[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-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",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6133436,"mediaKeyId","5703125-890c8c96c1474392470323226beec730","parentId",5703125,"title","Commission reviews 25% rear-yard hard-surface limit, considers raising cap and adding drainage rules","audioSeconds",367,"startMs",4117000,"endMs",4484000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5703125-890c8c96c1474392470323226beec730&start=4117&end=4484","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5703125-890c8c96c1474392470323226beec730/thumbnail_4117000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6133436/Utah/Commission-reviews-25-rear-yard-hard-surface-limit-considers-raising-cap-and-adding-drainage-rules","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6133436-57f4eb04391ed99713b4b0ceaeb4ce8e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770298770&Signature=lvSCBkNA3abJhsV9w3HGzSNioH-YH7jilXYW0TaHvkqxMleYnCWvt7hydH6WfTQiok~GgsJnsjLuX2mMkxXFX6Hui08gQoSEYK-Ojme0h737rXLd2jYDKuGWVY-l7CHOrPQvBozSmCcMFox5-fEMMTZHeMfwUBgGsNrtbXMdpzS~bE2QXHZVthg8tKkZmqk6w5AZ~XDMU4oUgq0aFPoLTllCSSI8Pq-VkX13FXXYJBxRT3wPMN395YyiMhvyX4cYUHjFocjyOEjJqwHa2qy8UNs37zs-3kmX6DorsX7LmIOI7tbQ6Wiq746ZjxfmtsDOuz9lNbXHSWRyQyUrXweleQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Fruit Heights City","date","2025-08-27T14:41:58Z","article","The planning commission reviewed an older ordinance that limits hard surfacing in rear yards to no more than 25 percent and discussed whether the cap should be increased for smaller lots or adjusted by slope.

\"25. No more than 25% of the rear property,\" Speaker 1 read from the current language. Commissioners noted the rule may have been written when lots were larger and that modern development patterns and accessory uses (patios, sport courts, pool footprints) make the provision harder to apply consistently.

Commissioners discussed model approaches used in other cities: Centerville, for example, ties allowable hard-surface coverage to lot slope and ranges \"anywhere between 40 to 60% based on the slope of the lot,\" Speaker 1 said, citing the research he pulled. Commissioners also raised the need for stand-alone drainage requirements so that large areas of new concrete or pavers do not send groundwater or surface runoff onto downslope neighbors.

\"We need it to be broad enough to find that if someone does get ransacked by groundwater coming down slope from them,\" Speaker 5 said, noting the pool ordinance currently contains language requiring proper groundwater management but that the rule does not apply to non-pool hardscaping. Commissioners asked staff to draft options for modifying the 25% cap (including slope-based alternatives) and to add clear, general drainage and runoff requirements applicable to large hard-surface installations.

No change to the ordinance was adopted at the meeting; staff will return with draft revisions for further discussion.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Planning Commission Meeting 8.26.25","oneSentenceSummary","Commissioners reviewed the city's 25% rear-yard impervious-surface limit, discussed potential increases tied to lot slope, and urged broader, standalone drainage language so groundwater and runoff are managed when homeowners install large patios, pools or hardscaping.","taxTitle","Fruit Heights Planning Commission, Fruit Heights, Davis County, Utah","taxId",21253,"location","Utah","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6133440,"Commission considers 11 p.m. curfew, fixture limits for backyard sports-court lighting after resident complaints",537,2707000,3244000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5703125-890c8c96c1474392470323226beec730&start=2707&end=3244","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5703125-890c8c96c1474392470323226beec730/thumbnail_2707000.jpg","/articles/6133440/Utah/Commission-considers-11-pm-curfew-fixture-limits-for-backyard-sports-court-lighting-after-resident-complaints","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6133440-bc6d2e747db33c95dcfb4991a8f3a5e2/orig.mp4?Expires=1770298770&Signature=fxYiRE5C~5pW8ziOEzwA9XjORvd9wg4kvopfSyYh6hcg-RGQPokkmNv4nqhm5wGIhQcH8klD-QBWpRHy-35QvGFXExe7xGds3aO6F5qJqmEkYEO85Rrpoh-4c7Y0HiESDvuhO8s6RF~mwOWzBMv5yxAvMQLZYYXK5Bk3f8FKOLBQFKAAmJQsJOd32vRvq20e7Svwe1mVvEChFFz0sd876os3SPFri0k6AZD-qCE9DN01gKg74V6578l4Jpcew-G82rguo8eUgjCgIcY6YXf8J6mTdYgUzMuRYnAHz~8PDvzXWUdVnl0Q2rspD02hxNgbOL8Fcm3RgrckjYHf-0BPYQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Fruit Heights planning commissioners spent substantial time reviewing complaints about backyard sports courts — primarily pickleball — and associated lighting and noise. Residents and commissioners said neighbors have reported bright lights and late-night play that disturbs bedrooms.

\"I've had multiple calls from different residents now that there's all these pickle balls, floors, tours... where the light lights up the whole walk or lights up 3 or 4 meters houses at the same time,\" Speaker 5, City planner, told the commission. Commissioners reviewed model language used by other Utah cities and discussed several regulatory approaches, including requiring fixtures that direct light only onto the property, limiting pole heights, and imposing an evening cutoff for court lighting.

Many commissioners favored an explicit curfew: several suggested 11 p.m. as a reasonable time to require lights be turned off. \"But 11 seems reasonable as part of the time,\" Speaker 2, Planning Commission member, said. Commissioners also discussed enforcement options; staff noted that law enforcement or code enforcement responses are possible when neighbors report violations.

The commission reviewed a noise summary presented by a member of the commission who referenced published measures that indicate pickleball can produce approximately \"70 decibels at a 100 foot distance,\" which is louder than typical tennis play and above many outdoor decibel thresholds. \"Compared to other sports courts, pickleball produces sounds at a louder level, approximately 70 decibels at a 100 foot distance,\" Speaker 1 said during the presentation.

Commissioners agreed to separate lighting from other topics and pursue a standalone lighting ordinance, with staff drafting specific, enforceable language on directional shielding, pole height limits, allowable light spill beyond property lines, and a recommended time limit (11 p.m. was a common suggestion). They also asked staff to outline enforcement procedures and potential permit requirements for sport courts.

No new ordinance was adopted at the meeting; the commission asked staff to prepare draft language for discussion at the next meeting.","Following multiple complaints about late-night sports-court lighting and noise — especially from backyard pickleball courts — the commission asked staff to draft a standalone lighting ordinance addressing fixture shielding, pole height, light spill and a possible 11 p.m. cutoff, and to coordinate enforcement language.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6133445,"Fruit Heights planning commission moves to clarify fence setbacks, measurement for corner lots",1781,179000,1960000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5703125-890c8c96c1474392470323226beec730&start=179&end=1960","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5703125-890c8c96c1474392470323226beec730/thumbnail_179000.jpg","/articles/6133445/Utah/Fruit-Heights-planning-commission-moves-to-clarify-fence-setbacks-measurement-for-corner-lots","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6133445-66805ea109f5e870f5da76e731688bc7/orig.mp4?Expires=1770298770&Signature=HjuX-mYl6oOmZoVijoVlcj4uS9mof9k2qrD7O5d79rY6-dP2bUiD3qxkoPJT7J5bwg8DzIFxwMCJEZRfcwu0md-PGYC4cE0GsKVrQU2YjKm0Nt5B19VLLlcy6Tc0PRV8TxuFpHrAnf4w6DTDKG6IKDb6g0ESvbX48zdDrOaM3U~mx7tNmcTaVy27HQl1yz6npNQSmmwegDJpcATaeYSm1CA7RQFCeZF80NOxL2vxPFnuhYKXo0IFrnH49FMuTknnQrI7NXXagNvpJe~jHwx6IXy4hV~SKDYvUhIGldjrZqK8fCOo4GYxj7HQkUKWMSiTxHlqRGo9lIlZXFQVu78e2w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Fruit Heights Planning Commission on Monday discussed clarifying city fence setback rules after multiple recent disputes over fences on corner lots and how the setback is measured.

The issue centers on a provision in the existing ordinance that, as written, requires \"fences must be set back at least 9 feet from the edge of the street right right away,\" language that staff said has caused inconsistent interpretations on corner lots and where sidewalks and utilities are placed. \"If you read through the ordinance, it states that, where there is no curve, that system must be set at least 9 feet, from the back edge of the street right away,\" said Speaker 5, City planner. \"I think this ordinance needs to be a little more clearer.\"

Commissioners said the change in standard sidewalk widths — including new 5-foot ADA sidewalks and developments that locate curb and sidewalk differently — has made the phrase \"edge of the street right of way\" ambiguous for homeowners and permit reviewers. Speaker 3, Planning Commission member, noted that \"in my mind, the edge of the right of way is where the city street ends and the property line starts,\" while Speaker 5 said staff has recommended measuring from the back of the curb in most locations because curb-and-gutter is often the clearest landmark for residents and inspectors.

Commissioners discussed the role of the existing clear-vision intersection rule — which they said remains in effect for intersections and requires nothing between approximately 2 and 10 feet above grade within a 40-foot triangle from the centerline — and whether that should be extended to driveway locations or other nonintersection corners. \"We used to have a better clear-vision thing for driveways,\" Speaker 5 said. \"We used to have that. Would we be able to accomplish it if any fencing that's in front of the house ... has to be non-privacy?\" Speaker 1, Planning Commission member, added that the commission should avoid rewriting ordinances to address a single situation and instead seek clarity that applies across the city.

No ordinance amendment was adopted at the meeting. Commissioners directed staff to draft clearer language — including a default measurement (back of curb) with limited exceptions where curb-and-gutter does not exist — and to provide comparisons to neighboring cities for the next meeting. \"The planning commission to kinda think about, consider, look to other communities ... Put something together,\" Speaker 5 said.

The discussion also included practical permit notes: Speaker 1 confirmed staff had not issued a permit for a specific disputed fence and said they would require a site plan measured to the clarified standard before approving any new fence.

The commission did formally approve minutes for the April 29, 2025, meeting during the same session; that vote was procedural and unrelated to the fence discussion.

Next steps: staff will return with proposed ordinance language and examples from other Utah municipalities for further discussion and possible referral to a public hearing.","The Fruit Heights Planning Commission discussed clarifying how the city measures fence setbacks on corner lots — including whether to measure from curb/gutter or right-of-way — citing safety, ADA sidewalk changes and recent permit disputes. Commissioners asked staff to draft clearer language for a future meeting.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Commission reviews 25% rear-yard hard-surface limit, considers raising cap and adding drainage rules

Commission considers 11 p.m. curfew, fixture limits for backyard sports-court lighting after resident complaints

Fruit Heights planning commission moves to clarify fence setbacks, measurement for corner lots