The Cache County Planning Commission voted Thursday to recommend that the County Council deny a request to rezone roughly 98 acres in the Petersburg area from A-10 (agricultural) to RU-2 (rural two-acre lots). The motion passed unanimously after public comment and staff presentation.

The commission’s staff report said the property’s location and characteristics are not compatible with the RU-2 zone and noted the nearest RU-2 parcel is about 1.25 miles away. Connor, planning staff, told the commission that the proposed rezoning “is not consistent with the Cache County general plan” and flagged secondary access and a restrictive condition on a large parcel as additional concerns.

The applicant, Ry Lund, addressed the commission and said the packet submitted with the application included a 20-lot concept and that “it wasn't gonna be 49 lots,” adding the RU-2 density assumptions in staff materials did not match the applicant’s stated intent. Several nearby residents told the commission they oppose the rezoning because of water and safety concerns. Resident Kent Baker said his family farm’s spring-fed troughs and irrigated silty loam fields could be affected if new diversions reduced local supply: “I’m afraid it will impact my ability to maintain my agricultural work that I'm trying to maintain.” Other residents described deep domestic wells in the area — one speaker said his well is about 480 feet deep — and warned that added homes would stress a limited aquifer and increase traffic on local roads.

Commission discussion repeatedly returned to water availability and county-level limits on providing services in sparsely served areas. One commissioner noted the county council has placed a temporary moratorium on new subdivisions above five lots while a basin-wide water study is completed; staff cautioned that state approval to transfer water rights does not guarantee a sustained, local groundwater supply. Commissioners also discussed that a zone change would permit the theoretical maximum density of RU-2 even if the current developer proposes fewer lots, and that infrastructure and emergency access could be inadequate for higher-density outcomes.

Following the public hearing, a commissioner moved that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the Mountain Manor Springs rezoning to the County Council based on the staff report’s five findings; a sixth finding — noting a late letter of opposition from Mendon City — was added during discussion. The motion was seconded and carried with all members voting aye.

The commission’s recommendation is advisory; the County Council will consider the rezoning and the public record at a future meeting. The applicant was told he will have another opportunity to present before the council.