[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},"mediaId",6655322,"mediaKeyId","5404412-17d36f87cd975a006cb637974e7bb9f5","parentId",5404412,"title","Commission agrees to start state-mandated water-plan element; delays comprehensive landscaping ordinance rewrite","audioSeconds",1039,"startMs",3209000,"endMs",4248000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5404412-17d36f87cd975a006cb637974e7bb9f5&start=3209&end=4248","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5404412-17d36f87cd975a006cb637974e7bb9f5/thumbnail_3209000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6655322/Utah/Commission-agrees-to-start-state-mandated-water-plan-element-delays-comprehensive-landscaping-ordinance-rewrite","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6655322-5e8a5036d369cbbad69758c29661e015/orig.mp4?Expires=1770644413&Signature=PfG1yF~yc9pbod2U-JsYcT3xaohCUcVC-jpvi0-0n~TGIzeO9kYIQp4J5xRGtgjN1yvT3KQIGJIGb14HHYMczhhEusNfnyvrAXtwdwxezRBed9829B16nvoZ14iRkyyvj-JyFAEyOy7BwD7hTVxDyFTwX1gD4XMdwDj-U9vUlkC0E5gBrzvewVS6JIGKju0nN3gD2PBwOraDzcTAaumjavb7DjTatRAZejzl~Y0WZKCc45N4v9vrB~Og3HGMNBOZed5FJihh4SZf6C8GEbzPRQHjZMiEnm7wfvLZNpf6VGQ1V77GC8t5jaQD0O7XLWzH6yGul0jrEnEfESr6oIaZaA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-07-15T12:17:10Z","article","Grand County's Planning Commission on July 14 gave staff a green light to begin drafting the state-mandated water element of the county's general plan and signaled it will delay adoption of a comprehensive water-efficient landscaping ordinance until that plan and a broader land-use-code overhaul can be coordinated.

Commissioners and staff said the legislature requires the water-preservation element be adopted by the end of the calendar year. Planning staff advised that the element focuses on preserving existing water allocations and aligning local planning with water providers and conservation plans. Contract planner Andrew Jackson and planning staff explained the element must incorporate data from local water districts and the county's conservation planning and that a public-engagement schedule beginning this summer would be needed to meet the statutory deadline.

Commissioners offered several aims for the element: establishing a clear, locally adopted baseline for water use; coordinating with water providers and districts; and linking water availability to development approvals where appropriate. Several members said a clear local baseline would help resolve differing public views about how much water is available.

On water-efficient landscaping, the commission heard public comment from Katie Murphy, who said she had spent a year drafting a comprehensive Grand County landscaping ordinance as a VISTA in planning and urged the commission to \"table this\" and allow more integration of her draft with staff proposals. Planning staff said the version on the agenda was deliberately limited to a few elements—primarily to allow county residents to access the Utah WaterSavers turf buyback program—and was not the comprehensive rewrite Murphy and others had previously worked on.

Staff and commissioners expressed two linked concerns: limited planning-staff capacity and the land-use-code'integrity risks of piecemeal amendments. Planning staff recommended advancing a short, narrowly tailored amendment to enable participation in the WaterSavers program while deferring a full landscaping-code rewrite to a larger, funded land-use-code update that would include the water element. Commissioners generally supported that approach, noting that ad-hoc code changes can create incompatible sections and legal ambiguity.

Trish, representing the county commission in the meeting's county-commission update, confirmed the state mandate for the water element and said the commission had already discussed required elements, including potential agricultural protections.

The planning commission took an informal straw poll in favor of starting the water-element work immediately and asked staff and the contracted planner to schedule public engagement. Staff said it would use existing water-conservation plans and consult local water districts, aiming for public hearings in October and adoption before the end of the year.

Katie Murphy offered to work with staff and commissioners to reconcile her earlier, more robust landscaping draft with a staff-prepared short amendment if the commission wished to move quickly to enable the WaterSavers program. Commissioners expressed interest in her assistance but emphasized that a comprehensive landscaping ordinance should be coordinated with the general-plan water element and a holistic land-use-code rewrite.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","7.14.25 Grand County Planning Commission","oneSentenceSummary","Grand County planning commissioners agreed to begin work this summer on a state-required water element of the county general plan but signaled they will not immediately adopt a broad water-efficient landscaping ordinance, favoring a coordinated general-plan and land-use-code update instead.","taxTitle","Grand County Boards and Commissions, Grand County, Utah","taxId",67556,"location","Utah","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6655327,"Planning commission backs Metoyer Drive overnight-accommodations overlay but removes workforce-housing exception",960,1240000,2200000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5404412-17d36f87cd975a006cb637974e7bb9f5&start=1240&end=2200","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5404412-17d36f87cd975a006cb637974e7bb9f5/thumbnail_1240000.jpg","/articles/6655327/Utah/Planning-commission-backs-Metoyer-Drive-overnight-accommodations-overlay-but-removes-workforce-housing-exception","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6655327-555ee02d452797d2e3e30babde950c67/orig.mp4?Expires=1770644413&Signature=eOGbyn0YRlKBTdeFby5v9oj-XDCqtVass5~MFcXLxt35koL9dRPS7mIyBrfiiczWrsOVSO6t~xoiJ87QPJ2Xmhm0kHJHb0EYzz2R1QnQquy26SP~LDNkVdT~xIwK8-LmsBIgltLkbSEkhHe8N6guSf47oAfzMrmdEPkEi3TDtLxdCmGsGWMy9Hv7xHZNypNU6V1WxM9oLW~GmfFko0L7aQvpcnWvm1H~Iw8dINqpTaFiM39YZot2AeBZsDT3RnI~hGd7c17mVRxCt7GJZDoXGiLAPkKhlR2IC6CsNRONQGg52eDXQJ9meSEvTEi~mGYPYkIy3DvlvbiCRNVp6F06Og__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Grand County Planning Commission on July 14 recommended approval of an overnight-accommodations overlay for a 2.1-acre Metoyer Drive parcel but amended the recommendation to exclude an exception for the code'required workforce (assured) housing provision.

The commission'level vote, taken after a public hearing and applicant presentation, will be forwarded to the Grand County Commission for final action. Chair Sam opened the public hearing and said the commission'level recommendation would be transmitted to the county commission.

Applicant representatives described the site as surrounded by existing overnight accommodations and said the proposed 24-unit development is intended to be high-end townhome-style lodging rather than a high-density condominium. The applicant said the project would generate local tax revenue and \"fits kind of what was put in place for the OAO,\" and noted the application requests waivers for two overlay requirements: an 80% on-site power-generation standard and the assured-housing obligation.

Planning staff advised the commission that the on-site 80% energy requirement is a \"pretty tough commitment\" and that the assured-housing requirement is legally complicated. Staff summarized that a court-backed proportionality standard applies to housing exactions and that a fee-in-lieu is possible but still subject to a proportionality test and restrictions on how and when collected funds may be used.

Commission discussion focused on two issues: (1) whether the Metoyer parcel is an appropriate location for overnight accommodations under the county'adopted overlay; and (2) whether to allow an exception to the assured-housing requirement for this application. Commissioners said the parcel's context and size made it a reasonable candidate for the overlay, but several members expressed concern that exempting the project from workforce-housing obligations would shift cumulative housing costs onto the community.

Commissioner Aaron moved to recommend approval of the overlay but without the assured-housing exception. The motion was seconded and, according to the meeting record, passed unanimously; the transcript records that the recommendation and conditions \"will be on the county commission tomorrow.\" The commission closed the public hearing and transmitted its recommendation to the county commission, which will consider the matter at an upcoming meeting.

The planning commission'level action was limited to the overlay (the commission did not approve site-plan or final building design). Staff noted the development agreement language in the record will be adjusted to reflect whether exceptions are granted for assured housing or energy requirements, and that more detailed site plans and engineering will be required if the county commission approves the overlay.

The record shows commissioners also discussed practical implementation questions: how a fee-in-lieu would be calculated, the difficulty of proving a direct housing demand caused solely by these 24 units, and constraints on spending collected fees within statutorily acceptable timeframes. Staff cautioned that fee-in-lieu programs can accumulate funds that are difficult to spend promptly and remain legally vulnerable if they fail to meet proportionality standards.

The commission'level recommendation will be accompanied by a development agreement that reflects the commission's decision to exclude the assured-housing exception; the county commission will make the final determination.","The Grand County Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of an overnight-accommodations overlay for a 2.1-acre Metoyer Drive parcel but removed an exception that would have waived the code'required workforce (assured) housing requirement. The recommendation goes to the county commission.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Commission agrees to start state-mandated water-plan element; delays comprehensive landscaping ordinance rewrite

Planning commission backs Metoyer Drive overnight-accommodations overlay but removes workforce-housing exception