From Deseret News archives:

More land-use fights forecast

Local governments told to expect more legislative limits

Published: Thursday, March 16, 2006 9:25 p.m. MST
 |  E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 
The state's city and county governments may have dodged a few bullets this past legislative session as bills seeking to limit municipal-planning powers died or were gutted, but both developers and local officials expect the battle to continue in coming years.

Neil Lindberg, a land-use attorney who advises the Provo City Council, told the Wasatch Front Regional Council's Regional Growth Committee on Thursday that developers and property-rights groups have been — and probably will continue to be — a loud voice in lobbying and getting their complaints across to legislators. Cities and counties, meanwhile, lack an avenue for consistent communication with lawmakers.

"Local governments aren't regularly telling their stories," he said.

Among the most visible land-use bills at the 2006 Legislature was Senate Bill 170, sponsored by Sen. Al Mansell, R-Sandy, a real estate broker and president of the National Association of Realtors. SB170 would have tightly restricted municipal governments' leeway in making zoning decisions, setting up a situation in which local governments would carry a heavy burden to prove their rulings were vital to protect a community's interests.

The bill "would have turned planning on its head," Lindberg said.

Story continues below
But Michael Hutchings, a lawyer who represents developers like Anderson Development and who wrote part of SB170, said in an interview Thursday that the bill would have brought fairness to a zoning process that is inconsistent from city to city and that leaves developers at the mercy of city councils reacting to public whims.

"There's a desire by landowners for fairness in the planning process at city hall," Hutchings said. "There's a great amount of frustration that landowners, builders and developers have experienced in dealing with some cities and some counties on land-use issues."

Local officials, on the other hand, contend that no two sites are alike, and each proposed development should be studied individually and left to planners' and city councils' discretion. That can take time, and unexpected issues can arise.

SB170 was replaced by two less-dramatic substitute bills, both of which the Legislature approved. One aims to speed zoning decisions and requires reporting on fees collected from developers. Another expands the Office of the Property Rights Ombudsman and allows developers to appeal zoning decisions to the ombudsman or another mediator. Hutchings predicts developers' drive for more freedom will be back in future legislative sessions.

"That's an issue you will see raised next year," he said. "It's not a dead issue."

Comments

You can be the first to comment on this story.

previousnext

Latest comments

Go Rich!!!!!! Kick some Eagle butt.

Obama pressed into role as healer

How can anyone with brain cell claim bush never did anything right? that...

D-Will, Price sit out Jazz practice

They are done and have been since Karl, John and Hornacek retired. What a...

Interesting article. Most Americans don't think of 1930's with the reference...

You Timp Chickens dont know how to play REAL football MC 45-0 over timp

Go Eagles!!!! I have faith in ya.

Go CAVEPEOPLE! However, are there any other high school band programs in...

Utah group finds homes for orphans

The laws are so complex that what has been done will give false hope to many...

Y. tight ends talented tandem

Pitta and George have been awesome and both are deserving of atention and...

Clinton to Dems: pass health bill

So what are you doing PERSONALLY and INDIVIDUALLY to help others? [tht is...

Advertisements
Advertisement