Lehigh Planning Commission Meeting - April 23, 2026

The Lehigh Planning Commission met on April 23, 2026, at 2:00 PM MT in the new city building. The meeting covered ten agenda items including a controversial concept plan for transferring density from West Canyon to lower Traverse Mountain, along with several zoning, signage, and conditional use approvals. The commission voted to recommend denial of the concept plan but left the door open for a modified proposal.

Consent Calendar

• Approved items 2.1 and 2.2. A correction was noted that the March 12 meeting minutes lacked a seconder for item 3.2.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Item 3.1 (Smith's Pylon Sign): One e-comment from Hannah Orton opposed the sign, calling it oversized and detrimental to mountain views. Two other e-comments raised concerns about sign height and location.
• Item 3.5 (Traverse Mountain Area Plan Amendment): Over a dozen residents spoke in opposition. Key points included:
  • Rob Ludlow (20-year resident, involved in 2012 compromise) called the proposal a "density grab" that unwinds carefully negotiated compromises.
  • Zach Sabrisky said he paid extra for a view lot and now fears high-density development will ruin it.
  • Drew Armstrong questioned whether infrastructure already invested in West Canyon would be wasted.
  • Aaron Ethington cited the area plan's explicit language limiting density in Perry A1/B1 to 250 units, not 827.
  • Mary Ann Ludlow, an attorney, argued residents have vested rights in the 2012 plan and that Perry Homes already profited from mining under the guise of mass grading.
  • Angie Park described the ecological damage in West Canyon and urged the commission to see it.
  • Josh Coleman noted the area already has multiple high-density complexes and lacks promised parks.
  • Ryan Kingle said a handshake is a promise; he was sold on the original plan.
  • Shanna Coleman pointed to traffic safety issues near schools.
  • Brandon Ethington requested a 10-acre park in exchange for density transfer.
  • Brian DiPatello, a police officer, warned of increased crime and overpopulation from apartments.
  • Paul Randstrom argued the developer should invest in infrastructure where they are entitled, not shift costs to residents.
  • Clint Jorgensen, a former civil engineer, stated the proposal is purely about profit.
• One online comment on Item 3.7 requested a condition prohibiting short-term rentals for the ADU.

Discussion Items

• Item 3.1 – Smith's Pylon Sign Exception: Applicant requested a 50-foot height (down from 70) and 400 sq ft sign (below code's 600). Staff showed UDOT bridge elevations and traffic speeds. Commission praised the reduced size. The sign has no video board. Approved.
• Item 3.3 – Flag Lot: Conditional use for a flag lot at 200 South. Staff confirmed it meets code and fire access. Approved.
• Item 3.4 – Bull River Road Preliminary Subdivision: Three single-family lots in R110 zone. Applicant Perry Homes confirmed code compliance. Approved.
• Item 3.5 – Traverse Mountain Area Plan Amendment (Concept Plan): This was the main discussion. Staff recommended transferring all 600 units out of West Canyon to lower parcels near SR92, citing infrastructure, emergency access, wildfire, and geotechnical benefits. Applicant Matt Swain (Perry Companies) argued the transfer would place density near transit and services, allow market flexibility, and create more open space in West Canyon. He acknowledged the potential for up to 827 units in Perry A1/B1 (currently 250 max). The DRC preferred all units moved out. Public testimony was overwhelmingly opposed. Commission members expressed concern about the massive density increase (from 250 to 827 possible units) and the mining history. They voted to recommend denial but indicated willingness to consider a modified concept with fewer transferred units.
• Item 3.6 – Green Zone Change: 1.57 acres from A1 to R122. Staff said it meets the general plan. Approved with positive recommendation.
• Item 3.7 – ADU Conversion: Applicant Jeff White described converting his shop into a detached ADU to house adult children or aging parents. Building built in 2020. Windows are 10 feet high. Commission discussed the online comment about short-term rentals; legal counsel advised they cannot impose such a condition without evidence of a negative impact. Approved.
• Item 3.8 – Heritage Meadows Preliminary Subdivision: Tabled at applicant's request.
• Item 3.9 – Fence Height Exception: Applicant requested 8-foot fence (6-foot code) along rear property line adjacent to railroad. Already has 8-foot fences on sides. Commission approved, citing privacy and sound reduction.
• Item 3.10 – Hansen Tennis Club Signage: Amendment to allow wall and monument signs. Staff recommended downlighting instead of up-lighting. Applicant agreed to comply with design standards. Positive recommendation to council.

Key Outcomes

• Item 3.1: Approved motion to approve the pylon sign exception (height 50 ft, 400 sq ft). Vote: unanimous.
• Item 3.3: Approved conditional use for flag lot. Unanimous.
• Item 3.4: Approved preliminary subdivision. Unanimous.
• Item 3.5: Motion to recommend denial of the concept plan to city council, with findings that it is not consistent with the development code or general plan. The commission also expressed openness to a modified concept plan that transfers some density out of West Canyon. Vote: 3-0 (Commissioner Jackson excused).
• Item 3.6: Positive recommendation for zone change. Unanimous.
• Item 3.7: Approved conditional use for ADU conversion. Unanimous.
• Item 3.8: Tabled until applicant requests to bring back.
• Item 3.9: Approved fence height exception. Unanimous.
• Item 3.10: Positive recommendation for signage amendment, with condition that lighting be downward facing per code. Unanimous.
• Meeting adjourned at approximately 4:50 PM.