Spring City planning commission recommends public hearing and 30-day survey on reducing minimum lot size to 0.5 acre

Spring City’s Planning and Zoning Commission on Monday recommended that the city council hold a public hearing and run a public survey to decide whether to reduce the minimum buildable lot size from 1.06 acres to one-half acre.

The commission voted unanimously to ask the council to schedule a noticed public hearing, present educational materials and then distribute a 30-day survey — using numbered mailed ballots for property owners and in-person/QR options at city hall — so the commission can make a recommendation informed by the public comments and survey results.

Why it matters: The change would amend the city’s RA-1 zoning minimum and could enable property owners to subdivide larger lots. Commissioners said the issue has split the community and that a controlled survey plus public education would help the council and the public understand trade-offs.

Commissioners focused early in the meeting on survey design and administration. An unidentified planning and zoning member said the first step was ‘‘identify what kind of data you’re trying to get from the survey’’ and recommended short, simple questions. That participant added, “We’re gonna recommend a survey.”

A draft ballot question discussed by the commission read: “Do you favor reducing buildable lot sizes in the Spring City boundary from 1.06 acres to 1/2 acre?” A separate exchange cited local service constraints — sewered areas may have different development requirements than areas without sewer — and commissioners said the survey should collect contextual information such as current lot size and residents’ reasons for preferring one size over another.

Legal context entered the discussion. An unidentified participant referenced a 2023 state change to ballot-box zoning law and said a unanimous local legislative decision on land use ‘‘is not subject to a referendum,’’ noting that even a single council ‘no’ vote could preserve the right to seek a referendum.

Several commissioners and at least one attendee urged controls to avoid duplicate responses. Options discussed included numbered mailed surveys tied to property records, in-person check-in with ID or tax/utility bill at city hall, and QR-code responses captured electronically. Scott Newman, who identified himself during public comment, urged the commission to retain an experienced survey statistician — for example from a local university — to ensure the instrument is unbiased and defensible.

Commissioners debated participant eligibility for the survey: Spring City’s ordinance distinguishes residents (who must own or rent in town and live there at least one year) from absentee property owners. Commissioners agreed the survey should reach property owners as well as residents in ways that reflect how land-use changes affect both groups, while also checking state law on whether any distinction could be enforced.

On the timing and next steps, commissioners recommended a 30-day response window for the mailed/numbered surveys, a noticed public hearing to provide education and collect in-person input, and that planning and zoning prepare a letter and the recommended question for the council. The commission asked staff (Kate Penny and chair/staff) to draft the survey and a letter to present at the next planning-and-zoning meeting and to the city council.

The commission’s motion asked the council to schedule the public hearing and to proceed with the survey so planning and zoning can “make our recommendation to city council” after considering the hearing and survey results. The commission chair said the motion passed unanimously;

Next steps: The commission will prepare the recommended survey language, confirm legal constraints with the state, coordinate the notice and logistics, and present the recommendation to the city council at its next meeting. The final decision to change the ordinance would rest with the elected city council.