Rush Valley planning commission approves Sager trust lot-line adjustment, 3-2

The Rush Valley Planning and Zoning Commission on an unnumbered October meeting approved a lot-line adjustment and variance requested by trustees for the Vance and Betty Sager trust to divide a 16.9294-acre parcel into three parcels of about 5.64 acres each.

Curtis Shagers, trustee of the Matson Meddy Shagers Trust, told the commission the trust sought an equal and equitable division so three beneficiaries would each receive similar acreage and remain eligible for the Greenbelt program: "Each of the parcels would be 5.64 acres," he said. He added that the proposal would not change outer boundaries or affect neighbors.

Commissioners and staff discussed earlier proposals that would have created one small (about 1.6–1.7 acre) parcel and one large (~14-acre) parcel, and the trustee said that split would have produced roughly $180,000 more land value for one beneficiary based on a November 2023 appraisal at about $16,100 per acre. Trustee Curtis Shagers said that the lot-line adjustment and variance were intended to avoid that disparity and to keep all three parcels in the Greenbelt.

Staff and multiple commissioners raised two recurring procedural concerns. Commissioner David Anderson cited Utah Code 10-9a-702 (variances) and said the commission may not find an unreasonable hardship when the hardship is self-imposed or merely economic. Commissioner Anderson also asked how the town would track a newly created nonbuildable parcel over time. Planning staff and others said the recorder's office and county mapping can mark a parcel as nonbuildable (for example, by hatching on the plat) and that a deeded easement can be recorded to provide access to a landlocked lot.

Participants identified specific parcel numbers during review: the landlocked central parcel was referred to as 0018, the larger front portion as 0038, and the southern portion as 0020; commissioners and applicants discussed inconsistencies between older paper maps and current county GIS pages (cited pages 283 and 306) and confirmed county records would be the controlling documentation.

Tanner Hussey, a representative from Ensign, presented maps and said the adjustment is largely a reconfiguration of prior internal boundaries. Commissioners asked for and received confirmation on the proposed access solution: a deeded easement recorded against the southern parcel (0020) to serve the landlocked 0018. Planning staff confirmed that an easement is an encumbrance, not a surrender of ownership.

After discussion, Commissioner Carl Wall moved to approve the lot-line adjustment as proposed; Commissioner Paul Bishop seconded. A roll-call tally recorded yes votes from Scott Hawkins, Carl Wall and Paul Bishop, and no votes from David Anderson and Kyle Russell; the chair announced the motion carried 3–2. The commission did not attach additional conditions beyond the recorded easement discussion noted in the hearing.

Documents and clarifications the commission discussed included the 16.9294-acre total, the November 2023 appraisal value used in the trustee's explanation, the alternative three-parcel geometry that had been proposed earlier (1.6, 1.7, ~14 acres) and the applicant’s explanation that two of the new lots had been previously buildable and would remain so where allowed by zoning.

The commission recorded that applicants may appeal the commission’s decision to the town council as provided under Rush Valley procedure; staff noted the town’s variance and appeals process would apply.