Daniel council debates code change to allow commercial condominiums; owners say it helps small businesses, council raises enforcement concerns

Nephi Tranel, a property owner on Highway 40, asked the Daniel Town Council to amend town code to permit commercial condominiums, saying the structure would allow small business tenants to buy and build equity rather than continue to rent.

"It's advantageous for a small business to be able to occupy their own property," Tranel said during the council's Aug. 4 meeting, describing a building he said is already operating as commercial space and is subdividable into individual units.

Corbin (presenting as the applicant's representative) explained how commercial condominiumization works, saying recorded covenants, codes and restrictions (CC&Rs) and a homeowners association would manage common areas and reduce the town's enforcement workload. "When you condominiumize a building, it gives people the opportunity…to invest and be vested in the building," he said, arguing the model helps smaller local businesses buy property they could not otherwise afford.

Planning staff and the planning commission recommended approval after a public hearing; the council heard that discussion but treated the item as a non‑decisional discussion. Several council members pushed back, citing potential liabilities and increased administrative duties under state condominium law. One council member told the applicant the town is a small jurisdiction with limited staff and warned that condominium disputes often produce appeals or complaints that fall back on municipal resources.

Neighbors raised practical concerns about traffic and access. Resident Jason Stewart, who lives across the street from the site on Little Sweden, showed photos and described difficulty turning into his driveway because of vehicle movements tied to the commercial parcel: "If I had a problem…who in your HOA would I talk to?" he asked. The applicant's representative replied that the HOA president would serve as the point of contact and that they are coordinating access improvements.

The council and applicant also discussed insurance, maintenance assessments and how CC&Rs allocate responsibility for common‑area repairs. The applicant said each unit owner carries insurance for individual units and the HOA carries liability for parking lots and common areas; a reserve account and CAM/assessment fees would cover maintenance needs.

Council members noted the planning commission's review and said they had previously discussed and tabled or voted against similar requests after weighing potential costs to the town. No vote was taken at the Aug. 4 meeting; the council left the item for further consideration and additional information.

The council encouraged the applicant to return with the supplemental materials requested at prior meetings and for staff to clarify the town's administrative obligations under state condominium law before any ordinance drafting.

What's next: The item remains under discussion; the council did not schedule a follow‑up vote during the Aug. 4 meeting.