Planning commission tables PUD amendment for President’s Park after debate over lot widths, affordability and utilities

The Grantsville Planning Commission on a long agenda item paused action on a proposed amendment to the President’s Park planned unit development that would increase the number of townhomes and change minimum lot widths.

Developer representative Travis Taylor told the commission the project team is asking to “modify the development agreement” and add 43 units, and that a 10% affordability threshold applied to that increase would guarantee “a minimum of 5” units meeting the affordability formula. Taylor said the townhomes’ typical footprint would be about 20 feet by 52–54 feet (a roughly 1,000 square‑foot footprint, with finished homes around 1,600 square feet after subtracting garage area).

Commissioners expressed repeated concern about the proposed cut in minimum lot width — from a 40‑foot standard to as little as 20 feet for some townhome units — and about how that change would affect livability, streetscape, and apparent expectations set by the original development agreement. Commissioner comments focused most on the 20‑foot width for townhomes; several commissioners said they could be more comfortable with a 30‑foot compromise but opposed the 20‑foot proposal. One commissioner said, “the change from 40 to 20 foot is something that gives me pause,” and others warned that 20‑foot units could provide only limited private outdoor space.

Taylor and his engineer said detailed utility and stormwater design has not been completed and that the development review committee would review utilities if the commission advanced the amendment. Taylor said the project team has met with the U.S. Army Corps and paid for a stormwater study (he referenced a roughly $70,000 stormwater report) and described a proposed perimeter “moat” concept to manage debris flows from an alluvial fan; the developer said further engineering work would follow only if the commission signaled willingness to approve the PUD changes.

On affordability, the developer told commissioners the larger 40‑foot units would likely price above the mid‑$400,000s, while the narrower townhome product could be targeted “sub $350,000.” Commissioners pressed the developer on alternatives for affordability — interest rate buy‑downs, reduced unit counts, or committing a share of the additional units to a moderate‑income definition — and asked whether the developer would accept fewer than the requested 43 additional units. Taylor said he would “have to go back and do that” but indicated a willingness to explore compromises.

After extended discussion, the commission took no final vote on the amendment. Commissioner Paul made a motion to table the item so the developer could return with revised materials and additional detail; the motion text appears on the record but a formal roll‑call tally was not transcribed. Commissioners directed the developer to coordinate with staff (Shelby) about when to return with updated materials.

Planning commissioners said they would want a clearer parks timeline and tighter commitments tied to concessions if they were to consider allowing substantial deviations from the original development agreement. Several commissioners emphasized they treat development agreements as bilateral commitments and want some of the original promises preserved in any amendment.

The developer and commissioners agreed to reconvene the PUD amendment discussion at a later meeting so the applicant can provide additional options, revised unit counts and frontage dimensions, and more detailed utility and parks timing information.

The commission’s discussion on this item included public‑facing technical points (stormwater, Army Corps jurisdiction, geotechnical checks) and policy choices (lot widths, housing mix, and affordability commitments). The item was tabled; the developer said he would return with revised proposals and asked to coordinate timing with staff.