Sandy Planning Commission Meeting - February 19, 2026: Rezoning Recommendations
Sandy Planning Commission Meeting - February 19, 2026
The Sandy City Planning Commission met on February 19, 2026, to conduct public hearings and make recommendations on two rezoning applications. The Commission forwarded a positive recommendation for the Fortner Rezone (4-2) and unanimously recommended approval of the 106 Church Rezone.
Consent Calendar
- Minutes Approval: The meeting minutes from February 5, 2026, were approved unanimously.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Fortner Rezone: Multiple residents from the area spoke in opposition, citing safety concerns related to traffic, inadequate crosswalk infrastructure, lack of sidewalks, and setting a precedent for higher density in single-family neighborhoods. Residents requested that the rezone be denied or that the intersection improvements be completed first. Specific concerns were raised about on-street parking, driveway congestion, and the safety of the existing diagonal crosswalk at 8600 S and 1000 E.
- 106 Church Rezone: Residents from the adjacent HOA expressed support for the rezoning but raised concerns about the narrow width of Hollow Bend Drive and the need for road widening or removal of the median on 10600 S to accommodate additional traffic. They asked for coordination with the HOA regarding right-of-way and maintenance responsibilities.
Discussion Items
- Fortner Rezone (8564 S. 1000 E.): The applicant requested a zone change from R-1-10 to RM-12 on 0.65 acres, proposing six owner-occupied units (a four-plex and a duplex). Staff noted the property is designated as medium density in the General Plan, allowing up to 12 units/acre. The concept plan showed about 9 units/acre. The city engineer and transportation engineer detailed planned road improvements along 1000 E and 8600 S, including curb, gutter, sidewalk, bike lanes, a right-turn lane, and pedestrian-activated crossing lights, funded by Salt Lake County. Commissioners debated the differences between RM-10 and RM-12, with staff clarifying that RM-10 would limit units to five. The Commission expressed concerns about the concept plan but noted that site plan review would address specific design and infrastructure details.
- 106 Church Rezone (166 E. 10600 S.): The applicant requested a zone change from R-1-40A to R-1-10 on 1.94 acres, aiming to maintain the existing church and create three residential lots fronting on Hollow Bend Drive. The rezoning is consistent with the Low Density Neighborhood designation. Staff confirmed that road width and HOA maintenance issues would be resolved during the subdivision approval process. The transportation engineer noted that the median on 10600 S was installed for safety and would not be removed.
- Director's Report: The director announced a joint meeting with the City Council on March 10, 2026, to kick off the comprehensive code rewrite. Clinton Spencer was introduced as the new Development Services Manager.
Key Outcomes
- Fortner Rezone: Motion to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council for approval of the zone change from R-1-10 to RM-12 passed 4-2 (Bromley, Duncan, Schoenfeld, George in favor; Mortimer, Wrigley opposed). The motion noted the Commission's struggle with the decision and recommended further consideration of site plan details.
- 106 Church Rezone: Motion to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council for approval of the zone change from R-1-40A to R-1-10 passed unanimously 6-0.
- Meeting Adjourned: The meeting adjourned following the administrative business.
Meeting Transcript
Recording in progress. Good evening and welcome to the planning commission meeting for February 19th. We'll do a quick round of introductions and then a pledge of allegiance and go from there. Start with planning commission staff. Cameron Duncan. Jennifer George. Danny Schoenfeld. Dave Bromley. Ron Mortimer. Steve Wrigley. And then James, do you want to introduce staff? Yeah. We have a few staff members here with us tonight. I'll just ask them to raise their hand as I introduce them, and each of them will be participating in the meeting tonight. My name is James Sornson. I'm the community development director. Mike Wilcox, the planning director, is here with us. Brittany Ward, assistant public works director. And Ivan Hooper is transportation engineer who's back here with us. And then I Ish over here is the planning secretary with us tonight. Thanks. All right. We'll do if you could please rise and we'll do a quote Pledge of Allegiance. We'll go from there. And to report which stands one nation under God inevitable with a liberty and justice for all. Our first public hearing item tonight is the Fortner rezone. Jake, I think you've got that one. Good evening, uh planning commission. Uh for the public, Jake Warner, long-range planning manager for the city. Uh the city has received a rezone application for property located at 8564 South, 10th East. The application is requesting a zone change on the property from the R110 zone to the RM12 zone. Property, there's two parcels involved. The property total is is approximately uh.65 acres. The um as I mentioned, the property is currently zoned R110. It was a recently annexed into the city and given that zone at that time. It is surrounded by um unincorporated county property zoned A1 in the county to the north, and then RM12 and R210 zoned properties to the east. R210 zoned properties to the south, and an SDR17 uh zoned property to the west. The property, as I mentioned, was recently annexed in the city, so it was not part of the city when the city's general plan was done, which uh includes the future land use map. Um but we do have an annexation plan in the general plan that shows kind of that missing puzzle piece indicating what that land use would be when it comes into the city, which it has now. And so that puzzle piece, um, that missing puzzle piece is shown in that cutout window, and it's designated as medium density neighborhood. Again, not all of that area in that puzzle piece came into the city with the annexation, just a portion of that, including the subject property. Um that uh the subject property is designated as medium density neighborhood on the feature land use map, which allows for up to uh 12 units per acre, and then um and that matches the properties to the south and to the east of the subject property. There's some other pockets in that area that are also designated as medium density neighborhood in the area. Um the majority of that area is designated as low density neighborhood, which would be that lighter beige color on the map. The applicant has submitted a concept plan um showing their intent to uh develop the property for six units. This would um according to the concept plan, they're showing a four-plex on 10th east and a duplex um back behind to the west. They have also submitted um conceptual elevations of um what the architecture would be. This is a change from what was shown at the neighborhood meeting. The neighborhood meeting was held on January 21st. Um my understanding is that they've attempted to address some of the neighbors' concerns as far as the architecture, and so this is uh a different elevation than the than what was shown at that time.
openpublica.com