Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Maple Springs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves rezone to Professional Office after heated neighborhood hearing
Summary
The council approved Ordinance 2025‑004 to rezone 7.53 acres near 1100 North from R1‑8 to Professional Office (P‑O) by a 4‑1 vote. Neighbors raised concerns about lighting, traffic, and losing residential character; proponents said PO would create less density than a 28‑lot subdivision.
The Pleasant Grove City Council voted 4‑1 to approve Ordinance 2025‑004 rezoning roughly 7.53 acres at 1783, 1807, 1841 and 1855 West 1100 North from R1‑8 (single‑family residential) to the P‑O (Professional Office) Zone. The motion carried with Council Members Dianna Andersen, Eric Jensen, Karianne LeMone and Todd Williams voting "Yes" and Council Member Steve Rogers voting "No." Community Development Director Daniel Cardenas told the council the request conforms to the city's General Plan and that the Planning Commission recommended approval with one dissenting vote.
The applicant, Brett Evanson of Maple Springs of PG Holdings, LLC, told council the rezone would likely yield three office buildings rather than a 28‑lot single‑family subdivision, which he argued would be less dense. Multiple nearby residents spoke during the public hearing: Carrie Hammond, who lives at 1877 W 1100 N and owns a back parcel, said she and nearby neighbors came away from developer meetings "in support of the proposed rezone" but asked that site plans strictly adhere to code for dumpsters, lighting, landscaping and traffic mitigation. Other residents, including Mike McClellan and John Johannesmeyer, urged consideration of smaller homes to preserve neighborhood character and walkability.
Council debate focused on reconciling property owner rights, the General Plan's envisioned land use, and direct impacts to adjacent homeowners. Attorney Tina Petersen advised that while the City has discretion, a denial of a rezone that otherwise conforms to the General Plan would require factual findings. Council ultimately approved the rezoning; staff recorded follow‑up requests to review lighting concerns mentioned during public comment and to ensure site plans meet separation and setback standards when they are submitted.
