Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Amendments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cedar Fort schedules public hearing on code amendments including MG40, sensitive overlay and APWA standards; council raises dust and disturbance concerns
Summary
The council agreed to take multiple code changes to public hearing — resurrecting the mining-and-grazing (MG40/AR40) language, reviewing sensitive overlay zones, and adding APWA street/public-utility standards to subdivision requirements — and flagged gaps for land-disturbance permits and dust enforcement after complaints about local dirt-moving activity.
The Cedar Fort Town Council voted to place several code amendments on a public-hearing agenda, directing staff to bring forward language resurrecting the prior mining-and-grazing (MG40/AR40) zone and the sensitive-overlay provisions and to append current APWA street and subdivision-construction standards to the town code.
Staff told the council it appears some provisions (MG40 and sensitive overlay) did not migrate correctly into the updated Title 10 and that restoring the prior code language requires a public hearing. The council agreed to list the items as “miscellaneous code amendments” (Title 10 and Title 6) and to hold the public hearing at 6 p.m. before the next council meeting so members and the public can review proposed changes.
Accessory dwelling units: Council members noted ADU (accessory dwelling unit) language is incomplete or inconsistent in the revised code; staff recommended reviewing Eagle Mountain’s recent ADU language as a template and returning with a more detailed proposal rather than rushing an immediate change.
Land disturbance and dust enforcement: Council discussion included a complaint about a property in Cedar Meadows where heavy dirt-moving and milling operations are generating dust. Staff acknowledged that while disturbance permits exist as an application, the town code lacks explicit thresholds and enforcement language (for example, a clear volume threshold or fee), which limits the town’s ability to hold property owners accountable for land-disturbing activity until code language or permit provisions are added. The council discussed adopting a disturbance-permit threshold (examples from other jurisdictions: moving up to two feet of soil without engineered plans) and possibly a permit fee; the state has air-quality rules but local code clarity was identified as a gap.
Why it matters: The public-hearing items affect future allowed uses on 40-acre parcels, overlay protections, street construction standards and local enforcement capacity for land-disturbing work and dust control. Restoring the correct zoning language and adding APWA references will change the town’s baseline for permitting and for developer obligations.
Next steps: Staff will prepare specific amendment language for the public hearing (scheduled for June 9 at 6 p.m., per the transcript), including the resurrected MG40/AR40 text, sensitive-overlay language, and APWA references for subdivision construction. Council asked staff to prepare clear descriptions for the hearing so residents understand exactly what will change.
