Zoning fight may pit Utah, cities

The tension isn't atypical — with developers and city leaders often at odds over what shape a landscape should take.

Developers often become frustrated by inconsistent municipal decisions, like Provo approving residential zoning for one developer and denying it for another, says Charles Buki, a national planning consultant who has held senior positions at the Neighborhood Reinvestment Commission and the American Institute of Architects.

Buki, who is Virginia-based, favors good planning processes but concedes zoning is "probably not the most perfect tool in the 21st century. . . . The zoning process is a poor forum to hash out the debate" between developers looking at short-term profits and city officials who want long-term stability.

Presently, cities can "make any zoning decisions they want so long as it's not made in an arbitrary and capricious manner," said Lincoln Shurtz, legislative analyst for the Utah League of Cities & Towns.

That type of latitude allows cities to zone land agricultural, residential or commercial — and divvy up chunks of residential land to allow for higher density housing or larger lots.

Salt Lake City Councilwoman Jill Remington Love maintains local zoning control is of supreme importance.

"Through zoning we've been able to protect a lot of our neighborhoods in Salt Lake City," she said. "We've been able to protect our foothills and protect the downtown in a way by preventing sprawl and concentrating development."

Curtis and Harper want to stop cities from employing what can be inconsistent zoning, such as saying one area can have homes on 5,000-square-foot lots while an area down the road has to have larger lots. There's no health, safety or public welfare reason to let one area have more dense development in it than another, Curtis says.

The two lawmakers also want to eliminate issues that come up with agricultural land. Much undeveloped open space is zoned agricultural, even though it's not being used to grow crops. Cities zone land agricultural to make property owners who want to develop it to come to the city to negotiate, Curtis contends.

Property owners then have to barter with the city over density, development fees, open space and other issues before any change in the zoning is endorsed.

"The whole concept of a 'holding' zone — so that when you want to use your property you have to come in and negotiate — kind of bothers me," Curtis said.

Many city leaders are riled about the move to make changes and vented frustration at Harper at the Oct. 17 meeting of the league's Legislative Policy Committee. Some have suggested the changes could make the entire state have Houston-style zoning rules. Houston is infamous as one of the worst-planned cities in the United States.