Sandy Planning Commission Meeting Summary - November 6, 2025
Sandy Planning Commission Meeting Summary - November 6, 2025
The Sandy Planning Commission convened on November 6, 2025, to address three specific development applications involving signage, accessory structures, and sensitive area restoration. The meeting also included administrative updates regarding the city's upcoming development code rewrite and an open forum discussion on strategies for managing community opposition (NIMBYism) in planning processes.
Consent Calendar
(No specific items were placed on the Consent Calendar; all agenda items were presented with individual deliberation and voting.)
Public Comments & Testimony
- Speaker 1 (Identity Unrecorded): Expressed concern that the public engagement process for planning items is moving too slowly, potentially causing frustration among taxpayers.
- Speaker 2 (Self-identified as a mother from a neighboring city): Raised the position that there is an "undeniable connection between housing and zone policy and racism," characterizing modern anti-development sentiment as a form of systemic racism.
- General Commentary: Multiple panelists (Paul Alred, Chris Hupp, Nick) noted that opposition to development often includes misinformation regarding property values, traffic capacity, and safety, though no specific public testimony supported these claims directly during the specific item discussions where public comment was opened and closed without speakers.
Discussion Items
- Strategies for Managing NIMBYism:
- Data and Education: Panelists emphasized the necessity of using data-driven responses to counter myths, such as the misconception that low-income housing lowers property values (citing a Gardner Institute study showing a 10% increase). Speakers expressed that educating the public on zoning limitations and facts is critical to reducing unfounded opposition.
- Visualization and Technology: The panel discussed the importance of using visual aids (e.g., view corridor simulations, scale models) to help residents understand the actual impact of proposed density and building heights, contrasting this with the "dark side" imagination residents often resort to when lacking information.
- Engagement and Process: Strategies recommended included meeting with vocal opponents privately before public hearings ("meeting trouble in the parking lot"), slowing down the process to allow for additional public education, and securing third-party experts to add credibility to technical findings like traffic studies.
- Planning Commission Conduct: Paul Alred stressed that planning commissioners must "speak the truth" and refuse to cave to public clamor or misinformation. He expressed strong support for city staff having a formal role in selecting planning commissioners to ensure the commission remains moderate and knowledgeable. He also noted the irony of recruiting NIMBYs who are "bright" to serve on the commission, provided they can be trained to follow the process.
- Systemic Issues and Classism: In response to a question about racism, panelists acknowledged that opposition often reflects classism, as the demographic most capable of attending meetings (affluent, time-rich individuals) often disproportionately opposes housing for service workers. They discussed using moderate-income housing reports to highlight where workforce housing is actually located versus perceived.
- Hill Center Theater Sign Amendment: Discussion focused on the applicant's request for four signs. The applicant clarified that the lettering on the rehearsal hall sign would be "routed and backed with acrylic" and illuminated, rather than simple vinyl lettering, to maintain consistency with the Hale Center Theatre theme.
- Russian's Accessory Structure: The commission discussed a request for a 2,618-square-foot garage with a 24-foot height increase. Staff confirmed setbacks were met, with the structure set back 15 feet on the rear property line, exceeding the 11-foot requirement.
- Restoration in Sensitive Area (400 East Tonya Drive): A contentious discussion occurred regarding grading standards. The applicant proposed restoring slopes to a maximum 2:1 grade, but Commissioner Duncan noted the terrain appeared steeper. Staff and the Chair deliberated on whether to strictly enforce the 2:1 code standard or modify the condition to require "restoration to existing conditions" as feasible, acknowledging a potential conflict between the ordinance and geological reality. The final decision maintained the requirement but ensured staff review would verify the slope matched neighbor lots as closely as possible.
Key Outcomes
- Approval Granted: Unanimous vote (7-0) to approve a sign theme amendment for the Hill Center Theater (MacU Center) at 9886 S Monroe St.
- Approval Granted: Unanimous vote (7-0) to approve a conditional use permit for an accessory structure (garage) for John Russian at 135 E 110th S, including increased height and size.
- Approval Granted: Unanimous vote (7-0) to grant a special exception for restoration in a sensitive area overlay zone at 400 E Tonya Dr, subject to seven conditions.
- Minutes Approved: Unanimous vote to approve the meeting minutes from October 16, 2025.
- Future Agenda Items:
- Development Code Rewrite: Staff announced a 18-month process to rewrite the development code, with a consultant selection expected within a couple of weeks.
- Housing Workshops: City Council is scheduled to review final housing workshop concepts on November 18, potentially leading to faster code drafting for specific housing types separate from the main code rewrite.
- Future Meetings: Upcoming meetings are scheduled for November 20, December 4, and January 15 (the only January meeting, as December 18 falls on New Year's Day).
- Administrative: The meeting adjourned following the discussion of the city's social event at the Mortimer residence.
Meeting Transcript
Recording in progress. And is a founder of revival development. We have Paul Alred, who, after 30 years, instead of retiring and sitting on a beach and drinking umbrella drinks, decided to get into the private sector and is a uh the owner of uh private sector business as well and doing consulting. We've got uh Chris Hupp, who most of you know he's with Solmus, but he's also the programs director for APA. Uh Chris and I have known each other for 17. All right. So this just a little bit of a backstory here on how this came together. We were working on um a housing summit, and um we had recruited these gentlemen and asked them to help us kind of work on this UMB playbook. We knew we had some issues across the board. Part of what we wanted to do was um be a voice for planners, staff you know, level people, um, and we realized really quickly that there's stuff happening at the city level that they can't really talk about. Um they've got families, they've got mortgages, they've got you know careers to maintain. So part of what we wanted to do was um sort of voice things that we've heard from friends from colleagues, um, and just talk about solutions, talk about the challenges that we're all dealing with. And um, the conversation on a call one day with the committee putting this together was so good that we all said, shoot, we wish we would have recorded this and we could have just played it back to you guys. So, unfortunately, um you're gonna have to listen to us yammer up here and stumble through it again and try to recreate that conversation. Um, but we recruited Paul to come in as a retired, semi-retired public person. Um Paul is not afraid to tell us the truth. Um, he's not afraid to represent his people. Um, and so I think between the three of these guys, uh, we're gonna have a super interesting discussion. So we've got some slides um just to kind of talk through um some of the challenges, the objections we hear. This is not formal at all, it is just a discussion. Um so I think probably just to start off with you know, one of the big ones we all hear, we don't want density, we don't want intensity. Anybody heard that objection at council planning commission, staff meetings, staffers have you know, have to represent stakeholders and say, look, our people don't want density. So we've all heard this one. Um Chris, why don't we take it off with you? You're holding the mic. I was pass it over. All right, Christopher's okay. Well, um so uh probably the most common thing that we heard, and and this is this is why we wanted to start with this is we don't want density, and uh we don't want those people. Uh you'll see a few of these things. We it's going to be crime. It's it's too crowded as it is. And and as we were going through this, as we were going through this discussion, we were going through specific examples of how we addressed it, and and to Auggy's points that he had already mentioned, we talked through some of these and started to develop out what we like to call the Yimbi playbook that has specific solutions that could be utilized in different circumstances. And as we go through this, I I had an opportunity, and I don't I don't know if I see anyone from Leighton City. If you're from Layton City, raise your hand. Hey, there you go. Got a few from Layton. Hey, there we go. Yeah. So we were working with Leighton City, and the Latin City planners wanted to uh or did the presentation. I sat in the audience and I looked for specific NIMBY's that would have potential issue or who had been brought to our attention as being NIMBY's, and I sat right next to them. So that as the latent city planners talked about the topic, talked about the project, and the NIMBY would say, Well, what about the traffic is gonna be blah blah blah blah? I was able to sit right next to them and give them the facts behind all that and resolve that NIMBY issue before it became an actual issue. That's uh again one of the many solutions that we can do. Plant people in the audience, sit next to the NIMBY's, get to know them, understand what their exact concerns are, and address those exact concerns. Along that same line, uh there are a lot of great strategies to uh counteract NIMBYism. And along what he was saying, one strategy I developed was I would try to meet with the NIMBY's as much as I could one-on-one or in small groups. I invite them to City Hall prior to the public meeting, public hearing, and I'd say, okay, let me hear your concerns. And then I would take that opportunity to get to know uh the chinks in their armor, so to speak. And so that we could counteract some of that. And as staff in particular, after meeting with uh those folks, those residents, uh the most important thing about meeting with residents, by the way, wasn't to find the weaknesses, it was to it was to try to make uh create understanding and try to educate them about the zoning process.
openpublica.com