Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Peculiar alderman brings first reading of ordinance to allow permitted UTVs and golf carts; neighbors raise safety concerns
Summary
Alderman Jarrett introduced Bill 2025-17 to allow certain utility terrain vehicles and up-to-date golf carts on city streets under a permit; staff said the city would rely on applicants’ attestations and could revoke permits for noncompliance. Some aldermen reported constituent opposition and warned about crossing state highways and limited destinations.
The Peculiar Board of Aldermen took up the first reading of Bill 2025-17 on Sept. 29, a proposed amendment to the city code (section 3.40) to permit certain utility terrain vehicles (UTVs) and modern golf carts on city streets if they meet equipment, licensing and permit requirements.
“A lot of towns have already adopted something similar,” Alderman Jarrett told the board, describing a permit system that would require applicants to certify their vehicle meets code requirements, show proper equipment such as lights and seat belts, and pay any applicable fee. Jarrett said he consulted with the development-services director and drafted the ordinance after researching neighboring municipalities.
Several board members raised questions about the city’s liability for certifying vehicles and how enforcement would work. Staff responded that the city’s process would rely on the applicant’s attestation that the vehicle meets code standards and that the city could revoke a permit if it found the vehicle to be noncompliant. “We’re just saying we’re taking their word,” a staff speaker said, clarifying the city is not performing full mechanical inspections.
A ward alderman reported conducting outreach and said none of his respondents supported admitting these vehicles in his ward; he said residents cited safety concerns, the prevalence of state highways in Peculiar and limited safe places to operate slow-moving vehicles. Board members also noted that state law allows crossing—but not continuous travel—on state highways where posted speeds fall below 45 mph.
The ordinance draft on the table did not include the permitting fee schedule or specific penalties; one alderman pointed out those items had been removed from the version presented. The board approved a motion to take the first reading by title only; no final vote or ordinance adoption occurred at this meeting.
The item will proceed to future consideration; staff and aldermen signaled they would refine the draft language on permitted routes, crossing rules and fees before a final reading.
