Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the General Plan Update topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners adopt General Plan updates to comply with SB 34, add language promoting housing near services
Summary
Utah County approved edits to its 2014 General Plan to align with Senate Bill 34’s requirement for a moderate-income housing plan, adding language encouraging moderate-income housing within incorporated municipalities near services and clarifying reporting expectations.
Get email alerts on the General Plan Update topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Utah County commissioners voted to update the Utah County General Plan (2014) to comply with Senate Bill 34 and to add clarifying language that emphasizes promoting moderate-income housing within incorporated municipalities near essential services.
Bryce Armstrong, community development staff, told the commission the amendment responds to SB 34 (2019) by updating the county’s moderate-income housing plan and adding several housekeeping edits. Armstrong explained the statute requires jurisdictions to review and report on progress and that a December 1 adoption date had been included in the bill’s timeline.
Commissioners discussed how to count housing inventory for reporting and whether accessory dwelling units and manufactured homes should be included. Armstrong said ADUs and certain rental units may meet the moderate-income thresholds the county will use to report housing inventory.
Several commissioners expressed concern that text saying “Utah County shall consider policies that create opportunities for housing for residents of various income levels in unincorporated areas” could conflict with longstanding county land-use priorities that encourage development inside municipalities. To address that concern, staff proposed and commissioners accepted additional language stating the county will “encourage and support, and promote moderate-income housing within incorporated municipalities near essential services, including employment, transportation options, commerce, education and health care.”
Commissioners moved and approved the General Plan amendment with the noted additions; staff said the plan could be revisited when the regional transportation plan is finalized and that further refinements may follow as reporting requirements are clarified by the state.
