Planning commission tables Higley Road rezone after infrastructure, wetlands concerns

The Tooele County Planning Commission voted to table a rezone request for a roughly 61-acre property north of Higley Road that the applicant asked to change from MU-40 (multiuse, 40-acre minimum) to MD (manufacturing/distribution). Staff recommended denial at this time because of infrastructure constraints and wetlands on the site; commissioners asked the applicant to work with planning staff to propose acceptable uses and an infrastructure plan before the next business meeting.

Planning staff member Trish DeCote told commissioners the property is "just North of Higley Road" and is "just barely over 61 acres in size" and noted the site borders the western edge of the area identified for the Inland Port. DeCote said the staff recommendation was to deny the rezone given current road access and infrastructure limitations: "Staff just recommends denial at this time because of those issues. Until those infrastructure things can be addressed, I think we should just hold off for the reason for now."

Property owner Michael Drury, who identified himself during the hearing, said he has owned land in the area for about 20 years, has completed environmental and cleanup work on portions of the site and has already performed county road improvements on other parcels he owns. Drury told the commission he has coordinated with the Army Corps on wetlands delineation and said the wetlands delineation measured about 9.9 acres; he said he plans to avoid developing the wetland area for now and to develop roughly 41 acres on the east side of the parcel. Drury also said traffic studies he commissioned show heavy existing use on Higley Road, citing "about 400 trucks 400 semis a day, about 3,000 cars a day."

Commissioners raised concerns about a single access point (Higley Road), existing road width and safety, the presence of wetlands that may require Army Corps approval for mitigation, and how uses permitted by an MD (manufacturing/distribution) zoning could affect the area. Staff described that the current roadway section is narrower than planning standards and that minimum residential road width requirement is 60 feet in parts of the code; staff noted portions of Higley Road are privately owned and that access arrangements would need resolution.

After discussion, Commissioner Scott moved to table the rezone request and direct the applicant to work with planning staff to identify acceptable (lower-impact) uses and produce a plan for infrastructure improvements appropriate to the intended uses. Commissioner Dow seconded the motion. The motion passed on roll call; the commission scheduled the item for the commission's May business meeting (the parties discussed holding the next hearing on May 14). The tabling preserves current zoning while the applicant and staff collaborate on proposed zoning conditions and infrastructure planning.

The tabling does not change the underlying zoning. If the applicant returns with zoning conditions the county council adopts, those conditions would limit permitted uses on the property; if the property is rezoned without conditions and a use is listed as permitted in the new zone, that use would not require a separate CUP based on road impact alone.