Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legislation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council adopts two zoning and commercial-code ordinances; votes recorded
Summary
Riverton City Council approved two ordinances on Sept. 16: ordinance 25-21 (amendments to the RM-6 multifamily zone regarding rear-yard setback language) and ordinance 25-22 (restoring commercial dumpster-enclosure architectural standards). Both passed after public hearings and roll-call votes.
At the Sept. 16 council meeting Riverton City Council held public hearings and adopted two ordinances amending zoning and commercial standards.
Ordinance 25-21: RM-6 zone rear-yard setback language
The council reviewed changes to the RM-6 multifamily residential zone that clarify rear-yard setbacks. Staff presented two alternatives and the planning commission's recommendation. The approved language retains a 25-foot rear-yard setback where an RM-6 project abuts existing single-family residential zoning unless the setback is otherwise established through a site-designation (SD) during rezone approval.
Vote: Council Member Broker moved adoption; Council Member McDougall seconded. Roll-call votes recorded on the motion as follows (votes captured from the roll call read aloud at the meeting): Council Member McDougall — yes; Council Member Perucci — yes; Council Member Broker — yes; Council Member Heyman — yes; Council Member McKay — yes. The motion carried.
Ordinance 25-22: Commercial-code dumpster-enclosure language
Staff said an inadvertent edit had removed required architectural standards for dumpster enclosures from several commercial-zone code sections. The ordinance restores consolidated dumpster-enclosure standards across commercial zones, specifying screening, height and materials consistent with prior code text.
Vote: Council Member Hammond moved adoption; Council Member Perucci seconded. Roll-call votes recorded (as read at the meeting): Council Member McKay — yes; Council Member Broker (Barroker) — yes; Council Member Hammond — yes; Council Member McDougall — yes. The motion carried.
Other routine business: The consent agenda was approved earlier in the meeting by voice vote. The council adjourned at the end of the session.
Ending: Both ordinances passed and will be codified per standard procedures; no immediate legal challenges were raised in the meeting.
