Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning Subdivision topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Pleasant Grove resident urges council to allow older lots to be subdivided

Pleasant Grove City Council · December 3, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A resident asked the council to amend frontage requirements so an older, undersized lot could be sold and developed; council did not debate the request during public comment and staff will follow up.

A Pleasant Grove homeowner urged the City Council on Tuesday to consider amending subdivision rules so older lots with narrower frontages can be developed or sold.

"My name is Matt Bramwell," Bramwell told the council during the open comment period. He said he lives at 542 East 300 North and built his house six years ago. Bramwell said a neighboring lot with similar dimensions is owned by a resident in financial difficulty who wants to sell, but current city rules — including an 85‑foot frontage requirement cited by the commenter — prevent subdivision that would allow building that lot.

Bramwell asked the council to consider an amendment or a grandfathering provision to allow lots in older neighborhoods with smaller frontages to be developed, saying it would improve the block’s appearance and help the homeowner sell an otherwise undevelopable parcel. He said the lot is currently an overgrown field that is an "eyesore" and that permitting development would "beautify" the neighborhood.

The mayor reminded commenters that the council will not interact or debate speakers during the open session and that staff will follow up on issues raised. No council vote or staff directive was recorded during the meeting in response to Bramwell’s request.

If the council elects to pursue the matter, next steps would typically include a staff review of the applicable development code, possible preparation of an ordinance or variance process, and public hearings; none of those steps were announced during Tuesday’s meeting.