Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Short Term Rentals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Meadow planners back annual inspections, set STR cap by council resolution
Summary
Planning commissioners reviewed a draft short-term rental ordinance covering properties rented 29 days or less, agreed to require annual inspections with a per-unit inspection fee, removed a specific occupancy cap, and opted to let the town council set the maximum number of licenses by resolution with a waiting list and transfer rules.
Unidentified Speaker 5 (Moderator) opened the Planning and Zoning meeting to review a draft short-term rental ordinance that would regulate residential rentals of 29 consecutive days or less.
The draft would require owners to obtain a short-term rental business license, designate a property manager available 24 hours to respond to complaints, provide Utah tax identification and liability insurance, and submit a parking-diagram and bedroom count. "The topic for tonight is the the short term rental ordinance," Unidentified Speaker 5 said as the group began reading sections aloud.
Why it matters: Commissioners said the town wants to protect Meadow's residential character while giving residents limited opportunity to rent rooms or units. Unidentified Speaker 3 argued that allowing many STRs could reduce housing available to families and change the town's character, saying the town should prioritize long-term residents. "We want Meadow to be a small town, a community town, a family community town," Unidentified Speaker 3 said.
Key decisions and next steps: The commission agreed on several substantive points to include in the ordinance or to finalize by separate council action. They leaned toward requiring annual inspections tied to license renewal rather than a one-time inspection, and discussed establishing a per-unit inspection fee (Unidentified Speaker 2 suggested $50 as an example). The group also decided to remove the specific numeric occupancy formula—commonly framed in the draft as two guests per bedroom plus four per home—because members found it difficult to enforce and preferred nuisance/noise rules to address over-occupancy.
The commission debated limiting the total number of STR licenses. Rather than setting a fixed number in the ordinance, participants agreed a better approach is to let the town council set the maximum by resolution so the cap can be adjusted without reopening the ordinance. "The maximum number of short term rental businesses shall be limited by resolution set by the town council," Unidentified Speaker 5 proposed; members responded that a resolution-based cap would allow case-by-case approvals and grandfathering of the two existing licenses.
Other provisions the commission discussed and agreed should be in the ordinance include: - A required notice to owners of record of residential properties within a 300-foot radius of a proposed STR, mailed or hand-delivered with proof of mailing and a local contact. - A requirement that purchasers of properties containing licensed STRs apply for a new license within 45 days of transfer; licenses do not automatically transfer on sale. - A waiting list for applicants if the cap is reached, ordered by date of receipt, with no fees while on the list. - Clear language that issuance of an STR license "shall not have the effect of changing the legal status of the rental dwelling," i.e., licensing does not legalize previously unpermitted structures.
Quotes that capture the discussion: "The topic for tonight is the the short term rental ordinance," Unidentified Speaker 5 said as the review began. On community impact, Unidentified Speaker 3 argued that commercial-scale buying of houses for STRs could harm the town's future housing stock: "To take the whole house off the market for our community's future generation is kind of the, I think, the biggest concern." On policy flexibility, Unidentified Speaker 5 recommended the resolution approach for caps so the council could respond to changing circumstances.
What remains unresolved: The commission did not adopt final fee amounts or a statutory fee schedule; members asked staff to add language establishing that inspection and per-unit fees will be set by council resolution so they can be adjusted. They also did not record any formal ordinance adoption at this meeting; the draft will be revised to reflect the changes discussed and returned for future review and a public hearing. The meeting previously approved minutes from a past meeting by motion at the start of the session; no other formal votes on ordinance text were recorded.
