Speaker numbers apply only to this recording.
The Lehi Planning Commission met on Thursday, September 24, 2026, at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers to discuss and vote on six agenda items. The meeting included several public hearings where residents voiced concerns about zoning changes, traffic, and development impacts. The Commission issued recommendations to the City Council for four items and rendered final decisions on two conditional use permits.
3.1 Lakeview Land and Rock General Plan Amendment The applicant proposed changing the designation to Commercial/Heavy Commercial as a first step toward a development agreement for construction-oriented businesses. Staff noted this was a repeat of a 2024 request that was tabled by the City Council. Commissioners expressed that a direct zone change would set a dangerous precedent, removing the city's ability to control future development. The consensus was to deny the amendment and strongly recommend a Development Agreement to impose specific controls on operating hours, truck routes, building heights, and buffers.
3.2 Spring Meadow Villas Preliminary PRD Applicant Windy City Development presented a 71-lot subdivision on former farmland that had already received a density bonus from the City Council. Discussion focused on resolving neighbor concerns over water runoff and the need for a no-climb fence. The Commission supported the project, noting the layout preserved open space near the lake and wetlands.
3.3 Skye Area Plan Amendment DR Horton requested an amendment to swap non-residential ERUs for residential ERUs and move density from the hillsides down to the Mixed Use 1 area closer to SR-92 by buying back ERUs from a previous land partner. The Commission favored the proposal, reasoning it reduces traffic impacts and development pressure on the foothills.
3.4 Inverness Preliminary Plat E (405 Townhome Units) This item sparked the most debate. DR Horton requested approval of a 405-unit townhome plat and a substitution for the code-required amenities (table 37). Commissioners expressed strong concerns that the proposed amenities (pool, pickleball courts, playgrounds) did not constitute an equivalent swap for the specific phase, citing past negative experiences with amenity aggregation in the community. The applicant argued residents have access to the entire master-planned community amenities, which were provided dollar-for-dollar beyond the code. The Commission voted for a negative recommendation. (The agenda listed this as a final consideration, but the transcript clarified it is a recommendation to City Council).
3.5 Inclined Indoor Wingsuit Concept Plan Clark Robinson and Mark Menlove presented a unique indoor wingsuit flying facility (the third of its kind globally). The building required an exception to the 40% first-floor glass requirement because of the structural walls required to house a large turbine fan. The Commission was highly impressed, with the motion citing the "friggin' turbine engine" and the building's genuine design as justification to grant the exception.
3.6 Lehi Taco Bell Site Plan The application required a conditional use permit for a drive-through and an exception to the glass requirement (corrected from 40% in the agenda to 20% under the State Highway District zone). The applicant explained the drive-thru orientation on the main road was forced by other code provisions, creating a conflict. The Commission found the applicant made good faith efforts to comply with the code and granted the exception.
Or before we get into the regular agenda tonight, we um just wanted to go over a couple of things. Just a little how we do things around here. Um we are very excited for public comment. We welcome it and we encourage it. Right. I I heard questions from some people already asking if there was a list. There's no list. Uh feel free to come forward when the time is appropriate. We will have uh a public hearing for each agenda item that uh necessitates one, and we will have it at that time. Um we will have a two-minute um timeline or time limit, and if someone in the control room could get ready for that action, uh we'll have a two-minute time limit for each uh individual to come up and give their comment. Um that being said, we will turn the time over to our staff for the regular agenda. The HDMI core that is buried right there. Sorry. Sorry, Jacob, I didn't realize you weren't ready. Do you want me to warm up the crowd a little more? You think I would get used to this building, but I have an issue, it seems like every time getting set up. So um okay. Item 3.1 is public hearing and recommendation of Cole Peck's request for review of the Lakeview Land and Rock General Plan Amendment located at approximately 600 south, 600 east, changing the designation for low density or from low density residential to commercial and heavy commercial. Um like I mentioned this is for 12.81 acres, um switching it, and there's not an exact amount of heavy commercial and commercial on the plan. They've kind of just shown it as almost like a bubble or a square, so the applicant probably can provide a little bit more detail on that. But this is a county island with a general plan designation, so it is meant to be annexed into Lehigh City at some point. But um the land to the east is light industrial on our general plan, and the land to the west with the existing subdivision is low density residential. Um the applicant's narrative kind of explains that the commercial zoning or commercial designation is meant to act as a buffer with potential office space to the neighborhood. Um they have expressed an interest in a development agreement, which would be a city council decision. And then just for some background, the applicant did come before the planning commission in both 2021 with a slightly different request. They were asking for light industrial then, but then in 2024, it was a pretty much the exact same request. And that timeline expired, and that's why they're here again with this request. So with that, I'll turn it over to the planning commission for any questions. Thank you, Jacob. Any questions for staff? Yeah, Jacob, we're both sides of 60s in the county. Yeah, I can show you that. So just the side that they're requesting this general plan amendment on is in the county, the other side zoned A1 agricultural, but um has kind of like a legal non-conforming grandfathered in industrial use there. So any other questions for staff? Out of curiosity, in 2024, when this was brought, what was the outcome of that? With the planning commission or the city council. Both, if you have it. Um I believe with planning commission, it I'd have to go back and check on that, so I don't want to say it was negative or positive. But with city council, it was tabled with the recommendation to pursue a development agreement.