Springdale council adopts limits on accessory buildings, caps total residential development

The Springdale Town Council voted June 11 to adopt Ordinance 2025‑08, a revision to the town land‑use code that creates separate development standards for accessory structures and caps the total square footage of development permitted on residential parcels.

Planning staff said the change is intended to protect Springdale’s village character and visual resources. “Currently, accessory structures are regulated by the same standards as a primary structure on a property,” staff member Tom Dancy said, explaining the existing code and the planning commission’s rationale for separate rules. The ordinance introduces increased setbacks for accessory buildings over 12 feet in height, new setbacks from ridgelines, mesas and steep slopes, and specific height limits for visually sensitive parcels.

The ordinance also establishes a hard cap on total development per residential parcel. The planning commission recommended a cap sized to reflect existing conditions: a base cap of 7,500 square feet for parcels at or near minimum zone size, 6,500 square feet for legacy substandard parcels, and 9,000 square feet for parcels three times or more than the minimum zone size. The proposal limits the number of larger structures to four (primary structure plus up to three accessory structures) plus one additional structure of 200 square feet or less for a total of five structures.

Council debate focused on the ordinance’s exception process and documentation requirements. Dancy said the planning commission added a narrow exception pathway to address unusual lot layouts where strict application of setback rules could increase visual impacts rather than reduce them. “In order even to be eligible for the exception, you first have to demonstrate that you could build the building in compliance with all of those standards,” he said. Council members asked to limit the burden of photo‑simulation requirements for very small structures; the council agreed to require two sets of photo simulations only when a structure exceeds 150 square feet, mirroring the town’s erosion overlay threshold.

Members also asked to add “hilltops” to the code language listing high‑visual‑impact features. Councilmember Kyla moved approval with those edits; Councilmember Jack Burns seconded. The motion passed unanimously.

What the ordinance does not change: the height bonus in section 10‑15(f) remains in place for primary structures, but the council clarified the ordinance explicitly bars the height bonus for accessory structures and agreed to remove ambiguity about whether the size bonus applies to accessory buildings.

The council directed staff and the planning commission to ensure consistency between the new accessory‑structure definitions and cross‑references elsewhere in the code before the ordinance is codified.