Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission advances edits to Forestry and Recreation zoning; asks staff for clearer setbacks, pet limits and height references
Summary
The commission reviewed a draft rewrite of the Forestry and Recreation (FR) zone (new chapter 19.46), directed staff to add a setbacks table and waiver language, clarified household-pet definitions, and agreed building-height rules should defer to Foothills and Canyons overlay (FCOS) language until a combined standard is adopted.
The Immigration Canyon Planning Commission spent the bulk of its Sept. 24 meeting reviewing an updated Forestry and Recreation zoning chapter intended to consolidate site-development standards into a new 19.46 and to preserve the canyon’s rural character while clarifying rules for setbacks, pets and building height.
Commissioners directed staff to move a setbacks table (modeled on the commercial table, 19.32.050) into the forestry chapter and to add explicit cross-references to FCOS for stream setbacks and other environmental protections. Unidentified Speaker 6 summarized the draft intent as a status-quo-preserving approach: “So that's what this ordinance does, it proposes to maintain the status quo, basically.” That speaker and others said the chart-style setbacks would help nonprofessional readers and would include a sentence allowing the Planning Commission to waive standards in cases of difficult topography.
Why it matters: the rewrite aims to replace duplicate, scattered development standards with a single, searchable chapter while keeping the overlay-provided environmental protections in force. Commissioners repeatedly emphasized they want clear, usable rules that won’t surprise property owners or unintentionally weaken stream and slope protections.
What the commission discussed: members debated three core items. First, setbacks: commissioners agreed to import or reformat the commercial setback table and explicitly note exceptions for ephemeral and perennial stream setbacks preserved under FCOS. Second, household pets: the draft model uses a small-number default (2 household pets); commissioners discussed grandfathering existing households, creating a defined ‘private kennel/cattery’ use for larger counts, and a possible increase to four permitted household pets before triggering licensing/permits. Third, building heights and measurement: the draft contained inconsistent height clauses (30 ft vs. 35 ft, with different measurement methods). Commissioners proposed removing the duplicated, confusing height paragraph and referencing FCOS measurement rules until the combined 19.46/FCOS rewrite is complete.
Legal and editorial changes: staff attorney Claire (first introduced by the commission during the meeting) clarified legal references and advised against wording that could imply retroactive application of zoning. Commissioners asked staff to standardize chapter punctuation and references (for example, inserting commas after chapter numbers where appropriate) and to replace the word "governing" with "entities having jurisdiction." The commission asked staff to add a brief legislative-history editor’s note so readers will know FCOS provisions still apply during the transition.
Directions to staff and next steps: commissioners asked Claire and planning staff to revise the draft to include the setbacks table, explicit references to FCOS for stream/wetland setbacks, clarified pet limits and a clear statement that FCOS prevails where more stringent. Staff was asked to circulate the revised draft before the commission’s next meeting so commissioners can act on the ordinance at that session. Unidentified Speaker 2 reiterated the timeline: staff should send the revised materials for review ahead of the Sept. 9 meeting packet.
Quotes from the meeting: “So that's what this ordinance does, it proposes to maintain the status quo, basically,” said Unidentified Speaker 6 during the setbacks discussion. On legal wording, Unidentified Speaker 5 noted an earlier provision “seemed to suggest that our zoning ordinances are retroactive,” which prompted the group to drop the problematic clause.
What’s next: staff will prepare a revised draft that (1) adds the setback table and waiver language, (2) standardizes references to state administrative code and DEQ rules for water systems, and (3) clarifies household-pet rules and building-height references to FCOS. The commission expects to review the revisions at its next scheduled meeting.
