[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-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",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_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":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6469861,"mediaKeyId","5780187-951deaa8eb75d9183feef7e78ea304b7","parentId",5780187,"title","Commission debates allowing gravel secondary driveways; no vote taken","audioSeconds",271,"startMs",6007000,"endMs",6278000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5780187-951deaa8eb75d9183feef7e78ea304b7&start=6007&end=6278","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5780187-951deaa8eb75d9183feef7e78ea304b7/thumbnail_6007000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6469861/Woodland-Hills/Utah-County/Utah/Commission-debates-allowing-gravel-secondary-driveways-no-vote-taken","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6469861-2d76c7b6e81451429e3b94ef2b183cdb/orig.mp4?Expires=1771191423&Signature=Ab7eyzj7kX--gIPlWH6gM0trNCTlnoinqcPCCPsXB4n9vyDHDhcuyT8J9DggWhk0kNcmt78905NtX79YlNWBvrH8pZ-d~ZfuyAzj9oQ3Ni2jUtBO6up1DK5FrlLOssrjYSyfs0G79E50TXBri21CiD4rr8zcEqVtLIaKA0D9g1cbVx-L4KA62sT9GI2jW1fAh5GQG1dZD5OSMBvJTLur-l9KNB-fN14UWdmIOgoQkZq0F-bVqylXIfUvjne7Qors9x4Dmt5asb2ZvTd517iQ92m8LucqhN2usLQA6N0w02gb55Ix0cZQt9ArgY4gaigBxXPPwbvc1DJ2ZFejOYOGUQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Woodland Hills","date","2025-09-18T21:59:23.947Z","article","Commission members discussed a proposal to allow secondary driveways to be surfaced with compacted gravel rather than requiring full paving (as currently required for primary driveways). Proponents said gravel would help homeowners with large lots or infrequent-use access stay compliant while avoiding the cost of paving. Concerns included tracking gravel onto public roads, plowing complications, weed growth, drainage and whether the city would end up responsible for increased maintenance.

Staff noted some existing dirt tracks and occasional uses (wood-hauling, seasonal access) and said the ordinance change would apply only to secondary driveways; primary driveways would still need to meet pavement standards. Commissioners asked whether culverts or other crossing requirements would still apply where a secondary approach crosses drainage ditches and whether setbacks and approach radii should be enforced.

The commission did not move the item to a vote and asked staff for more detail on recommended standards (maintenance, setbacks, culverts and plow impacts) before returning the item for formal consideration.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Planning Commission Meeting September 17, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Commissioners discussed a proposed code change to allow secondary driveways surfaced with gravel instead of requiring pavement, citing maintenance, plowing and erosion concerns; the item was not voted on and will be reviewed further.","taxTitle","Woodland Hills, Utah County, Utah","taxId",4717,"location","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":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6469866,"Applicant asked to pause Mountainvale Way rezoning while surveying and setbacks are clarified",342,4759000,5101000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5780187-951deaa8eb75d9183feef7e78ea304b7&start=4759&end=5101","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5780187-951deaa8eb75d9183feef7e78ea304b7/thumbnail_4759000.jpg","/articles/6469866/Woodland-Hills/Utah-County/Utah/Applicant-asked-to-pause-Mountainvale-Way-rezoning-while-surveying-and-setbacks-are-clarified","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6469866-24b0d05b7de275a6a5df26459cef5040/orig.mp4?Expires=1771191423&Signature=NQDN~hYgNzbhpJFAK9UJFRifU9ZWWl8DxDHVhHiM0iGSk5i37WynZKJGCA28NiEUpVaXjQMYZYhV5Hj9EaCFZhcoGFQBeMoFTw3DeY7zbJVlMWQ4hoHFpLh3U2UOASzxuF-d0Dg~BsFYlDgZBkNCmG89BGZs0ODtg11TXCV0LS4Ar4nppl65xTN1W7o3Nok4RA-1d3p~nKjemw9k--nZXFoUbM9KsjN84nLq-bZt8dDDwe~EWDA5NaRa6tRJ3hG8uw~-3lp0eg7lEiGGPgxtITk0XY4G8qCFSDf~CdcSmAnYTXXEJ0LqfbcH4vJ51NCRsvtnBLFBiP4xiwy0lza4Ww__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Christie Burchette appeared before the Woodland Hills Planning Commission seeking a zone change for a parcel on Mountainvale Way from R-2 to R-1 with the goal of creating a second one‑acre lot for sale. The commission reviewed lot frontage, setback requirements, and potential building envelopes.

Planning staff advised Burchette to obtain a survey showing the existing house footprint, proposed lot lines and that each proposed lot could meet minimum frontage and setbacks; staff noted front setbacks of 50 feet and rear setbacks of 30 feet in R-1 and that R-1-19 (a 19,000-square-foot minimum lot) could be an alternative that provides more flexibility. Commission members warned that some houses built across larger lots can fall inside building envelopes after subdivision and that surveys should confirm viability before further action.

The applicant agreed to prepare a survey and consider alternative zoning (R-1-19), and the commission put the request on hold pending the additional materials and recommendations from staff.","An applicant seeking to rezone a parcel on Mountainvale Way from R-2 to R-1 to create a second one-acre lot was advised to obtain a detailed survey and confirm setbacks before the commission acts; the item was held for additional information.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6469870,"Public raises questions about water tank, mailboxes and runoff during hearing on 3 Bridges development agreement",1134,1325000,2459000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5780187-951deaa8eb75d9183feef7e78ea304b7&start=1325&end=2459","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5780187-951deaa8eb75d9183feef7e78ea304b7/thumbnail_1325000.jpg","/articles/6469870/Woodland-Hills/Utah-County/Utah/Public-raises-questions-about-water-tank-mailboxes-and-runoff-during-hearing-on-3-Bridges-development-agreement","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6469870-f5e0fa684cd43ae0a3a07e0a281ba31b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771191423&Signature=ne5DDUXXCIYIoocyvMdFuyMOhAcB-NjoWqMbDvDGp6cCc8uPVYK5qGszE06ArcLfdRfEGUOZ16GHyBioAlTcF4lRrSdK7DHRwcpYGFGSU-niJEaY0hOvj-nDzvXjCNWhqKYsetUfXVNhc1jBOI29~OIA47AKtVbQihRYADkfzZxS3rfteO30qQpgOBjqB6ndshwnSS~bQP571VsmJ6yO0KonAxb4Qz5x6GF-kIFV4GVFpjhTKJ5JtyQN7lJKJaINSu~u4gmeAMb0m4rxpXxONLBWMtVsbZTBqDdepHwsdqOmlKAJ3kaXwpUiEZrlqti-qeykVPR2nYU1siqp7oXsyg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Woodland Hills Planning Commission held a public hearing on a draft development agreement with 3 Bridges Development, which would govern development on a parcel partly inside Woodland Hills and largely in neighboring Salem.

Larry Mylar, present on behalf of 3 Bridges, told the commission the developer’s plans include infrastructure that could benefit Woodland Hills, notably a proposed 550,000-gallon water storage tank with an estimated cost of about $1.5 million. Mylar said 3 Bridges has the funds available and that the developer would pay for construction. He said the tank would be located on or near existing tank infrastructure and that the city would control the tank once built.

Public commenters raised several concerns and questions: where the mailboxes would be relocated, parking and access at the mailboxes as county road changes (including a roundabout) are planned, whether the developer would donate land for expanded mailbox capacity, the exact tank site and whether the agreement should specify its location with latitude/longitude coordinates, and who would hold warranty and maintenance responsibility for the tank and associated access roads.

Residents also pressed for clear, written commitments about stormwater mitigation and liability: commenters asked whether Salem City would sign off on runoff plans so Woodland Hills would not bear future liability if runoff control failed on the developer’s property. 3 Bridges’ representative said the developer is designing detention basins and that the golf-course portion of the project will include capacity to handle canyon flows; he said the developer would add capacity to accept Woodland Hills’ flow and that the design effort is under way. Commissioners and staff noted that Salem is the lead jurisdiction for the larger project and that detailed elements would be worked out in subsequent agreement revisions and in Salem’s public hearing process.

The public hearing was informational; the commission did not vote on the development agreement at this meeting but advised that revisions and additional details would continue to be negotiated between counsel and returned for public consideration.","A public hearing on a proposed development agreement between Woodland Hills and 3 Bridges Development prompted resident questions about a proposed 550,000-gallon water tank, mailbox relocation, stormwater detention and maintenance responsibilities; no commission vote was taken.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6469876,"Planning commission adopts clarified ADU rules, allows detached accessory dwelling units with conditions",3308,961000,4269000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5780187-951deaa8eb75d9183feef7e78ea304b7&start=961&end=4269","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5780187-951deaa8eb75d9183feef7e78ea304b7/thumbnail_961000.jpg","/articles/6469876/Woodland-Hills/Utah-County/Utah/Planning-commission-adopts-clarified-ADU-rules-allows-detached-accessory-dwelling-units-with-conditions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6469876-4c4f15f6bf29762b72ae388b3b6d9248/orig.mp4?Expires=1771191423&Signature=eqGxUaZiiMvHPc7tNZLfrnLzL984u1MmdRnO1Thv3b4CTrHW2i6ctYcaODg9EacEQ4MstUAwlyJLhvtTSUY07uGDG0ut8fOSc8Sd20LbP0bn526sY3rsEjGxOAQB8xvJ6u07WrRBQSO7ZfRFrvV7Hi3Qc7K2H305yVsoOs4F7IR3~6YLTRNr4BtA2heumg~DfNwI-bNRVKRByriHzokDmugkmLs0XpBdrGsVNEX7sQwCpTbJgjvxNKX~vJtoGHTueq6s4r~GoZCpiVhRxzjYsxUg6t6CxybEbOJoDzm2yWOpnEA4dACTeTJnM-UlcI1~5RsvtLEUZIKwYlkQ0LPytg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Woodland Hills Planning Commission adopted revisions to city development rules that clarify rules for accessory dwelling units (ADUs), distinguishing between internal ADUs inside the primary dwelling and detached (external) ADUs located outside the primary home.

Commission staff explained the change aligns local terminology with prevalent municipal practice and state code: the ordinance retains separate categories — an internal accessory dwelling unit inside the main structure and an external, self-contained unit detached from the primary home — and restates setbacks and building requirements for each. The proposed amendment was described as intended to provide additional housing flexibility while keeping standards for setbacks, building codes and utility connections.

Commissioners and members of the public questioned size limits, foundation and utility requirements, septic and sewer connections, and whether tiny homes on wheels could qualify. Staff said any external ADU must meet all applicable city building and fire codes (which include foundation, electrical, plumbing, and fire-safety requirements) and county septic or sewer capacity rules. The commission discussed but did not add a minimum square-footage requirement for external ADUs; commissioners noted most lots and setback rules already limit extreme outcomes.

A motion to adopt the ordinance changes (city code 10-18-1 and 10-19) passed following a second. One commissioner announced an abstention and requested additional study; the motion nevertheless carried.","Commission adopted amendments to city codes covering accessory dwelling units (ADUs), distinguishing internal ADUs from detached/external ADUs and adding requirements for external units.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6469881,"Woodland Hills OKs ordinance to let developers buy city water shares instead of supplying their own",702,2814000,3516000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5780187-951deaa8eb75d9183feef7e78ea304b7&start=2814&end=3516","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5780187-951deaa8eb75d9183feef7e78ea304b7/thumbnail_2814000.jpg","/articles/6469881/Woodland-Hills/Utah-County/Utah/Woodland-Hills-OKs-ordinance-to-let-developers-buy-city-water-shares-instead-of-supplying-their-own","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6469881-65bc8027e9e762cb564788ffffc2665b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771191423&Signature=hkchWHhFA8q6XSdbXPSZq7e6oX8F369W1rSMBEh~aAHSkc~JhqRyiUmzabeaALy9SH-Tuv1w9CTya8~Xo75-cof31qaM2PNtbarXKnBu28SohO2jUgGe9yw~k3-Au4iTBORjyK8lvCtnbgDRlTAWwiP72nSzaQeCOQFGTM211WfcoAvuQgyemvls0~SEJlhN377o~iY-4oo3NAwd5szjlZI0--zg4WHRczJlzdLGduYFBxviqhxF8UI2Uy-69aTbHtYu0u9FzzNpuJByNdlg48klpqa-QlQ2T6A3sxPzNmff0ANmDn5YorsBEj-2xi3f93XFd780nXzUeBSGieXs7A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Woodland Hills Planning Commission voted to adopt an amendment to city code 8-5-1 that lets developers acquire water shares from the city for a fee instead of bringing their own water rights when building new lots.

The change was presented during the meeting's public hearing portion as a response to the city’s current surplus of water rights. A staff member explained the ordinance will create a mechanism allowing developers to obtain “water shares” from Woodland Hills at fees set in the city fee schedule; those fees will be competitive with open-market prices and subject to periodic review.

Residents at the hearing asked whether the city could inadvertently sell water needed for existing residents. A speaker identified as Diana Sackett asked whether retaining “a little bit of excess water” created risk. A staff member replied the city would monitor supplies, could refuse to exchange shares if local needs would be compromised, and that oversight would involve the city’s water superintendent, the planning commission and the mayor.

Commissioners also noted state oversight: the Division of Water Resources monitors city water use and receives annual reports on consumption and unused rights. The commission discussed storage constraints and how additional storage would affect reliability, and a resident later raised questions about how share values would be set; staff said price and timing will be reflected in the city fee schedule and could be adjusted.

A motion to approve the amendment to city code 8-5-1 was made and seconded; the commission voted in favor and approved the change.

The ordinance change does not eliminate the option for developers to bring their own shares; it provides an alternative for applicants who prefer to acquire city-approved shares. The city emphasized that any share transfers must meet state approval for use in Woodland Hills.","The Planning Commission approved a change to city code 8-5-1 allowing developers to acquire city water shares for a fee as an alternative to bringing private water rights into Woodland Hills.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Commission debates allowing gravel secondary driveways; no vote taken

Applicant asked to pause Mountainvale Way rezoning while surveying and setbacks are clarified

Public raises questions about water tank, mailboxes and runoff during hearing on 3 Bridges development agreement

Planning commission adopts clarified ADU rules, allows detached accessory dwelling units with conditions

Woodland Hills OKs ordinance to let developers buy city water shares instead of supplying their own