grassy parks and asked whether the city would want ownership or whether leasing arrangements or minimal-maintenance amenities would be preferable.

Commissioners and staff also asked about homeowners associations and operating models. White said the developer preferred to avoid an HOA if the city could assume maintenance responsibility, but that alternatives could be finalized between preliminary and final plan review. The project team and staff indicated they would add more detailed management proposals as the plan moves toward a public hearing.

Next steps: Planning staff said the applicant will submit a revised preliminary plat and the project is likely to be scheduled for a public hearing at a future planning commission meeting pending completeness of materials. Staff noted that changes following the commission’s feedback could push the hearing one or two meetings later to allow the required review time.

Details and clarifications from the meeting: the site was described as roughly 25 acres; the central agricultural easement about 3.5 acres; smallest lots about 6,000 sq ft, average near 8,000 sq ft; setbacks 25/15/10 (front/rear/side). The developer identified the property as immediately north of Deer Run and adjacent to planned roads that would connect with the Orchards preliminary plan; sewer connection depends on upstream infrastructure, which the developer said they would either coordinate or construct as part of an approval agreement.

The commission did not take a formal vote on the rezone at this meeting; staff and the applicant will return with a formal application packet for a public hearing.

Ending: The commission encouraged revisions to lower the overall density somewhat in the southern portion adjacent to Deer Run, to expand or better define management of the open space, and to provide a clearer phasing and infrastructure plan. Staff requested any revisions be submitted in time for packet preparation so the rezone and preliminary plat can be noticed for a future public hearing.","Western Land Development presented a pre-application review March 6 for a 25-acre Canyon Bay subdivision at 600 South and 200 West, proposing a Master Plan Community (MPC) rezone, 3.5 acres of permanently protected agricultural open space, trail connections and smaller lots that transition density away from adjacent Deer Run.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning commission continues RV campground review; commission and owner discuss 90‑day rule and possible ordinance changes

Planning commission recommends MPZ amendments to city council, changes 'shall' to 'should' on minimum lot size

Developer previews Canyon Bay subdivision, proposes 3.5‑acre agricultural easement and MPC rezone