Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Structures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission weighs clearer definition, limits for portable carports
Summary
Payson Planning Commission discussed tightening the definition and rules for portable carports, including footings, attachments to houses, partial enclosures and easement removal agreements.
Get email alerts on the Land Use Structures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Payson Planning Commission members spent the Aug. 27 work session discussing how to define and regulate “portable” carports, focusing on how footing, attachment, enclosure and easement issues affect whether a structure should count as permanent.
Commissioners said the city’s current approach — distinguishing permanent structures by the presence of a footing or foundation — is useful but leaves room for ambiguity. Commissioners and staff discussed language that would bar footings or continuous foundations for structures treated as portable, allow limited spot footings to accept anchor bolts, and prohibit carports that rely structurally on an attached house.
Commissioners noted common local variations: metal carports with one or more sidewalls, units that sit on a slab, and frames that claim to be “portable” despite being difficult to move when built on-site. Several commissioners recommended a bright-line test that the structure must be able to stand alone and be movable without relying on the house to be considered portable.
Participants also discussed partial enclosure rules (for example, allowing a single sidewall to protect an RV or boat) and a suggestion to define “not enclosed more than 75%” so one side could be used for shade without converting the unit to a building. Commissioners asked staff to consider whether features such as garage-style doors, which make a unit function like a building, should disqualify a portable classification.
Right-of-way and easement concerns were repeatedly raised. Commissioners recommended requiring a written agreement — or at least a clear cross-reference to existing easement-encroachment rules — that obligates the property owner to remove a portable carport if it encroaches on an easement. Several members asked for legal and land-use review to tighten the definition and to add “weasel-proof” language to avoid unintended permanent conversions.
Next steps: staff will draft clarified code language and seek legal/land-use counsel input before returning proposed revisions to the commission for formal review.

