Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Nonconforming Structures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves rewrite of nonconforming‑use rules, tightens limits on rebuilding and expansions
Summary
The planning commission unanimously recommended replacing the city’s old nonconforming‑use chapter with a revised section that narrows how nonconforming structures and uses may be changed or expanded; commissioners removed a proposed allowance to convert a nonconforming use to another nonconforming use.
On July 10 the Emigration Canyon Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt a rewritten chapter addressing nonconforming uses and noncomplying structures intended to limit how existing nonconformities may be enlarged or changed.
Staff and the town attorney told commissioners the county legacy language gave property owners broad rights to alter nonconforming structures in ways that could significantly increase intensity (commonly cited example: a small nonconforming cabin expanded into a much larger residence). The proposed replacement narrows those rights and clarifies when a nonconforming use or structure is considered abandoned, abandoned for one year (and therefore forfeited) and how reconstructed floor area must comply with current setbacks, height and size rules.
Commissioners raised a specific concern about a draft subsection that would have allowed a nonconforming use to be changed to another nonconforming use via a conditional‑use procedure. After discussion the commission asked staff to remove that change (subsection b and its subparts) so that the ordinance does not automatically allow such changes. The commission also asked that the final text clarify that any new building square footage added during repair or replacement must fully conform to the current code’s setback, size and height requirements.
The planning commission recorded a unanimous recommendation (4–0) to forward the revised nonconforming‑use chapter to the City Council with the requested edits. Staff said the revised language is modeled on provisions used in Park City and Brighton to avoid the kind of loopholes that allow incremental enlargement of a nonconformity over time.
Commissioners and staff highlighted that the rewrite is intended to be more enforceable and less open to broad interpretation, while still allowing repairs and limited maintenance. The commission directed staff to prepare the final ordinance text for the council packet with revised subsection numbering and clarified language on abandonment, restoration and allowable rebuilds.
