Lehi Planning Commission Meeting – August 13, 2026

The Lehi Planning Commission met on August 13, 2026, at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers to consider a 13-item agenda covering subdivision approvals, flag lot requests, a development agreement, zone change, code amendments, and a building exception. The meeting ran approximately 2.5 hours.

Consent Calendar

• Approved the July 9, 2026, meeting minutes with two minor typographical corrections (name spelling on item 3.7 and a missing letter in item 3.11). The consent agenda was approved unanimously.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Item 3.4 (McBride flag lot): Several residents spoke in opposition. Chris Briggs expressed concern about losing mountain views, disrupting a tight‑knit agricultural neighborhood, and potential sewer issues. Val Tucker noted the property’s sentimental history and worried about traffic safety on 1200 East. Gina Christofferson questioned whether the split could be approved without a zone change. Moani Burke highlighted the property’s historical significance and safety concerns for children walking to school.
• Item 3.7 (Temple View Villas Plat B): Two online comments were read. A “concerned neighbor” opposed forcing two additional homes into the subdivision, citing traffic and density. Joanna Dixon felt the extra density only benefits the developer.
• Item 3.8 (Temple View Villas Plat C): An online comment from a “concerned neighbor” questioned whether purchasers of already‑sold lots were aware of the pending split.
• Item 3.9 (Nancy Walker Development Agreement): Several neighbors spoke. A resident (name not given) described dust and lack of a buffer wall from an adjacent heavy‑commercial property, asking the commission to enforce existing codes before approving new ones. Jennifer Black said the change would destroy the neighborhood’s peace. Chris Breidenberg asked about buffers and road improvements on Triniman Lane. Barbara Hollingshead noted that all other properties on State Street are commercial. Dean Kazarian read a statement from Kyle and Sheena Welch, whose home directly abuts the Walker property; they requested the parcel be split to keep a residential buffer along Triniman Lane.
• Item 3.10 (Jay Peterson zone change): The property owner, Jay Peterson, stated he never agreed to the current public‑facility zoning and asked the city to honor the original agricultural designation or follow proper due process.
• No public testimony was given on items 3.1, 3.3, 3.6, 3.11, 3.12, or 3.13.

Discussion Items

• Item 3.1 – Vivian Estates 5B Preliminary Subdivision: The applicant (Natha Franco of JDH Development) presented 10 single‑family lots on 2.5 acres near Dry Creek. Key points included a public trail dedication to the city, outdoor fire sprinklers for lots in high‑fire‑risk areas, and ongoing engineering for sewer access and a potential bridge over Dry Creek. Commissioners questioned sewer connectivity for adjacent residents. The subdivision meets RA‑1 density requirements.
• Item 3.3 – Greene Flag Lot: Mike Greene’s request for a flag lot on property where he already lives. Described as straightforward and meeting R‑1‑22 standards. Approved with minimal discussion.
• Item 3.4 – McBride Flag Lot: The applicant proposed a flag lot on a 1.27‑acre parcel split from an existing home. Staff clarified the lot meets RA‑1 zoning (max 35 feet, two stories). Commissioners discussed the narrow driveway, proximity to a busy intersection, potential sewer grading issues, and that views are not a protected right. Despite public opposition, the lot meets all code requirements for a subdivision.
• Item 3.6 – Belmont Flex Suites Condo Plat: Dustin Carr (Kairos Real Estate) requested condominiumization of an existing office‑warehouse building into 10 units plus common area. The site plan was previously approved. Commissioners questioned parking adequacy; staff noted parking is based on square footage and use. The approval is only for the plat, not site plan.
• Items 3.7 & 3.8 – Temple View Villas Plat B & C: Brent Ventura requested flag lot conditional uses and preliminary subdivisions for two lots each on two parcels in the same development. The original approval was for seven lots; the applicant now wants to split two large lots into four smaller ones (still meeting RA‑1 minimums). Commissioners debated whether this circumvents original expectations but concluded the lots still meet zoning and density.
• Item 3.9 – Nancy Walker Development Agreement: The agreement restricts heavy‑commercial uses on 2.581 acres at 915 W State Street, requiring an 8‑foot wall/buffer along residential sides, no access from Triniman Lane, and landscaping. Staff clarified the agreement matches existing code requirements. Councilmember Harrison’s proposal to split the parcel (residential along Triniman, commercial on State) was discussed but not adopted. The commission voted 3-1 to recommend approval.
• Item 3.10 – Jay Peterson Zone Change: Staff explained that a 2017 annexation mistakenly zoned 0.406 acres as Public Facility (PF) instead of Transitional Holding (TH‑5). The change corrects an administrative error, returning the property to its intended agricultural holding zone. Mr. Peterson expressed distrust over prior enforcement actions. Commissioners discussed the need to verify no written promises were made. Approved 5-0 as a recommendation to City Council.
• Item 3.11 – Water Department Storage Building Exception: The city requested an exception to the 20% glass requirement for a vehicle‑storage building on 300 West. The proposed glazing is at 17% (street‑facing wall). Architect Taylor Smith cited structural challenges and employee comfort (heat/cold). Commissioner Tyson Erion argued the city should meet its own code to maintain credibility. After debate, the motion to deny the exception passed 3-2. The item will be sent back for redesign.
• Item 3.12 – Renewable Energy Systems Code Amendment: Staff proposed increasing the maximum residential solar/wind system from 10 kW to 15 kW to keep up with industry standards. Approved as recommendation 5-0.
• Item 3.13 – Off‑Street Parking Requirements for Therapy Preschools: Staff added a new parking category for preschools/daycares with higher teacher‑to‑student ratios (e.g., specialized therapy), after council identified parking issues at existing facilities. Applies only to future projects; existing sites grandfathered. Approved as recommendation 5-0.

Key Outcomes

• Item 3.1 – Vivian Estates 5B: Approved unanimously with findings that the subdivision dedicates Dry Creek/trail and park space, meets code, and includes all DRC comments.
• Item 3.3 – Greene Flag Lot: Approved unanimously with standard findings.
• Item 3.4 – McBride Flag Lot: Approved 4-1 (one “nay”? The transcript shows “All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? No.” So unanimous? Actually Commissioner Nelson said “No” to opposition? The transcript: “Second. Motion and a second. All in favor. I need post. No. Did you get that, Tisha?” It appears one opposed – likely Commissioner Nelson. So 4-1. Summary includes vote tally.
• Item 3.6 – Belmont Flex Suites Condo Plat: Approved unanimously.
• Item 3.7 – Temple View Villas Plat B: Approved unanimously.
• Item 3.8 – Temple View Villas Plat C: Approved unanimously.
• Item 3.9 – Walker Development Agreement: Recommended approval 3-1 (one nay). Final decision by City Council on September 8, 2026.
• Item 3.10 – Peterson Zone Change: Recommended approval 5-0 with condition to review any prior contracts. City Council will make final decision on September 8, 2026.
• Item 3.11 – Water Storage Building Exception: Denied 3-2. The applicant will revise the design to meet the 20% glazing requirement.
• Item 3.12 – Renewable Energy Amendment: Recommended approval 5-0. Final adoption by City Council.
• Item 3.13 – Parking Requirements Amendment: Recommended approval 5-0. Final adoption by City Council.
• Item 3.5 (Traverse Mountain Area Plan Amendment): Postponed to the next meeting (August 27, 2026). Public hearing was opened and closed; the item will be presented for a vote at the next meeting.
• Item 3.2 (Shuman fence exception): Withdrawn by the applicant.