Mapleton OKs rezone of Gibby land

MAPLETON — A Maple Mountain subdivision that a number of residents worry is geologically unsafe is one step closer to being built.

The Mapleton City Council on Tuesday agreed to change Wendell Gibby's hotly debated acreage from the critical-environment zone to a specially created, residential-like zone. Under the new zoning, Gibby can build nearly twice as many homes. With a 3-2 vote, council members also approved the preliminary plans for Gibby's 47-home subdivision.

The decisions come on the heels of a recently signed memorandum of understanding that promised to resolve a five-year legal battle over the use of Gibby's land. Gibby has been fighting the city over a variety of issues, including eminent domain and property owner's rights, since he was criminally charged in 2002 for plowing in the area, which was considered geologically sensitive.

City Council members sorted through a list of nearly 50 concerns about the subdivision plans during the six-hour meeting. A fault line running across Gibby's land, beach-like sand and the engineering of 70-foot retaining walls were central to the discussion.

The vote to approve the subdivision plan came with more than 15 conditions.

"I've never had a subdivision come to the council level with this many issues unresolved," said Mayor Jim Brady. "This is a whole new animal."

Even Gibby was surprised the City Council didn't table the issue. Since the Planning Commission recommended denial of the zone change and subdivision plans last month, Gibby said he's been "furiously" working to complete the additional geologic studies they requested.

"We dug an additional 1,700 feet of trench," he said. "This has got to be one of the most-studied pieces of property in Utah."

He said, however, several of the council's conditions were potential "deal breakers." He still didn't see eye-to-eye with some City Council members on the location of the Bonneville Shoreline Trail, which traverses his property, or a suitable road width for streets in the subdivision. Both issues were central to the lawsuits Gibby brought against the city.

Despite the late hour — 1 a.m. — several residents stood up to voice opposition to the subdivision. Some who live in a neighboring subdivision worried a 70-foot retaining wall across the street from their homes would decrease property value. Others were concerned that school buses and snowplows wouldn't be able to navigate the steep roads of the proposed subdivision.