[{"_1":2,"_93":-5,"_94":-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",[32,74,84],{"_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":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},"mediaId",6477211,"mediaKeyId","5712903-7cd2208ed60001388890f4aa54865c69","parentId",5712903,"title","Hurricane planning commission tables proposed code change on accessory buildings in front yards","audioSeconds",918,"startMs",172000,"endMs",1090000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5712903-7cd2208ed60001388890f4aa54865c69&start=172&end=1090","thumbnailUrl","https://d352y6ypj4mjo3.cloudfront.net/AudioPlaceholder.png","articleUrl","/articles/6477211/Hurricane/Washington-County/Utah/Hurricane-planning-commission-tables-proposed-code-change-on-accessory-buildings-in-front-yards","mediaUrl","author","Hurricane Planning Commission","date","2025-08-28T18:00:00Z","article","The Hurricane Planning Commission on Aug. 28 voted to table a proposed land-use-code amendment that would change rules for accessory buildings and accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in front yards.

The item, LUCA 25-06, would amend Title 10, Chapters 3, 7 and 37 of the city code to add conditional-use standards for accessory buildings and ADUs placed in front yards and to clarify definitions. Planning staff asked the commission to table the proposal after legal review recommended removing an extra ‘‘guest house/casita’’ definition and making broader edits before sending the proposal on to the City Council.

Why it matters: the changes would affect how and where single-family homeowners — especially owners of flag lots and other infill lots — may place detached ADUs or accessory buildings in front-yard areas. Several residents have raised questions about setbacks, driveway access and whether the code’s current variance process provides relief for unusual lot configurations.

Resident Amy Heaton, who said she lives on a flag lot at 1049 South 180 West and wants to build an ADU for her son, told the commission the existing 25-foot setback requirement effectively eliminates her buildable area. “We live on a flag lot where we have an 80-foot driveway... we want to build an ADU for my son and his family,” Heaton said, asking the city to consider a waiver or different setback treatment for flag lots.

Planning staff explained the flag-lot ordinance measures front-yard setback from the portion of the lot that faces the public right-of-way and that, under current rules, an accessory structure typically must meet the same setback as a primary dwelling. Staff also told the commission the property owner previously requested a variance that the appeals board denied. As staff summarized, “The commenter did request a variance, but that was denied. There are pretty strict rules regarding variances.”

City attorney and staff review: Planning staff said attorney Dayton advised removing a separate guest-house/casita definition and revising the ADU definition more broadly. Staff recommended tabling the amendment so they can renotice the ordinance with cleaner language and to ensure the flag-lot setback rules don’t conflict with the new ADU language.

Commission concerns and clarifications: commissioners pressed staff to confirm several technical points now embedded in the draft code: that standard setbacks (25 feet) would still apply unless the flag-lot ordinance is specifically amended; that ADUs on lots of 0.5 acres or less must be architecturally consistent with the primary residence; and that the conditional-use pathway for additional ADUs relied on chapter 7 standards, including an 0.8-acre threshold for qualifying conditional uses. Staff agreed these provisions remain in effect in the latest draft and said the packet contained some earlier, inconsistent language that will be corrected.

Motion and next steps: a motion to table LUCA 25-06 so staff and legal counsel can redraft and re-notice the amendment passed by voice vote. Staff said the item will return to the commission for a new public hearing after the revisions; staff suggested the next meeting is a likely earliest return date but did not give a firm schedule.

What was not decided: the commission did not adopt any new setback exceptions or make changes to the flag-lot ordinance during the meeting. Staff said issues specific to individual denied variances — such as Heaton’s — will need to be addressed through their own application processes and that tabling the citywide amendment does not automatically reopen or change prior appeal decisions.

The commission closed discussion on the item and moved on to other agenda business.","mediaType","Audio","parentTitle","Hurricane City Planning Commission Agenda - 2025-08-28-PCR","oneSentenceSummary","The Hurricane Planning Commission on Aug. 28 voted to table a proposed land-use-code amendment that would change rules for accessory buildings and accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in front yards.","taxTitle","Hurricane, Washington County, Utah","taxId",80031,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":50,"_51":81,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":82,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":83,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6477200,"Neighbors raise traffic and density concerns; planning commission recommends less-dense rezoning for State Street site",1816,1912000,3728000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5712903-7cd2208ed60001388890f4aa54865c69&start=1912&end=3728","/articles/6477200/Hurricane/Washington-County/Utah/Neighbors-raise-traffic-and-density-concerns-planning-commission-recommends-less-dense-rezoning-for-State-Street-site","The Hurricane Planning Commission on Aug. 28 recommended that the City Council approve a zone change at 184 North State Street to R‑M‑2 instead of the applicant’s requested R‑M‑3, following public comments about density, parking and traffic.

Applicant and proposal: Kevin Hansen of White Glove Construction appeared for owners Theresa Rimehofer and Tanya Winona and asked to rezone the 1.22-acre parcel on State Street to a multifamily category. Hansen presented two development options: an RM‑2-style layout of about 12 townhome units (clusters of three) and an RM‑3 option that could yield about 16 units in continuous townhome rows. He said multifamily use better fits the parcel’s State Street location and the city’s general plan than a single detached home.

Public concerns: neighbors who live near the site asked for lower density, more parking and clearer vehicle access. One nearby resident described frequent U-turning and narrow local streets and said, “I’m not against a project... I would hope that as it’s considered, that there’s plenty of parking, that there’s more than 1 car garage, and that you just consider all the parking that will be on that street.” Neighbor Dory Tharpe, 284 East 200 North, told commissioners she walks at night and is “concerned about the traffic on State Street stopping, you know, turning right and also getting out of 200 North.”

Safety and engineering issues: planning staff and the applicant discussed access constraints: the property adjoins a private drive and a homeowners association (HOA) road that the developer may need permission to use or alter; engineering comments in the packet note potential road-dedication or improvement requirements if the parcel is later subdivided. Commissioners and staff also discussed fire access standards and turnaround requirements; during the hearing speakers referenced different length thresholds (one staff comment said a turnaround is required for drives over 300 feet; another speaker noted a 150-foot figure), a discrepancy commissioners said staff will clarify.

Commission action: commissioners initially debated density and whether RM‑3 was compatible with the neighborhood’s existing zoning pattern. After a resident asked whether the public could comment (public comment had already been opened earlier in the meeting), the commission withdrew an earlier motion and reopened the public hearing to hear neighbors’ remarks. Following that input, Commissioner Paul moved to recommend RM‑2 rather than RM‑3 based on the four rezoning criteria and concerns about compatibility and density; a second was recorded and the motion passed by roll-call voice votes.

Why it matters: RM‑3 would allow roughly 15 units per acre (theoretically up to 18 units on a 1.22-acre parcel), while RM‑2 allows roughly 10 units per acre. The commission’s recommendation to the City Council narrows the density that the site may carry if the council accepts the commission’s advice. The change does not pre-approve any final development, site plan or subdivision; those would require later approvals and could include conditions addressing parking, access, HOA agreements and building height.

Next steps: planning staff will forward the record, including public comments and the commission’s recommendation, to the City Council. Neighbors were told they may appear at the council meeting to repeat their concerns; staff noted the next council meeting is Sept. 4 and explained how to sign up for public comment.","White Glove Construction sought RM-3 zoning (15 units/acre) for a 1.22-acre site at 184 North State Street to build townhomes. Neighbors complained about parking, U-turns and the potential for three-story buildings; after public comment the commission withdrew an initial motion and ultimately recommended RM-2 (10 units/acre) instead, citing area",{"_33":85,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":86,"_41":87,"_43":88,"_45":78,"_47":89,"_49":50,"_51":90,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":91,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":92,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6477205,"Planning commission endorses rezoning at 235 North 1580 West, recommends approval to city council",710,1202000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5712903-7cd2208ed60001388890f4aa54865c69&start=1202&end=1912","/articles/6477205/Hurricane/Washington-County/Utah/Planning-commission-endorses-rezoning-at-235-North-1580-West-recommends-approval-to-city-council","The Hurricane Planning Commission on Aug. 28 voted to recommend that the City Council approve a zone change for a parcel at 235 North 1580 West, converting the property from RA-1 (residential-agriculture, 1 unit per acre) to R-1-10 (single-family residential, 1 unit per 10,000 square feet).

Applicant and purpose: agent Tim Scott told the commission the owner, George Love, seeks the rezoning to facilitate a lot-line adjustment with the adjacent Hughes property to the west. Scott said the change would enlarge the neighboring lot rather than create an immediate new buildable lot.

Why it matters: RA-1 requires a minimum of 1 acre per lot; R-1-10 permits smaller single-family lots consistent with the city’s future land-use map for this area. Commissioners said the parcel is not in an area designated for long-term agriculture and that the change aligns with expected infill development identified in the general plan.

Commission discussion: planning staff said a remainder parcel after the lot-line adjustment would be tight and that an additional separate lot was unlikely without significant reconfiguration. Commissioners voiced awareness of concerns about gradual loss of agricultural zoning but agreed this specific site fits the general-plan direction. Engineering comments noted potential street-dedication or improvement issues if the applicant later subdivides; staff said a lot-line adjustment does not automatically trigger the same road-improvement requirements as a full subdivision.

Vote and next step: the planning commission moved to recommend approval to the City Council; the motion passed by voice vote. Staff will forward the commission’s recommendation and the project materials to the City Council for final action.

What was not decided: the commission’s recommendation does not authorize any immediate subdivision, development approvals, or infrastructure work. Any future subdivision or development will require separate review and, if applicable, road dedications or improvements as part of that process.","The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve a zone change at 235 North 1580 West from RA-1 (residential-agriculture, 1 unit per acre) to R-1-10 (single-family residential, 1 unit per 10,000 square feet). The applicant seeks the change to facilitate a lot-line adjustment with the adjacent property; commissioners found the rez","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Hurricane planning commission tables proposed code change on accessory buildings in front yards

Neighbors raise traffic and density concerns; planning commission recommends less-dense rezoning for State Street site

Planning commission endorses rezoning at 235 North 1580 West, recommends approval to city council