Parowan City Council on April 10 instructed staff to draft an amendment to the city code to allow longer-term stays at a local RV park by conditional use permit, following extensive discussion with the park operators, nearby residents and staff about fencing, noise and enforcement.

The council’s direction: Planning Commission had recommended allowing stays of up to nine months for up to 30% of a park’s spaces by conditional use permit. After more than an hour of public exchange, council members voted to have staff prepare an ordinance implementing that recommendation; the motion passed with four members in favor and one opposed. If the ordinance moves forward, the park’s conditional-use permit will be agendized for formal action at the next council meeting and council members said they will attach conditions — notably a masonry or other site-obscuring fence along property lines that abut residences — to mitigate noise and privacy impacts.

Why it matters: Council members cited competing interests: the park’s owners said longer stays would help their business and generate more spending at local businesses, while adjacent homeowners and some commissioners pressed for stronger backyard screening and enforcement of conditions attached to the permit. Council members also discussed state tax rules that affect transient-tax collection on stays longer than 29 days.

Key points from the debate:
- Planning Commission recommended—by a positive but not unanimous vote—a 9-month limit and 30% cap on long-term spaces.
- Park operators asked for flexibility to remain financially viable; they said a phased, phased-in fencing approach could be hard because of costs and the park’s partial development. They pointed to a mix of transient and longer-term guests already on site and asked for clear, enforceable conditions rather than immediate punitive action.
- Several council members said they wanted a firm timeline and hard conditions (fencing and compliance milestones), and sought a mechanism to revoke the longer-stay allowance if the conditions were not met.
- The council directed staff to draft the ordinance and then include the park’s conditional-use application on the next regular agenda so the council can attach concrete conditions at that vote.

Ending: Council members said they favored a phased but enforceable approach; they told staff to return with ordinance language and a conditional-use permit application that would include timeline and fence requirements, and indicated the city counsel and planning staff will help craft enforceable milestones.