Planning commission delays accessory-building code changes to refine definitions and scope

The Snyderville Basin Planning Commission on Tuesday opened a public hearing and then continued proposed amendments to accessory-building rules in the Snyderville Basin development code to allow staff to refine technical definitions and separate broader policy topics.

Ray Miller, principal county planner, presented proposed changes to section 10-8-17 and chapter 10-11 that would allow either two minor accessory buildings or one major plus one minor on a lot; introduce a formal definition of "building footprint" that counts cantilevered roof or bay projections beyond a 36-inch allowance; and clarify plan-view measurement. Staff said the proposed changes aim to close a perceived loophole by which large overhangs and cantilevers had not been counted in footprint calculations.

Commissioners and members of the public debated several technical and policy implications: several commissioners asked staff to inventory existing properties that would become legal nonconforming if the new footprint definition were adopted and to consult the county assessor about potential tax impacts. Staff acknowledged there may be a small number of existing structures affected and agreed to review assessor implications before further action.

Public comment included a lengthy objection from a resident who said multiple large outbuildings on Old Ranch Road have harmed neighborhood character, and comments from other residents such as Rick Angel (Westwood Road, Silver Creek) who supported allowing two smaller accessory buildings (each about 1,500 square feet) as consistent with the general plan and as a replacement for aging barns.

Commissioners also debated how to treat steel shipping containers. Staff noted the current code prohibits shipping containers but enforcement has been difficult; the commission directed staff to separate that issue from the immediate cleanup amendments and return later with clearer standards for adaptive reuse or continued prohibition.

The commission voted to continue the accessory-building code amendments to a date uncertain and to direct staff to return with clarified definitions (plan view/footprint, explicit treatment of cantilevered projections) and an inventory of potentially affected existing structures. The County Council will hold a separate public hearing on any legislative changes once the commission completes its recommendation.

Next steps: staff will refine the draft language, check assessor and nonconforming-structure implications, and return the item for a future recommendation and referral to the County Council.