Council clarifies new zoning rules

The Sundance City Council addressed its new rules for storage containers, billboards and fence heights at last week’s meeting. Though the ordinance was set to receive its third and final reading, approval was tabled until September because work is still ongoing to complete the wording.

Sundance resident Kelly Mathis addressed the council about each of the three provisions under consideration, beginning with the shipping or storage containers.

According to the proposed change, shipping containers are still allowed within the industrial zone of the city. However, while the ordinance does allow portable moving containers and moving pods “used for moving and temporary use” outside the industrial zone, they may only remain for a maximum of 30 days.

Mathis asked the council to reconsider this decision on the basis that a storage container can be made to look good as a permanent component on a person’s land.

“I know some people buy them because that’s all they can afford. People can make them look very nice,” she said, asking the council to consider giving people a certain amount of time, such as six or nine months, to make the containers blend in with their house.

“I’ve talked to a lot of people. Some people don’t like storage containers, but people are really open to the idea if we were going to make them look like part of your house.”

Council Member Callie Hilty explained that the council has had multiple discussions about storage containers over the last couple of years and the problem comes down to deciding exactly what needs to be done to a storage container before it can be considered attractive.

“Whose standards are you building it to?” she questioned. The person themselves might think the container looks like the rest of their house, she said, but their neighbor might strongly disagree.

“Who is regulating that? Who is going to go there and say this is up to standard?”

Hilty listed some examples of possible standards the city would have to consider, such as whether the container is sided or painted or given a roof.

“We’ve had people say this is what they would like to do to fix one up, but then we are in the position of having to decide if that’s good enough,” she said.

Hilty agreed she’s seen some really cool examples of converted containers, but “that’s more the exception.”

Brooks reminded the room that the Land Use Planning & Zoning Committee has the ability to recommend a variance to the council.

“I believe that, just with everything else, if you come to land use planning to ask for a variance and you have a decent plan that includes a timeframe, I’m not sure that land use planning won’t send it through to us,” he said.

The city’s land use planning committee has the right to grant a variance, said Brooks, and the council has the right to uphold that variance. Council Member Joe Wilson meanwhile spoke to the idea behind the zoning codes in the first place.

“All these ordinances, honestly, run the line between your rights as the property owner and your neighbor’s rights as a property owner. That’s kind of what all of them do and it’s trying to find a blend inbetween so we can all live together in the same community,” he said.

Mathis also questioned the new rules concerning advertising signs. Brooks clarified that the city has never restricted election signs and is not looking to ban business signs; rather, he said, the council’s discussion of billboards has been specifically geared towards the interstate right-of-way.

“The concern we have has been the railroad right-of-way towards Rapid City where they’ve stacked up with signs. We’re trying our level-headed best to make sure we don’t have [that],” he said.

“We don’t need the golf course eclipsed by billboards…or the mountain.”

Brooks acknowledged that some people believe this creates an “anti-business climate” because tourists may see a billboard and jump off the interstate to visit town.

“That’s their argument, so then it comes down to aesthetics,” he said. “Do you want to see billboards going across the golf course or would you rather see open space? That’s really what this argument is about.”

Mathis also questioned the part of the ordinance that sets maximum fence heights at the front of a person’s property at 3.5 feet, which is not a standard height for a fence. Hilty clarified that this has been altered.

“We have already changed that. It’s four feet now,” said Hilty. “It has been 3.5-foot, but we changed it because obviously you can’t get a 3.5-foot fence.”

Mathis also spoke to the issue of public involvement in changes to the city’s ordinances.

“It just seems like we come up with an ordinance and not that many people attend the meetings and don’t really pay attention,” she said. “I’m wondering if there’s any way there could be a town hall meeting.”

“We have tried,” said Brooks. He noted that there is a constitutional requirement for the council to vote on issues during an official meeting, and pointed out that the council meeting itself is open to the public.

Mathis responded, however, that few people attend the meeting, so perhaps the discussion needs to be held at another time or on another day.

“Plenty of people I’ve talked to would like to be involved,” she said.

“I’ve been here since 1990 and they never have,” Brooks responded.

A final reading of Ordinance 4, 2021 was tabled until the September meeting to allow time for the wording to be finalized.