Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission backs rezoning at 11456 East Nonson Lane to allow house on consolidated parcel
Summary
The Brighton Planning Commission voted Sept. 17 to recommend that the Town Council rezone 11456 East Nonson Lane from FR 1 to FR 0.5 so an owner can build a single-family home on a consolidated 0.72‑acre parcel. Neighbors voiced traffic and density concerns; staff said the change aligns with the general plan.
The Brighton Town Planning Commission voted Sept. 17 to recommend that the Town Council rezone a nonconforming parcel at 11456 East Nonson Lane from FR 1 to FR 0.5, a change staff said will allow a consolidated, buildable lot.
Justin, a planning staff member, told commissioners the applicant merged two substandard parcels into one roughly 0.72‑acre parcel and needs the FR 0.5 designation to meet minimum lot requirements. He described the zoning differences: FR 1 requires a minimum lot area of 1 acre and a 200‑foot lot width with maximum density of one unit per acre, while FR 0.5 requires a half‑acre minimum, 100‑foot width and allows up to two units per acre. Staff reported red‑shaded steeper areas on the site plan (greater than 30% slope) and said the proposed lot otherwise appears able to meet setbacks and other standards.
In public comment, neighbor Rose Rogers said she opposed the rezoning because creating two potential lots could increase winter traffic and occupancy in a cramped area. The property owner, Ryan, spoke online and said the plan is to build a single family home for his family, not a rental, and that the consolidation was to create a buildable lot consistent with neighboring development; he confirmed he holds a water share.
Commissioners pressed staff on legal and precedent issues. One commissioner warned that approving a spot rezoning could open the door for other undersized parcels north of Big Cottonwood Canyon Road to seek similar rezoning, altering the effective density of the neighborhood. Staff replied they had not recommended any exceptions to setbacks or slope limits and that the current application appears able to comply with those standards.
After discussion about lot history, water shares and general‑plan density targets, a motion to recommend approval of the rezoning to FR 0.5 was made, seconded and approved by voice vote. Commissioners attached the expectation that the project must meet standard site constraints (setbacks, height restrictions and slope rules) when the subdivision application returns for final review.
The Planning Commission’s recommendation will be forwarded to the Brighton Town Council for final action.
