The Summit County Council considered whether or not to impose a temporary zoning ordinance to halt certain developments on Wednesday but was not ready to endorse a moratorium.
Planning Department staff met with the County Council to discuss what types of stoppage could be implemented in certain areas of Summit County as the community responds to controversial legislation that takes away some local control in land use and continues planning for the future. However, the county can only adopt a moratorium if there is a compelling public interest – specifically regarding health and safety.
“Coming out of this year’s legislative session are two very important paths that lay on our horizon,” said Patrick Putt, the county’s community development director.
Putt was referring to H.B. 462, an affordable housing bill that requires the county to develop and adopt a new moderate-income housing plan by Oct. 1. The legislation also requires Summit County to include a Housing and Transit Reinvestment Zone, or HTRZ, at Kimball Junction in the new plan. The other bill referenced by Putt, S.B. 110, requires water use and preservation to be included in the county’s General Plan.
Elected officials must determine if they want to adopt a moratorium as they begin implementing new plans required by the legislation. Officials could also choose to impose a temporary zoning ordinance if they modify transportation and road standards or water and sewer infrastructure standards, change parking requirements in commercial or multi-family projects, alter the height, setback, lighting, landscaping or architectural design standards, or if the county changes its fee schedule. A moratorium can also be implemented if the county conducts a study to gather evidence and data to determine how those areas impact the county.
Dave Thomas, the county’s chief civil attorney, said moratoriums are not constitutional takings of property but allow local entities to delay decisions regarding land-use permits or put new regulations in place. They can only be applied to administrative development permit applications, not legislative applications.
“What that means is you can’t have a moratorium on applications for rezones, master-planned development, variances, development agreements or special exceptions,” he said.
Moratoriums aren’t valid on pending applications that have been deemed “complete” by the Planning Department, but can be applied to subdivision plats, temporary use permits, low impact permits, conditional use permits, site plans and building permit applications.
If the County Council wants to adopt a temporary zoning ordinance or moratorium, they can do so without a recommendation from the Planning Department or without a public hearing. However, they must have a specific target area and a legitimate reason for imposing a moratorium instead of a less restrictive approach. A moratorium is effective for up to six months and only applies to applications submitted once it’s in place.
“You can’t just say we’re redoing our code therefore we’re going to have a moratorium,” Thomas said. “You have to have a specific reason.”
Summit County officials previously adopted a moratorium regarding accessory dwelling units because there were concerns over the heights of the buildings and where they were being placed on various properties. At the time, county officials wanted to determine if the units would have “detrimental effects” on neighbors, according to Thomas. In that case, the moratorium only applied to those applications and allowed the County Council to develop new regulations to mitigate possible health and safety concerns.
Councilor Roger Armstrong said he appreciated the Planning Department’s efforts in underscoring where a moratorium could be established because there have been concerns in the public regarding growth in the county and the Snyderville Basin particularly since the affordable housing legislation passed. Armstrong also expressed a desire to have a moratorium on permits with certain landscaping designs to help control water usage.
“We’ve heard a lot in the public in the wake of H.B. 462 and other major applications … that the county and Park City should just establish moratoriums on all building and just stop it. I think we all know that we can’t do that, but I don’t think the public is aware that a blanket shutdown on all development is not legal in the state of Utah and can’t be accomplished,” he said.
Moving forward, the county must decide if it will adopt a moratorium as it begins developing its new implementation plan to ensure that all new permits meet the requirements, or if it will continue accepting proposals as it creates the plan without a temporary zoning ordinance.
“It’s up to the council to decide if a moratorium is a good tool to use — or not, it might not be a tool that you want to use,” Thomas said.