Utah Zoning Changes

[prk166]

I'm curious what some folks think of this bill. THere are some aspects that I like. For example, I've seen the Minneapolis, MN city council spend 5 - 7 minutes discussing exactly what one single property is supposed to look like. This is a city of 380,000+ and they were specifically talking about one single house that was going to be built on a vacant lot in an established neighborhood. There didn't seem to be anything controversial about it. It looked to fit in with the neighborhood. I thought it was silly considering the other issues the city was facing.

Anyway, just curious what folks think of this.


http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_3438598

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_3435164

About SB170

Cities could not:

# Zone for aesthetics.
# Zone to control congestion.
# Deprive the landowner of ''all economically viable uses.''
# Reject zoning based on ''public clamor'' or the ''whims of members of the legislative body.''

Cities would have to:

# ''Conform'' to the request of landowners.
# Staff review of applications within 45 days.
# Vote on a rezone within 28 days after the staff report.
# Base impact fees on actual expenses of the development.
# Approve cul-de-sacs that are 600-feet deep.

[montgjules]

From a two-minute review of that bill, it sounds ridiculous. If I lived in a city that passed that bill, I'd be looking for the next ticket out of town.

[rslfutbolfan]

I think it is terrible. And FYI...the sponsor of the bill is Mansell of Mansell reality and the judge is a lawyer for big time developers...a little conflict of interest perhaps? Living in Park City with its crazy growth we need to be able to zone for certain things, especially to control congestion as it is already a terrible problem which resulted from poor planning! Dont ya love Utah politics????

[Old Ska]

Utah already has the worst land use management / urban planning I have ever seen. This would make it far, far worse.

However, I do think the voting on rezone within 28 days of staff report is a good idea.

I am on my city's Economic Development council (granted, not in Utah), and I would be horrified if something like this ever got momentum. Afterall, a crack house is the most economically viable use for many properties that I can think of.

[prk166]

montgjules --> It's a bill that has been presented (or going to be?) to the utah legislature. So you're either in the state or your out. 😉

Thanks for the comments too. I wondered how much of this was a backlash against the wal-mart backlash.

[StarsOnSunday]

I love zoning laws. As a general rule I prefer less government, but when it comes to zoning laws, the more the better (especially democrats). I came to love zoning laws during my two-year sabatical in Argentina. I started to notice how obnoxious it was that people could run a storefront out of their garages. People could sell food out of their kitchens. There were convenience stores in the middle of a suburban block (instead of on the corner). Now before you get all ethno-economically over-sensitive on me, you have to realize that these conditions existed in regular middle class neighborhoods. The frustarting thing is that these neighborhoods were otherwise very pleasant, but the lack of zoning laws (or regulation thereof) had severly comprimised the aesthetics of the neighborhood.
As Old Ska mentioned, Utah is already bad. Think about an area like Fort Union. There are houses next to a dentist office (which used to be a home), next to a church, next to a 7-11, and somewhere behing all this there is a large house turned into a 4-plex. Contrast this with Summit County. In summit county, all the stores, churches, and basically anything in view of a four lane street has a similar aesthetic, wood and rock usually. They have zero billboards on their streets. It is beautiful, and it fits in perfectly with the natural beauty around it. This is a direct correlation between zoning laws and refinement. I hope they make it as hard as possible for developers to have their way. Developers are businessmen and their priority #1 is the bottom line. The main consern of our neighborhoods should be as far removed from the developer's bottom line as possible. Developers do not care about your neighborhood, they want to turn as big a profit as possible, and that is all.

[Stucki]

The ironic thing about the planning disaster that is Utah is that Utah started off as one of the most and best planned areas in the country. Both Mormon and mining villages were planned with purpose. Unfortunately the developers took over which created the mess that is the Wasatch Front.

[montgjules]

Oops, I guess I skimmed a little too quickly. I thought it was for a specific city. The fact that somebody could even consider passing this for the entire state of Utah is just ridiculous.

[StarsOnSunday]

http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_3463279
Developers call off the attack. Whew!

[prk166]

80 pages for a proposed law seems like a lot if it was just for a bluff.