Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parking Code Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tooele council favors refined rule limiting front-yard parking; staff to return with revised draft
Summary
Community Development Director Andrew Agard presented four options to amend Tooele City's parking-location code to address front-yard parking. Councilmembers favored a refined version of option 3 (limit parking to established driveways/lesser side) and directed staff to return for at least one more work session.
Community Development Director Andrew Agard presented four alternatives to amend Tooele City Code governing parking location, seeking council guidance on how to address vehicles parked in front yards in residential zones. The council signaled support for a refined version of ‘‘Option 3' that would limit vehicle parking to the established driveway and the lesser side of the front yard adjacent to the driveway.
Agard said the four alternatives were: (1) a full prohibition of front-yard parking that would require parking areas to be in the rear or side yard and be paved; (2) allow front-yard parking only if paved and graded to direct stormwater appropriately to protect groundwater; (3) limit parking to the established driveway and the lesser side of the front yard adjacent to the driveway (illustrated with a graphic), and (4) permit up to 50% of a front yard to be used for vehicle parking. He cautioned that a full prohibition would be difficult to enforce and that percentage-based rules raise measurement challenges.
On the groundwater-protection option, Agard explained the rationale: allowing only paved and properly graded front-yard parking would help "prevent automotive fluids from leaking into the soils and eventually percolating into the water supply in the aquifer." Councilmembers raised corner-lot questions and visibility concerns; several asked that the code be written so that on corner lots the side where the garage and driveway are located would be allowed for parking. One councilmember noted that a relatively small share of residents cause the most visible impacts but agreed neighbors can be seriously affected.
The council expressed a preference for Option 3, with edits to address corner lots and driveway orientation. Councilmembers asked staff to coordinate the revised language with the city attorney, refine graphics and setback/visibility language, and return for at least one more work session before starting the public-process steps. Agard agreed to "tinker" with the draft and bring it back, then move it through the public process if the council directs.
The work-session discussion will continue; no ordinance or formal vote on an amendment was taken at this meeting.
