Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Rights topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident faults past State Street master plan enforcement, warns of property-rights impacts
Summary
During public comment at the planning commission work session, a resident described eight years of disputes tied to the State Street master plan, alleging forced property alterations and urging the commission to protect property rights in the general plan.
A resident delivering a lengthy public comment at the Orem planning commission's April 2 work session urged commissioners to prioritize property rights in the general plan and described past impacts he said resulted from the State Street master plan.
The commenter said the State Street master plan had required property owners to "bring it up to code" in ways that cost him millions and, he argued, amounted to an effective taking when additional front‑setback and design requirements were enforced. "When I sold one of my properties on State Street and the new owner tried to add a shed, he couldn't because he had to bring it up to code," the resident said. He added the plan's implementation had required a buyer to give up 15 feet of frontage to comply with proposed language and that the change had made redevelopment economically unworkable.
The resident said the plan included a trigger tied to the scope of improvements (a "10% trigger") that converted many properties from legal-nonconforming to conforming in ways that he and others saw as punitive. "If you make more than a 10% change ... it was unfair," he said, adding that the enforcement pushed sales and relocation decisions: "I sold everything in Orem city ... I'm in Lehi now. Why? Because they're freaking friendly to me."
Commissioners and staff acknowledged the history and said the State Street plan and related enforcement efforts are under review in other forums. A planning staff member noted that current staff and council are reviewing those triggers and considering more incremental approaches. "Matt and Cathy are looking at that right now, how to make changes to that program that's been in place," staff said.
Why it matters: the exchange underscores how master-plan design standards and retrofit requirements can create political and legal disputes with property owners. Several commissioners said it reinforced their desire to be clear in the general plan about the limits of any new design or retrofit requirements and to avoid retroactive imposition.
The resident warned of legal action if the city reintroduced similar rules without compensation or grandfathering. "If you're gonna compensate them correctly for it and fairly, not by changing zones, not by adding, new requirements and restrictions," he said, "I'll tell you what I'm gonna do. I'm sue the city. That's what I'm gonna do." Staff said review of the State Street rules and their triggers is ongoing.
