Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Exactions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission backs updated exactions language, clarifying when frontage improvements are required
Summary
The commission recommended that council adopt code changes clarifying exactions (developer-required curb, gutter and frontage improvements), stressing state-law nexus limits on disproportionate requirements and noting appeals and UDOT intersections.
Copperton’s planning commissioners recommended May 13 that the town council adopt amendments clarifying when exactions—developer-paid frontage improvements such as curb and gutter—may be required.
Staff (Speaker 6) said the text restores language inadvertently omitted from earlier code updates and aligns local practice with state limits on exactions: the municipality may require new public improvements that are proportionate to a development’s impact (for example, a new house on an undeveloped lot may be asked to construct frontage improvements), but should not impose disproportionate obligations for minor projects. Speaker 6 described the legal concept as requiring a nexus between the requested improvement and the impact of the development.
Commissioners raised site-specific questions, including how requirements apply near highways (where UDOT rules also apply) and who pays for work. Staff said applicants may choose their own contractor and that municipal inspection will verify compliance; an administrative appeal process exists for decisions applicants wish to challenge.
After discussion, Speaker 3 moved and Speaker 2 seconded a recommendation that council adopt the proposed exactions language. The motion passed with no recorded objections. Staff said routine inspections and standards will apply and that the commission will be briefed on any annexation- or rezone-related impacts later.
