Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board weighs whether some municipal rules create 'political liability' amid housing debate
Summary
ULCT staff presented two local policy fact patterns — use of a 32‑foot roadway exception as a citywide standard and a city limiting housing to quarter‑acre single‑family lots — and asked the board whether those practices represent political liabilities requiring league action.
League staff presented two fact patterns May 19 to ask whether certain local policies should be labeled political liabilities and how the league should respond.
Fact pattern one concerned several cities that staff said were using a statutory exception intended to allow wider roads when street parking is needed — a "32‑foot road width" exception — as a default citywide standard rather than on a project‑by‑project basis. Jared and other staff noted that in some verified examples the exception had become the standard cross‑section for residential streets, not a narrowly applied exception. Board members asked clarifying questions about whether the practice was project‑specific or citywide and discussed possible responses.
Options discussed included: 1) work with the cities to reduce political liability, 2) pursue narrow legislation targeting the practice, 3) oppose legislation on principle, or 4) let the cities handle the matter locally. Board members suggested an additional approach — require cities to record specific findings when they invoke the exception — to preserve local flexibility while limiting misuse.
Fact pattern two concerned a city that staff said effectively allows only single‑family housing on lots of a quarter acre or larger, prohibiting multifamily, townhomes and smaller lot development. Staff said that city is among a very small number on the Wasatch Front taking that approach. The board discussed whether and how the league should engage, including outreach to the city, education about consequences, or more formal action.
Staff used Slido polling during the meeting to collect board preferences on what the league should do; because responses are part of internal deliberations the board asked staff to follow up with targeted engagement and additional fact‑gathering.
Ending: Staff said they will follow up to verify details, continue outreach, and return with options rather than immediately labeling specific municipalities as political liabilities or taking legislative action without further verification.
