Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cache County Council tightens rezone rules, raises commercial lot coverage and denies Dutson rezone
Summary
On Jan. 27, 2026 the Cache County Council adopted code changes that restrict where RU2/RU5 rezonings can be filed, increased maximum lot coverage in the Commercial zone to 70% (with a canal-setback exemption), and denied the Dutson property rezone; council also advanced several resolutions and appointments.
At a regular meeting on Jan. 27, 2026, the Cache County Council in Logan adopted several land-use changes and decided multiple agenda items, including denying a private rezone request and approving amendments to zoning rules.
Vice Chair Kathryn Beus presided over the meeting. The council unanimously denied Ordinance 2026-01, the Dutson Rezone request for 15.12 acres near Newton, after Development Services interim director Brian Abbott summarized the Planning Commission's recommendation for denial and owner Paul Dutson clarified the application had listed an incorrect number of homes. Councilmember Keegan Garrity moved to deny the rezone and the motion passed 6-0 (Chair Sandi Goodlander was absent). The Planning Commission had cited incompatibility with RU2 standards, distance from other RU2 parcels and access/service concerns.
The council then moved to adopt two code amendments. Ordinance 2026-02 amends §17.08.030 to add distance-based restrictions on RU2 and RU5 rezones: applications for RU2 must be within one-quarter mile of a municipality or propose no more than three lots; RU5 applicants must be within one-half mile or likewise limit potential lots to three. Interim Director Brian Abbott presented the draft; Councilmember Nolan Gunnell made the motion to suspend rules and pass the ordinance, which passed 6-0.
The council also passed Ordinance 2026-03, an amendment to Table 17.10.040 that raises the maximum lot coverage in the Commercial (C) zone to 70% and creates a process for a canal-company-written exemption to the 16.5-foot canal setback. That measure drew public comment from Chris Chambers, a storage‑unit business owner, who said his facility currently exceeds prior coverage levels and asked how compliance would work; Chambers suggested an 80/20 approach used by some cities. Public Works Director Matt Phillips weighed in on engineering and roadway considerations during discussion. The ordinance passed on a 4-2 vote (Yes: David Erickson, Kathryn Beus, Nolan Gunnell, Joann Bennett; No: Keegan Garrity, Mark Hurd).
Votes at a glance
- Ordinance 2026-01 (Dutson Rezone): Motion to deny passed 6-0. (Motion by Keegan Garrity; second by Nolan Gunnell.) - Ordinance 2026-02 (RU2/RU5 code amendment): Motion to suspend rules and pass passed 6-0. (Motion by Nolan Gunnell.) - Ordinance 2026-03 (Combined 17.10 amendment — commercial lot coverage and canal exemption): Motion to suspend rules and pass passed 4-2. (Motion by Nolan Gunnell.)
Why it matters
The RU2/RU5 amendment limits where higher-density rural rezones can be proposed, directing such changes closer to municipal boundaries or keeping them small (three lots or fewer). The change to commercial lot coverage and the canal exemption alter development potential for commercially zoned parcels and create a pathway for written canal-company approvals to reduce setbacks, which may affect redevelopment and expansion of existing commercial sites.
What’s next
Several of the code changes take effect as provided in County procedures; the council set related public hearings for additional ordinances on Feb. 10, 2026. The Dutson landowner was advised to revise and reapply if he wishes to pursue a different plan. The council indicated staff will coordinate implementation details with Development Services and public-works staff.
