Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lehi council approves higher transportation impact fee, short-term rental bylaws and multiple infrastructure measures; denies CHU concept plan
Summary
At its February meeting the Lehi City Council raised transportation impact fees, approved a Cold Springs Ranch area plan amendment to allow owner-occupied short-term rentals, authorized a substation construction contract and several development-related resolutions, and denied a 219-unit CHU concept plan over infrastructure and floodplain concerns.
The Lehi City Council on Thursday approved a package of ordinances and resolutions that adjust transportation funding, formalize limited owner-occupied short‑term rentals in Cold Springs Ranch, and authorize utility and development agreements, while denying a large concept plan for the CHU property.
The council voted to adopt Ordinance 03-2026, updating the transportation impact fee facilities plan and raising the per-trip transportation impact fee from $121.79 to $146.87, a roughly 20% increase recommended by consultants Bone, Collins & Associates. The consultant, Rachel Volick, told the council the increase reflects a new transportation master plan, recent growth projections and actual costs on several projects. The ordinance includes direction to update the fee every two years and takes effect 90 days after adoption.
Council members approved an amendment to the Cold Springs Ranch area plan (Ordinance 01-2026) to permit owner‑occupied short‑term rentals under specified parking and owner‑occupancy rules. Staff noted applications require a site plan showing required parking, the city enforces on a complaint basis, and state rules limit enforcement methods (e.g., cities cannot use listing sites as primary enforcement evidence).
The council approved Resolution 2026‑04 to enter an agreement with RME for construction of the Skye Substation after staff confirmed RME was the successful bidder. It also approved amendments to the ProSteel Customs development agreement requested by petitioner Dusty Yates, removing an expressly listed U‑Haul use and clarifying automotive sales were allowed within the commercial zoning.
By motion, the council denied a concept plan for the CHU property (proposed 219‑unit development) citing concerns that the plan did not fit the existing neighborhood character, relied on infrastructure not yet shown to be available, and included areas within FEMA’s 100‑year floodplain. Several council members urged clustering any future development away from sensitive wetlands and improving infrastructure analysis before reconsideration.
Other actions included adopting a home‑occupation code amendment (Ordinance 02‑2026) permitting adult day care in owner‑occupied homes with the requirement that operators hold a valid Utah Department of Health adult day care license, maintain annual fire/life safety inspections and comply with Utah Administrative Code R501‑1. The council also passed two related resolutions affirming local land‑use authority and inviting regional participation; and it tabled two draft resolutions on equitable transportation funding for Utah County to allow staff to refine data and regional outreach by an August timeline.
Votes at a glance (recorded motions and outcomes): - Consent agenda: Mover Council Member Newell; second Council Member Stallings; outcome: approved unanimously (Council Members Lockhart, Newell, Harrison, Freeman, Stallings voted yes). - Ordinance 03‑2026 (transportation impact fees): Mover Council Member Freeman; second Council Member Harrison; outcome: approved (Newell, Harrison, Freeman, Stallings, Lockhart yes). - Resolution 2026‑04 (Skye Substation agreement with RME): Mover Council Member Harrison; second Council Member Freeman; outcome: approved (unanimous among voting members present). - Resolution 2026‑63 (ProSteel Customs development agreement amendments): Mover Council Member Newell; second Council Member Harrison; outcome: approved (unanimous among voting members present). - Ordinance 01‑2026 (Cold Springs Ranch area plan amendment — owner‑occupied STRs): Mover Council Member Lockhart; second Council Member Freeman; outcome: approved (Freeman, Stallings, Lockhart, Newell, Harrison yes). - CHU concept plan (219 units): Mover Council Member Harrison; second Council Member Lockhart; outcome: denied (Freeman, Stallings, Lockhart, Newell, Harrison yes). - Ordinance 02‑2026 (home occupations — adult day care): Mover Council Member Stallings; second Council Member Freeman; outcome: approved (unanimous among voting members present) with requirement of Utah Department of Health adult day care license, annual fire/life safety inspection and compliance with Utah Administrative Code R501‑1. - Resolutions 2026‑05 and 2026‑06 (local land‑use authority and regional participation): Mover Council Member Freeman; second Council Member Lockhart; outcome: approved (unanimous among voting members present). - Resolutions 2026‑07 and 2026‑08 (transportation funding for Utah County): motion to table and direct staff to return with refined language for August 1 consideration; outcome: tabled.
What happens next: The transportation impact fee ordinance will take effect 90 days after formal adoption. Staff will implement the Cold Springs change by updating application materials for owner‑occupied STR permits and will return refined regional transportation funding language by roughly August 1, per the council’s direction. The CHU applicant may revise and resubmit concept plans with additional infrastructure and floodplain mitigation information.
Sources and provenance: Council meeting transcript, public hearing presentation by Bone, Collins & Associates (Rachel Volick) and staff comments (Kim and other staff); motions and roll call votes as recorded in the meeting record.
