Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission refers contested East Garland rezoning back to Planning Commission
Summary
After public comment and staff briefing on a request to rezone a roughly 20-acre East Garland parcel from AHZ to A1/2, Box Elder County Commissioners un-tabled Ordinance #599 and voted to send the proposal back to the Planning Commission for further review and a community plan.
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County staff and the property applicant clashed over the proposed rezoning in East Garland during the Feb. 25 meeting, and commissioners opted not to approve the A1/2 rezone request, instead referring the matter back to the Planning Commission for further study.
Community Development Director Scott Lyons outlined the history: the application originated in May 2024 and drew a lengthy public hearing at the Planning Commission, where most speakers opposed half-acre zoning. Lyons said the county later worked with residents on a community plan and an Agricultural Heritage Zone (AHZ) alternative. Applicant Brody Calder told the commission he sought smaller lots to allow some agriculture while creating parcels his children could use in future. Chairman Tyler Vincent and other commissioners expressed sympathy for the applicant's position but emphasized countywide consistency and the General Plan’s intent to prioritize growth within incorporated cities.
Commissioner Bingham moved to un-table Ordinance #599 so the commission could act; the item was un-tabled. Commissioner Perry then moved to send the rezoning request back to the Planning Commission for rezoning and review; the motion carried unanimously on roll call.
The commission’s action does not approve A1/2 zoning; it instructs staff and the Planning Commission to re-examine the parcel, evaluate community plans, and recommend a zone consistent with the General Plan. No final rezoning was adopted at the Feb. 25 meeting; further hearings or deliberations by the Planning Commission and the county are anticipated.
