This story features those who ask for a yes vote on Prop 10. A story featuring those who are asking a no vote on Prop 10 is available at this link.
Prop 10 challenges an action made by Wasatch County Council earlier this year to redraw planning area lines in the county. Because of the wording of the referendum those in favor of the zone change by the council will vote Yes on Prop 10, those against the council’s change will vote No on Prop 10.
In Wasatch County zoning of property impacts how many homes can be on a piece of land. An RA-5 zone means one home can be on every five acres of land. RA-20 means that one home can be on every 20 acres of land.
The Wasatch County General Plan has several areas, that have similar zoning requirements for each property in the areas. The Southern Planning Area allows for RA-5 zoning while the Central Planning Area only allows for RA-20.
Back in 2014 the council changed the zoning of the Central Planning area which included the North Fields from RA-20 to RA-10. A referendum which appeared on the 2016 ballot saw approximately 70% of voters reverse the council’s decision meaning that the North Fields area remained less dense than proposed.
Last year, one land owner who had property that bordered the Southern and Central Planning area came to the council asking them to allow their property in the Central area to have more dense zoning.
The council instead changed the boundary of the planning area. Approximately 30 acres were moved from the Southern area to the Central Planning area and 20 acres from the Central area to the Southern Planning area.
Wasatch County Council member Kendall Crittenden explains why they made the boundary change.
“We studied it and as we looked at it we determined that if you take the street that goes down to the side of the property at 650 South there’s a very distinct difference between the property on the south side of 650 South versus the property on the north side of 650 south." Crittenden explained, "The property on the south side is absolutely agricultural it always has been. There’s no wetlands there. Some of the wetlands map from a long time ago kind of show wetlands in there but people that have farmed it for years and years it’s always been in alfalfa. The property on the north side of 650 definitely is wetland. There’s kind of a natural dividing line there. So, we made the determination to re-do the line between the Central and the Southern planning area and use 650 South as the dividing line until it got a little further west and then we used the stream and followed it. That change put his 20-acre piece that he had asked to rezone into Southern Planning area which means we can now re-zone it to RA-5. It also moved two pieces of property on the north side of 650 into the Central Planning area which is RA-20. Now because they’re already zoned RA-5 it won’t change their zoning. We can’t go back to those people and say, ‘well we moved your property it’s now in another zone so it’s now RA-20.’ So it does stay RA-5.”
Crittenden says that the citizens behind the referendum have been misleading about how the boundary would affect the North Fields.
“The Central Planning area includes a lot more than the North Fields." Crittenden continued, "The North Fields are in the Central Planning area but it’s a good half-mile, mile away from Midway Lane, (which) kind of designates everything north of there is what to we refer to as the North Fields. These are sometimes, used to be, referred to as the South Fields but it’s not in the North Fields. So, they’re telling people ‘yeah we already told them with seventy-something percent that we didn’t want it and now they’re trying to do it again.’ Well that’s a mis-leading statement, we’re not rezoning the North Fields. Anybody that’s lived here knows that this piece of property is not in the North Fields. It is in the Central Planning area but it’s not the North Fields.”
Crittenden says that the council has the right to make changes to the general plan.
“It’s a guide and the council can change that at any time." Crittenden said, "Every so-many years or so like we did several years ago we looked at every planning area in the general plan and we made changes in some of them. We made changes in this one, between the Central and Southern. But the council can change the general plan when need by when an issue arises. They’ve claimed that you can’t change the general plan that’s set-in stone. Well anybody that understands what that is, it’s a general plan. It’s a guide. If conditions warrant it you can change that plan.”
Crittenden says the council doesn’t intend to rezone the Central Planning area.
“If Proposition 10 passes in support in what the council’s done everything north of 650 (South) will be in the Central Zone and except for those two pieces, they will be RA-5 but everything else will be RA-20. The intent right now of the council is and I guess based on that we don’t intend on rezoning that. Properties on the south side of 650 (South) those property owners could come in and could request a rezone. So yeah it could create a few more. One of the things we thought about is that by giving him an RA-5 it gives a bit of a transition between city density versus county density." Crittenden concluded, "Which we’ve kind of tried to create around the county.”
Wasatch County Council member Kendall Crittenden, he is asking for a yes vote on Prop 10. A story featuring those who are asking a no vote on Prop 10 is available in a link below.
