Council overrides mayor’s veto 6-1 on road connection for GEM apartment project after debate over stub-street rules

The West Jordan City Council voted 6-1 on Jan. 14 to override Mayor Burton’s veto of ordinance 24-53, a major-variation approval for the GEM apartment project that included a modification to a planned street connection. The override restores the council’s prior action approving the variation but leaves remaining design details to staff and the developer.

Mayor Burton explained his veto at the meeting, saying he was not acting emotionally but wanted additional review. "I just felt that it went really quick, and I wanna just make sure that all the options and consequences are reviewed," he said. Under state law and city rules, the council needs a supermajority to override a mayoral veto; the required five votes were met when the override passed 6-1.

The underlying dispute concerned whether the subdivision road must be extended through to the adjacent development or if it may terminate at the city-owned park to reduce vehicle cut-through between the single-family neighborhood and the new apartment complex. Council member Green, who moved to override the veto, described the council's intent as balancing connectivity with neighbor concerns: "All we're doing is restricting some automobile traffic... We're not putting up the Berlin Wall. They're gonna have common park with some walkways." Council member Bloom and city planning staff raised concerns that the council's decision might conflict with code requirements (discussed in the meeting as "14-5-5" or similar provisions) and that inconsistent application could create legal risk.

Planning staff said they prefer greater connectivity generally and flagged potential interpretive issues in the subdivision code, which could be subject to challenge if inconsistently applied. The city attorney and planning staff suggested that if the council prefers different treatment for stub streets in certain contexts, the more durable approach is to amend the ordinance so the code clearly reflects council policy rather than rely on ad hoc deviations. Staff also noted some confusion among council members and the developer about what had been approved at the earlier meeting; planning staff said the applicant was willing to work with the city to refine the design.

Council members who supported the override pointed to past local examples where a street terminates at park property to reduce cut-through traffic and protect park parking. "We've done this before," Council member Green said, referencing prior neighborhood examples. Council member Bloom said she would vote no, citing process concerns and a desire to avoid legal inconsistency.

The vote to override the mayor's veto passed 6-1 (Bloom opposed). Staff said the action restores the ordinance as adopted at the council's prior meeting; planning staff and the applicant will coordinate on the detailed design of the terminated street, parking and pedestrian connections and return to staff review as needed.