Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Permits Pending Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission recommends scrapping agricultural exemption from permit requirement, affirms pending‑ordinance notice practice
Summary
The commission voted 4–0 to strike a sentence exempting agricultural uses from building/use permits and to adopt pending‑ordinance subsections consistent with state law (180‑day notification), intending to reduce administrative confusion and prevent applicants from 'gaming' the code during rewrites.
The Emigration Canyon Planning Commission voted July 10 to recommend changes to permit language that will remove an agricultural exemption and formalize how pending ordinance notifications work.
Commissioners and counsel discussed section 19.02.0.09, a legacy provision that said "no use permit shall be required for land use used for agricultural purposes as defined in this title and or for the keeping or raising of animals or fowl." Counsel recommended striking that sentence so permit review applies consistently to land‑use activities in town. Jody moved the amendment; Dale seconded and the commission approved it unanimously.
Counsel also explained the state's pending‑ordinance practice: after a municipality publicly notices proposed ordinance changes, it can pause certain permits to prevent applicants from seeking to vest under the old code for up to 180 days; if no adoption happens within that period, the prior code applies again. Commissioners asked staff to adopt the two transition subsections of the redline so the town has the 'belt‑and‑suspenders' protections counsel recommended.
Commissioners additionally directed staff to standardize defined titles (for example, capitalizing 'Building Official' and using 'Director of Planning and Development Services or the director's designee') and to sweep editorial cleanups before packets go to council.
