On the agenda: Bluffdale meeting — Data Center (Jul 22)

BLUFFDALE CITY

CITY COUNCIL,
MEETING AGENDA
City Council Chambers
Wednesday, July 22, 2026, at 6:00 p.m.

Mayor Natalie Hall
Councilmember Steve Austin
Councilmember Wendy Aston
Councilmember Greg Wilding
Councilmember Mackey Smith
Councilmember Alan Lord

Notice is hereby given that the Bluffdale City Council will hold a meeting on Wednesday, July 22, 2026, at Bluffdale City Hall,
2222 West 14400 South, Bluffdale, Utah. The meeting will begin at 6:00 PM or as soon thereafter as possible. This meeting
will also be broadcast live to the public at: www.bluffdale.gov. The public may comment at the meeting or by emailing
comments to [email protected] by 4:00 PM the day of the meeting. Emailed comments will be
submitted to the City Council but will not be read at the meeting. Notice is further given that access to this meeting by the
City Council may be by electronic means.
In the event the meeting is disrupted in any way that the City in its sole discretion deems inappropriate, the City reserves the
right to immediately remove the individual(s) from the meeting and, if needed, end virtual access to the meeting. Reasons
for removing an individual or ending virtual access to the meeting include but are not limited to the posting of offensive
pictures, remarks, or making offensive statements, disrespectful statements or actions, and any other action deemed
inappropriate.

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING 6:00 P.M.
1.

Call to Order: (Roll Call, Invocation, Pledge of Allegiance*).

2.

Minute and Agenda Approval:

3.

2.1

July 08, 2026, City Council Meeting Minutes.

2.2

Approval of this meeting’s agenda.

Presentation Items:
None.

4.

Public Comment: (This is a time and place for any person who wishes to comment on items not scheduled on the
agenda for public hearing. Any person or group wishing to comment on any item not otherwise scheduled for public
hearing on the agenda may address the City Council at this point by stepping to the microphone and giving his or her
name for the record or by emailing [email protected]. Comments should be limited to not more
than three (3) minutes, unless additional time is authorized by the Chair. Groups wishing to comment will be asked to
appoint a spokesperson. Items brought forward to the attention of the City Council will be turned over to staff to
provide a response outside of the City Council meeting.)

5.

Consent Agenda: (These items are considered by the City Council to be routine and will be enacted by a single
motion. If discussion is desired on any particular consent item, that item may be removed from the consent agenda
and considered separately. No public comment will be permitted.)

6.

5.1

Resolution 2026-38- A Resolution approving a Preliminary Official Statement and Official Statement
in connection with the issuance and sale of Water Revenue Bonds, Series 2026.

5.2

Resolution 2026-39- A Resolution authorizing the surplus of City-owned property.

Action or Discussion Items; Items Continued from Previous Meeting: (These items are considered by the
City Council individually. No public comment will be permitted.)

None.

City Council Meeting – July 22, 2026

Page 1 of 3

7.

Public Hearing Items: (Public comments must abide by the requirements listed above).
7.1

Ordinance 2026-11- A proposed amendment to Chapter 11.20 of the Bluffdale City Code to adopt
definitions of 'fulfillment center' and 'medical transportation establishment' and amending Section
11.350.020 of the Bluffdale City Code to permit these new uses within certain non-residential zones.
City of Bluffdale, Applicant. (Application 2026-18) (Staff Presenter, Caitlyn Tubbs)

7.2

Ordinance 2026-12- A proposed amendment to Section 11.160.320 of the Bluffdale City Code,
Placement and Usage of Accessory Storage Containers, to allow for placement and use of storage
containers (e.g. shipping containers, Conex containers, enclosed truck trailers, freight containers,
etc.) within the City of Bluffdale and limiting the number and locations of such within residential and
non-residential zones. City of Bluffdale, Applicant. (Application 2025-23) (Staff Presenter, Caitlyn
Tubbs)

7.3

Ordinance 2026-13- A proposed amendment of the Bluffdale City Code to:
1. Chapter 3.100 - to create a new chapter establishing definitions, permitted locations,

inspections, local contact requirements, fees, registration provisions, and compliance standards
for short-term rentals.
2. Chapter 11.20.020 - to add a general definition for 'Short-Term Rental' within the zoning code
definitions section.
3. Chapters 11.350.020 and 11.350.030 - to amend the Residential and Nonresidential Zones use
tables to allow short-term rentals within residential zoning districts and prohibit them within
commercial and industrial zoning districts.
4. Chapter 11.110.070.090 - to amend the Mixed Use Land Use Requirements table to allow shortterm rentals, in accordance with BCC 3.100, as a permitted use.
5. Chapter 11.110.100.040 - to amend the SD-X Bringhurst Station Project Zone standards to allow
short-term rentals, in accordance with BCC 3.100, as a permitted use.
6. Chapter 11.110.090.040 - to amend the Development Standards and Design Guidelines to allow
short-term rentals, in accordance with BCC 3.100, as a permitted use.
City of Bluffdale, Applicant. (Application 2026-02). (Staff Presenter, Ellen Oakman)
8.

Staff Reports, Additional Council Discussion, and Calendaring Items:

9.

Closed Meetings - if any: (This meeting will be closed to the public for one of the stated purposes found in Utah Code
§ 52-4-205(1), which is usually for one of the following purposes: discussion of the character, professional competence,
or physical or mental health of an individual; discuss collective bargaining; discuss pending or reasonably imminent
litigation; discuss the purchase, exchange, sale, or lease of real property, including water rights or water shares).

10.

Adjournment.
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING

I hereby certify that the foregoing notice and agenda was posted at the Bluffdale City Hall and on the City’s website
(www.bluffdale.gov), and posted on the Utah State Public Notice website (www.utah.gov.pmn).
Published and posted on July 17, 2026.

Tami Timothy
City Recorder

City Council Meeting – July 22, 2026

Page 2 of 3

In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, individuals needing assistance or other services or accommodation
for this meeting should contact Bluffdale City Hall at least 24 hours in advance of this meeting at 801-254-2200. TTY 7-1-1.
*Contact the City Recorder if you desire to give the Invocation or lead the Pledge of Allegiance.

City Council Meeting – July 22, 2026

Page 3 of 3

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39

Present:
City Council:

Natalie Hall, Mayor
Wendy Aston
Steve Austin
Alan Lord
Mackey Smith
Greg Wilding

Staff:

Bruce Kartchner, City Manager
Fred Donaldson, City Attorney
Tami Timothy, City Recorder
Stephanie Thayer, Administrative Services Director
Grant Crowell, Community and Economic Development Manager
Caitlyn Tubbs, Planning Manager
Ellen Oakman, Associate City Planner
Shane Paddock, Public Works Director
Matt Evans, Fire Chief
Courtney Armstrong, Accounting Technician
Amanda Luker, Communications Specialist
Carl Hamer, Police Sergeant

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING
1.

Call to Order.

Mayor Hall called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM. All members of the City Council were present.
Aaron Larsen offered the invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
2.

Minutes and Agenda Approval.
2.1

June 22, 2026, City Council Meeting Minutes.

2.2

June 24, 2026, City Council Meeting Minutes.

2.3

Approval of this Meeting’s Agenda.

Council Member Aston moved to APPROVE the Consent Agenda, as presented. Council

40

Member Austin seconded the motion. The motion passed with the unanimous consent of the

41

Council.

42

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1
2
3
4
5

3.

6

to learning more about the community and meeting the incredible people who keep Bluffdale running,

7

every experience had been special. She enjoyed being able to speak to members of the community

8

and seeing the amazing summer and America250 events in the City. Fly Your Kite Day was a

9

highlight even though her kite barely left the ground. She was excited for the upcoming baseball

10

game and all the opportunities she had had during the year.

11
12

Attendant, Mercedes Johnson, completed over 200 hours of service since being crowned. Her favorite

13

memories were volunteering at the adaptive arena cheer camp and appearing as princesses. She also

14

managed to go through two glitter sticks at the monster truck event. She was excited to continue

15

serving the Bluffdale community and make more memories throughout the rest of her reign. In their

16

year together, they attended many incredible events, including Love Where You Live, the Brooker’s

17

grand opening, plays in the park, and events supporting other royalty in parades in Saratoga Springs,

18

Eagle Mountain, Riverton, and Herriman, with more to come. They loved serving the community

19

and getting to know the people who make Bluffdale the wonderful place they call home, and Ms.

20

Flynn encouraged everyone to speak to them at every opportunity.

21
22

Upcoming events included Old West Days, the rodeo, and the upcoming Prince and Princess

23

Promenade royalty event. They were excited to continue serving the community they love and

24

encouraged everyone to say hello at Old West days.

25
26

Mayor Hall thanked Ms. Flynn and her attendants for their service, and for representing Bluffdale to

27

other cities.

28
29
30
31
32
33
34

Presentation Items.
3.1

Miss Bluffdale Quarterly Report. (Presenter, Isabel Flynn).

Isabel Flynn shared her experience as Miss Bluffdale. From children blowing kisses during parades

4.

Public Comment.

Mayor Hall opened the public comment period.
Albert Allen Larsen looked forward to the 2027 election. He stated that because of Council Member
Aston’s position with the City, if her husband decided to run for the new Fire Department position,

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

Utah Title 67-16 states that it would be a conflict of interest. He was disappointed with the votes

2

where people stated that they would not support an item and then supported it, and he would remember

3

that and play those recordings during the next election.

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

There were no further comments. The public comment period was closed.
Council Member Aston clarified that her husband never intended to apply for the open position.
5.

Consent Agenda
5.1

Resolution 2026-36 – A Resolution Authorizing the Surplus of City-Owned
Vehicles.

Council Member Austin moved to APPROVE the Consent Agenda, as presented. Council

15

Member Wilding seconded the motion. The motion passed with the unanimous consent of the

16

Council.

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

6.

Action or Discussion Items; Continued from Previous Meeting.
6.1

7.

None.

Public Hearing Items.
7.1

Resolution 2026-37 – Consideration and Vote to declare Surplus Property at
15010 South 1300 West (0.017 acres) and 14359 South Royal Coachman Dr (0.106
acres) to Utah Department of Transportation. (Staff Presenter, Fred Donaldson)

City Attorney, Fred Donaldson, presented the proposal to surplus properties the Utah Department of

29

Transportation ("UDOT") was interested in acquiring for expansion of their FrontRunner project.

30

They had made an offer to purchase the properties. If the City declined to sell, UDOT would likely

31

move to condemn. The parcels were identified on maps, and Mr. Donaldson reported that a total of

32

4.784 acres in easements would be granted to UDOT adjacent to and within Phillip Gates Memorial

33

Park. The properties had been appraised, and fair market value would be received for both parcels.

34
35

Mayor Hall asked if the easement would impact the park. Mr. Donaldson clarified that it was only

36

an easement and the park would not be affected. City Manager, Bruce Kartchner, added that it is

37

solely a construction easement.

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1
2

Council Member Smith asked if cities ever receive more than fair market value for property sold to

3

UDOT or the State. Mr. Kartchner reported that in dealing with governmental agencies, the goal is

4

fair market value. The City has a requirement to at least receive fair market value, and the other

5

agency has a requirement to protect taxpayer dollars by not paying more than fair market value. Value

6

is usually based on the appraisal. If the City believes the appraisal is inaccurate, a second appraisal

7

can be required. In that case, value is typically determined by averaging the two documents.

8

Mr. Donaldson stated that Staff worked to ensure that Bluffdale would receive fair market value for

9

the properties.

10
11

Council Member Aston asked if the easement was perpetual. Mr. Donaldson reported that there

12

would be one temporary construction easement and three perpetual easements. Council Member

13

Aston asked if the park trail would be closed during construction. Mr. Donaldson confirmed that it

14

may be closed temporarily during construction. He did not have details on access during that time.

15
16

Council Member Lord stated that there was a lot of open space around the easement and asked if it

17

would be restored once construction was completed. Mr. Donaldson confirmed that it would be

18

restored to preexisting conditions.

19
20

Council Member Austin asked if the easement in the parking lot area was also for construction.

21

Mr. Donaldson reviewed the easement areas on a map. He believed but could not confirm that the

22

public would have access to the park during construction. Mr. Kartchner stated that the property

23

purchase would impact the parking lot, so it would be restructured prior to releasing the construction

24

easement. His understanding was that some areas would be closed during construction, but the park

25

and limited parking would still be accessible. He did not have information on when construction

26

would begin. Mayor Hall remarked that the details were included in the meeting packet.

27
28
29
30

Mayor Hall opened the public hearing. There were no comments. The public hearing was closed.
Council Member Austin moved to APPROVE Resolution 2026-37 – Consideration and Vote to

31

declare Surplus Property at 15010 South 1300 West (0.017 acres) and 14359 South Royal

32

Coachman Dr (0.106 acres) to Utah Department of Transportation. Council Member Aston

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

seconded the motion. Vote on Motion: Council Member Wilding-Yes, Council Member Smith-

2

Yes, Council Member Lord-Yes, Council Member Austin-Yes, Council Member Aston-Yes.

3

The motion passed unanimously.

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Mayor Hall reported that items 7.2, 7.3, and 7.4 would be presented together but voted on separately.

19
20

Planning Manager, Caitlyn Tubbs, presented the Staff Report and stated that the request was for a

21

General Plan Map Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment, and Development Agreement to facilitate

22

construction of approximately 50,000 square feet of flex retail space. An aerial map was reviewed.

23

The subject property is located at the corner of 2950 West and 13900 South and includes three

24

separate parcels.

25
26

The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the items on May 20, 2026, and forwarded a

27

unanimous positive recommendation to the City Council with the following additional findings:

7.2

Ordinance 2026-06 – A Proposed Amendment for a Development Agreement to
Develop Four (4) Microflex Buildings on Approximately 3.914 acres at 13918
South 2700 West, 13942 South 2700 West and 13937 South 2950 West. (Staff
Presenter, Caitlyn Tubbs).

7.3

Ordinance 2026-07 – A Proposed Amendment to the General Plan Map for
approximately 1.90 Acres at 13942 South 2700 West, from Very Low Density
Residential to Commercial. (Staff Presenter, Caitlyn Tubbs)

7.4

Ordinance 2026-08 – A proposed amendment to the Zoning Map for
approximately 1.90 acres at 13942 South 2700 West. (Staff Presenter, Caitlyn
Tubbs)

28
29

•

Facades facing North Star Academy will meet standard glazing and materials requirements.

30

•

Any change in the number or location of accesses to the project would not constitute a “minor

31
32
33

change”.
•

The City Council should consider the proposed chain link fence along 2950 West. No
recommendations were made either for or against the proposed fence.

34
35

Ms. Tubbs reported that public comments received during the public hearing were in favor of the

36

proposal. The Applicant had revised their proposal in response to Planning Commission feedback.

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1
2

The Concept Plan was reviewed. Two access points were anticipated from 13900 South, one

3

approximately in the center of the project and one on the northeastern corner that would be shared

4

with adjoining property owners when those properties are developed in the future.

5

recommendation regarding changes to the access points was made in response to a comment received

6

during the public Planning Commission hearing asking that the second access not be impeded or

7

removed. Any changes to the access points would require additional Planning Commission and City

8

Council review and public hearings.

9
10

In order to move forward with the proposed development, both the General Plan Land Use Map and

11

Zoning Map must be amended. Although the surrounding parcels were designated and zoned for

12

commercial use, the center parcel was contemplated in the General Plan as Very Low Density

13

Residential and zoned R-1-43 Residential. The Applicant requested that the maps be amended to

14

make the center parcel consistent with the other two.

15
16

Through a Development Agreement, Applicants may propose deviations. The Applicant proposed

17

the following deviations:

18
19

•

The

Lot Coverage:

20

o The General Commercial (“GC-1”) Zone allows for a maximum lot coverage of 80%.

21

o The proposal would allow a maximum lot coverage of 85%, which was consistent with

22
23

the coverage approved for the Bluffdale Exchange project.

•

Landscaping:

24

o The GC-1 Zone requires a minimum of 20% landscaping.

25

o The proposal would allow for a minimum of 15% landscaping to accommodate the

26

increased lot coverage.

27
28

Ms. Tubbs reported that the project must comply with all existing requirements not directly addressed

29

in the Development Agreement.

30
31

The Land Use Deviations table was reviewed, and Ms. Tubbs reported that changes had been made

32

by the Applicant in response to Planning Commission feedback. Data Centers, Loan Centers, and

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

Storage Facilities for Machinery and Equipment were removed from the proposal. Both the original

2

and revised Development Agreements were included in the meeting packet.

3
4

Concept renderings were displayed. The Applicant had proposed a revision to the materials mix since

5

the Planning Commission reviewed the renderings. Brick accents would now be incorporated

6

throughout the facades in addition to metal siding, metal paneling, and Concrete Masonry Unit

7

(“CMU”). Project glazing was also revised. The original proposal would have met standards on all

8

facades facing 13900 South, with reduced glazing on the ends of buildings facing 2950 West and

9

interior portions of the project. Following the Planning Commission’s recommendation, all glazing

10

would meet existing standards.

11
12

Ms. Tubbs reported that the three items required separate motions. If approved, the Applicant would

13

sign the Development Agreement, and a City representative would record it with the Salt Lake County

14

Recorder. As the Planning Commission is the designated Land Use Authority, the Site Plan and

15

Preliminary Plat would go before that body for approval.

16
17

Council Member Lord asked if the Applicant also owned the parcel currently zoned residential.

18

Ms. Tubbs confirmed that they owned all three parcels under consideration.

19
20

Council Member Aston asked for more information about the Planning Commission’s request to

21

consider the fencing along 2950 West. Ms. Tubbs reported that there was an existing chain-link fence

22

on the southern property line between the subject property and North Star Academy, which the

23

Applicant proposed extending along 2950 West. There is a grade difference between 2950 West and

24

the subject property, and the fence would address associated safety concerns. The Applicant also

25

wanted to ensure that any school pickups would not bleed over into their required parking. The

26

Planning Commission requested that the Council consider the matter because chain-link fencing was

27

currently only permitted in industrial and sand-and-gravel zones. The Applicant proposed chain-link

28

because it was consistent with the existing fence.

29
30

Mayor Hall indicated that the chain-link fence near North Star Academy is black and asked if it would

31

be matched. Troy Sanders of Think Architecture spoke on behalf of the Applicant and confirmed that

32

it would be a black Permafused chain-link fence and extend around the corner to the intersection.

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1
2

Council Member Wilding asked if the approved uses were similar to those approved for the project

3

across the street. Ms. Tubbs confirmed that the uses were identical.

4
5

Ms. Tubbs reported that temporary job trailers and offices were proposed during construction only

6

and would be removed once construction is completed.

7
8

Mayor Hall asked if the units would be for sale or lease. Mr. Sanders stated that it would be

9

determined based on interest, but the spaces would likely be leased. The property would be controlled

10

by an HOA.

11
12

Council Member Austin asked for more information on the Construction Sales and Service use.

13

Ms. Tubbs reviewed the definition as outlined in Bluffdale City Municipal Code § 11.20.020:

14
15

An establishment engaged in the retail or wholesale sale of materials and services used in

16

the construction of buildings or other structures, as well as the outdoor storage of

17

construction equipment or materials on lots other than construction sites. Typical uses

18

include lumberyards, lawn and garden supply stores, construction equipment sales and

19

rental, electrical, plumbing, air conditioning and heating supply stores, swimming pool

20

sales, landscaping and property maintenance contractors' offices and storage yards,

21

construction and trade contractors' offices and storage yards, and public utility

22

corporation storage yards.

23
24

Council Member Austin expressed concern about allowing outdoor storage in the area. Ms. Tubbs

25

reported that the Applicant had self-restricted outdoor storage through the Development Agreement.

26

While Construction Sales and Service would be a permitted use, no materials, equipment, vehicles,

27

etc. could be stored outside of the unit. That rule would be enforced by the property owner.

28
29

Council Member Aston asked if overnight parking was addressed in the Development Agreement.

30

Ms. Tubbs reviewed the agreement for that information.

31

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

Council Member Lord asked if each unit has a designated number of parking stalls. Mr. Sanders

2

reported that they followed the same parking standard as the project to the north. It was based on

3

total square footage, and parking spaces would not be assigned to individual units.

4
5
6
7

Mayor Hall opened the public hearing for items 7.2, 7.3, and 7.4.
Erik Swanson was very pleased with the changes to the project since it was heard by the Planning

8

Commission. The Applicant considered both recommendations included in the motion and topics of

9

discussion during the meeting and adapted their plan accordingly.

10
11

Diane Kelley was curious as to why data centers would not be allowed in this development when one

12

had already been built. She had been worried about data centers but then heard that they are important

13

in the development of artificial intelligence.

14
15

Allen Larsen stated that military intelligence states that artificial intelligence is a defense issue, but

16

he did not believe that it was. The United States had over 4,500 data centers, but China only had 480.

17
18
19
20

There were no further comments. The public hearing was closed.
Council Member Aston believes data centers are better suited to other areas of the City as there are

21

neighborhoods and a school near the subject property.

22
23

Council Member Smith was opposed to allowing data centers. Although the technology is improving

24

in terms of water usage, the area surrounding data centers tends to have a higher temperature, and

25

there were no long-term studies on the health impacts of living in close proximity to one. He also did

26

not believe they should be allowed next to schools.

27
28

Mayor Hall asked Staff to address the question of overnight parking. Ms. Tubbs reported that it was

29

not explicitly addressed in the Development Agreement but could be added at the Council’s direction.

30
31

Council Member Wilding disclosed that he had worked with the property owner for many years, and

32

his engineers were performing work on the site.

33

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

Council Member Aston stated that although North Star Academy currently has a chain-link fence, the

2

City only allows that type of fencing in industrial zones. She agreed that a fence was necessary but

3

was in favor of requiring it to meet established design standards for the area. Council Member Smith

4

agreed and expressed concern that chain-link may look overly industrial.

5
6

Council Member Austin asked if the Applicant was open to installing wrought iron or another material

7

that meets standards. Mayor Hall added that it may not need to be full height. She understood that

8

chain-link fencing is cost-effective and provides visibility, and fencing was not a City requirement.

9

Mr. Sanders stated that if the Applicant was required to meet underlying standards, it would likely be

10

a black, powder-coated tubular steel fence with a similar appearance to wrought iron. The fence

11

would not be full height as it would be a safety barrier along the retaining wall. The Council agreed

12

that the fence should meet existing standards.

13
14

Council Member Austin stated that if overnight parking is not allowed on other properties in the area,

15

that should be addressed in the Development Agreement. Mayor Hall clarified that a similar

16

restriction was discussed for the nearby property but ultimately not included in the Development

17

Agreement. She was not aware of any problems with overnight parking. Council Member Smith

18

stated that he works late during the busy season and did not want to be too restrictive of businesses

19

that have similar needs or operate night shifts. Council Member Lord noted that it is not uncommon

20

to park a business vehicle overnight.

21
22

Mayor Hall thanked the Planning Commission for their thorough consideration of the proposal and

23

Staff for working with all parties on the project. She also thanked the Applicant, as they were the

24

first Applicant to automatically make changes recommended by the Planning Commission.

25
26

Council Member Aston moved to APPROVE Ordinance 2026-06 as amended to clarify that

27

fencing must meet established design standards. Council Member Lord seconded the motion.

28

Vote on Motion: Council Member Smith-Yes, Council Member Lord-Yes, Council Member

29

Austin-Yes, Council Member Aston-Yes, Council Member Wilding-Yes. The motion passed

30

unanimously.

31

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

Council Member Austin moved to APPROVE Ordinance 2026-07. Council Member Aston

2

seconded the motion. Vote on Motion: Council Member Lord-Yes, Council Member Austin-

3

Yes, Council Member Aston-Yes, Council Member Wilding-Yes, Council Member Smith-Yes.

4

The motion passed unanimously.

5
6

Council Member Austin moved to APPROVE Ordinance 2026-08. Council Member Aston

7

seconded the motion. Vote on Motion: Council Member Austin-Yes, Council Member Aston-

8

Yes, Council Member Wilding-Yes, Council Member Smith-Yes, Council Member Lord-Yes.

9

The motion passed unanimously.

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32

Ms. Tubbs provided a timeline and explained that the project was originally discussed at the

33

February 12, 2025, General Plan Work Session. At that time, the City Council directed Staff to draft

34

an ordinance creating two new zoning districts to permit 0.50- and 0.33-acre development patterns.

35

On April 16, 2026, the Planning Commission held its first public hearing and tabled the item pending

36

additional information.

37

Council/Planning Commission Work Session.

38

7.5

Ordinance 2026-10 – A proposed amendment to:
1.

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Consolidate Chapters 11.80.010 (R-1-43 Residential Zone) and 11.80.020
(R-1-10 Residential Zone) into a new Chapter 11.80.010 (“Single-Family
Residential Zones”), outlining lot and building requirements for all
existing single-family zones and creating the R2 (“half-acre”) and R3
(“third-acre”) zones;
Relocate Chapter 11.80.040 (R-1-87 Residential Zone) into Chapter 11.70
(Agricultural Zone) and renaming that zone to A-2);
Amend Chapter 11.350.030 of the Bluffdale City Code to incorporate new
R2 and R3 Zones and their respective uses and large animal rights;
Modify the lot standards (width, frontage, setbacks, and coverage) in the
R-1-10 (Renamed as R4) Zone;
Amend Chapter 11.290 of the Bluffdale City Code to note Development
Agreements may be required as part of a Zone Map Amendment request
under certain circumstances;
Amend assorted sections of the Bluffdale City Code to update code titles
and related references; and
Updating the legend and zone labels on the Official Zoning Map to reflect
those same changes.

The project was then paused until a January 21, 2026, joint City

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

A second public hearing was held at the February 18, 2026, Planning Commission Meeting, at which

2

time the item was once again tabled. That public hearing remained open until April 15, 2026, at

3

which time they forwarded a positive recommendation to the City Council. A community open house

4

was held on June 22, 2026, to discuss the proposal. Comments both in favor of and opposition to the

5

proposal had been received throughout the process and could be found in Planning Commission

6

meeting minutes and the meeting packet.

7
8

Ms. Tubbs reported that the proposed Text Amendment would not rezone any property or grant

9

additional density or development rights. Any future General Plan Map or Zoning Map Amendments

10

would require separate public hearings with the Planning Commission and City Council.

11
12

The proposal would consolidate the City’s existing single-family residential zones into one chapter

13

and create the R2 and R3 Zones to allow approximately 0.50- and 0.33-acre lots. It would also

14

relocate and rename the existing R-1-87 Zone as A2 and move it into the Agricultural Zones chapter

15

to be consistent with the A5 Zone. The existing R-1-10 Zone would be renamed R4, and R-1-43

16

would become R1. Modifications were also proposed to the R4 Zone to accommodate prevailing

17

development patterns.

18
19

A minimum property size of two acres would be required to apply for the R2 zoning designation. A

20

minimum of five acres and a Development Agreement would be required to apply for the R3

21

designation. Development density would be limited to 1.5 dwelling units per acre for properties

22

between two and five acres in size.

23
24

Proposed lot standards were reviewed, and Ms. Tubbs reported that no modifications were proposed

25

for the R1 Zone. Modifications were proposed for the R4 Zone due to the fact that, since 2004, no

26

requests had been received to rezone to R-1-10 that did not also include an Infill Overlay component

27

to modify standards, and most modification requests were for setbacks.

28
29
30
31
32

Proposed modifications were as follows:
•

Front setback
o Existing: 30 feet

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1
2

o Proposed: 20 feet
•

Side setback

3

o Existing: 12 feet

4

o Proposed: 10 feet

5

•

6

o Existing: 30 feet

7
8

Rear setback
o Proposed: 20 feet

•

Lot width/frontage

9

o Existing: 100 feet

10

o Proposed: 75 feet

11

o This was proposed to allow flexibility in development patterns. Currently, a 10,000-

12

square-foot lot with 100 feet of frontage would be exactly square, which is not

13

conducive to the City’s geography.

14

•

Lot coverage

15

o Existing: 40%

16

o Proposed: 50%

17
18

Proposed R2 and R3 Zones would be included in the Table of Permitted, Conditional, and Accessory

19

Uses for Residential and Agricultural Zones.

20

requirements, and R3 would follow the R4 Zone. Ms. Tubbs provided the example of a resident who

21

wanted to install a wind turbine and indicated that there must be a home on the property.

22
23

Protecting large animal rights was a priority during the process. Existing code allotted large animals

24

to a property by the 0.50 acre. However, the proposed R2 Zone had a minimum lot size of 20,000

25

square feet, which is less than 0.50 acres. As large animals are encouraged in the zone, the allotment

26

ratio was reduced to 20,000 square feet, which slightly expanded the number of properties that would

27

qualify for large animal rights.

28
29

On April 15, 2026, the Planning Commission forwarded a position recommendation to the City

30

Council with the following findings:

31

The R2 Zone would most closely follow R1

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

•

The Text Amendment does not rezone any property.

2

•

The minimum area requirements of two and five acres are in place to prevent subdivision of

3
4

standard one-acre lots in either zone.
•

Recommendation to strengthen R3 Zone placement language to state: This Zone is intended

5

to be limited to perimeter edges of the City and shall be located within 60 feet from the closest

6

property line to the City Boundary. Requests to apply this Zone to a property will also require

7

a Development Agreement in accordance with Chapter 11.290 of this Title.

8
9

•

Recommendation to initiate a General Plan Text Amendment within Land Use Categories
prior to any Zone Map Amendment.

10
11

Ms. Tubbs reported that a modification was made based on input received at the community open

12

house. A resident observed that as previously written, an accessory building that houses animals

13

could not fit on an R2 lot. As a result, the provision was stricken from both the proposed standards

14

and the Keeping of Animals chapter. Per existing ordinance, a minimum distance of 75 feet must be

15

maintained between an accessory building that houses animals and any dwelling unit. The Salt Lake

16

County Health Department had no concerns about striking the provision.

17
18
19
20

Mayor Hall thanked the Planning Department for their work on the item and the detailed presentation.
Council Member Smith asked if residents would now be allowed to keep turkeys. Ms. Tubbs reported

21

that existing code specified chickens, and the proposal would change the language to “poultry, e.g.,

22

chickens, pheasants, or similar fowl”.

23
24

Council Member Austin referred to the Table of Allowed Animal Uses and asked if it indicated

25

poultry would not be allowed in the R1 and R2 Zones. Ms. Tubbs explained that those zones are

26

allowed more poultry than entitled through the specific chapter. In those zones, 25 poultry are equal

27

to one large animal. Council Member Austin recommended that the words “except R1 and R2” be

28

stricken from the table to avoid confusion and the zones in which they are permitted be listed instead.

29
30

Council Member Austin asked why slaughtering of poultry was prohibited.

31

Economic Development Director, Grant Crowell reported that the chapter was modified

32

approximately five years previously to allow poultry on smaller lots. Footnotes could be added to

Community and

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

ensure that no rights were removed from larger properties. Mayor Hall indicated that the motion

2

should clarify that poultry is allowed in appropriate areas and the slaughtering provision should be

3

removed.

4
5

Council Member Wilding stated that the Text Amendment would create smaller lots, which some

6

residents were unhappy about, but it also included restrictions to guide and direct development, and

7

the animal rights modifications would allow property owners to do more things on their property.

8

There was a lot of misinformation around the proposal. Since the last Planning Commission meeting,

9

he had spent a lot of time on the phone explaining what the City was trying to do. A lot of people in

10

the City incorrectly believed they would be allowed to subdivide their one-acre property into two or

11

three lots. The size of projects that could potentially be rezoned to higher density was limited, and

12

those zones were considered low density in other areas. Properties in one-acre-lot subdivisions could

13

not apply for the new zoning. The Text Amendment was an effort to accommodate changes in society,

14

and it had benefits to both the City and its citizens.

15
16

Council Member Wilding had repeatedly been asked why the change was being considered. His

17

business had been involved in several one-acre-lot subdivisions in Bluffdale and developed

18

approximately 51 lots, only one of which had a large animal on it. The remainder had large, beautiful

19

yards. The reason for one-acre lots is to allow for large animals or other agricultural elements, but

20

society was changing, and people were no longer seeking that. The home that would be constructed

21

on a one-acre lot in Bluffdale was generally the same home that would be constructed on a 0.50-acre

22

lot. He had worked on many 0.50-acre-lot subdivisions throughout Utah, and he anticipated homes

23

on similarly sized lots in Bluffdale to sell for between $2 million and $4 million.

24
25

Council Member Wilding was interested in pursuing the new zoning because he had been asked to

26

do so by many property owners. There were also a lot of people who wanted to subdivide their one-

27

acre lot, but that desire was not being addressed through the Text Amendment. He is a pro-property-

28

rights conservative, and he listens to what people ask of him. Many people who were against the

29

proposal lived on one-acre lots and did not want neighboring property owners to subdivide. However,

30

the proposed zones were still very low density, as most areas would only allow for 0.50-acre lots.

31

There were only a few areas where 0.33-acre lots would be allowed, and he recommended that a gross

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

density limit also be imposed on the R3 Zone. The intention was to provide the opportunity for open

2

space; developers would be granted smaller lots in exchange for trails and open space.

3
4

The City Council was trying to find a balance between maintaining Bluffdale’s rural nature and

5

addressing the needs and desires of property owners who would like to subdivide into lots smaller

6

than one acre in size. Council Member Wilding did not believe many people would have horses on

7

the new 0.50-acre lots because people were no longer keeping them on one-acre lots, but the same-

8

sized home would be constructed. There would be a few more homes supporting infrastructure, which

9

lowers taxes and makes it easier to maintain that infrastructure. Sales tax revenues would also

10

increase. Those combined factors make it easier for the City to maintain lower taxes.

11
12

Council Member Wilding stated that he would like to hear from the public why it was acceptable to

13

raise taxes to maintain one-acre lots, because that is what would need to be done. If citizens believed

14

that, they should not defer a tax increase. One-acre lots are the most expensive way to develop and

15

maintain a city because they bring in the least amount of revenue. It was frustrating that property

16

owners did not want any restrictions on what they could do on their one-acre lot but did want to dictate

17

what the owner of a three-acre lot could do with their property.

18
19

Water restrictions were also a factor. The least waterwise way to develop land is with one-acre lots.

20

The City was changing. Fewer people were keeping horses, and more property owners were choosing

21

to let their yards go to weeds. Council Member Wilding hoped for a good discussion both for and

22

against the proposal. People thought they would have to move out of Bluffdale because a 0.50-acre

23

development may be built down the road from them, but they would not have to do so. They would

24

see beautiful homes in those projects, and he believed they would be proud of them. It was not true

25

that developers would make millions and millions more dollars from 0.50-acre lots because the City’s

26

one-acre lots were very valuable. Moving forward, it would be much easier for the City to make ends

27

meet if project densities were slightly higher.

28
29

Council Member Wilding disclosed that many of his clients were property owners in Bluffdale who

30

were interested in rezoning, so they would benefit from the changes, and his company would likely

31

be hired as the engineering firm for the project.

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1
2

Mayor Hall asked if there were any rezoning applications pending. Ms. Tubbs reported that there

3

were no formal applications, but multiple inquiries had been received as well as some concept plans.

4

Mayor Hall asked that the maps shown at the open house be displayed. Maps of parcels in the City

5

that were less than one acre, between two and five acres, five and 10 acres, and 10 acres or more were

6

reviewed and discussed.

7
8

Ms. Tubbs reported that all subdivision proposals must meet certain standards, but the Engineering

9

Department would need to speak to potential water issues with specific properties. Several standards

10

must be met for a property to be eligible for rezoning, and all zoning decisions were discretionary. If

11

the City Council determined that a specific zone made sense in one area of the City and not another,

12

they were not obligated to approve the rezoning request.

13
14

Council Member Aston stated that a property owner could currently request rezoning for 0.25-acre

15

lots and requested an overview of the rezoning process. Ms. Tubbs reported that the current R-1-10

16

Zone allowed for 0.25-acre lots. If someone wanted to propose a Zoning Map Amendment to that

17

zone, typically they would meet with Planning Department staff to analyze the overall size of the

18

property and its General Plan Designation. If it was designated Very Low Density Residential, that

19

designation did not support R-1-10 zoning, so they would also need to apply for a General Plan Map

20

Amendment. If someone were to propose to rezone to commercial along the Redwood Road corridor,

21

the General Plan supports commercial development in that area.

22
23

If Staff determines that the General Plan Map and proposed zoning were not supportive of one

24

another, the Applicant is informed that they must proceed with a General Plan Map Amendment.

25

They typically apply for both amendments at the same time, which requires a public Planning

26

Commission hearing. The Commission reviews the request and makes a recommendation to the City

27

Council. A second public hearing is then held with the Council, which makes the final decision. Both

28

applications carry application and noticing fees.

29
30

Council Member Smith asked about the total number of public hearings required. Ms. Tubbs

31

explained that there would be a minimum of two public hearings if the item was not tabled or

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

continued for further discussion. Council Member Smith remarked that the Council had voted earlier

2

to sell some of the property highlighted on the map.

3
4

Ms. Tubbs reported that the map being displayed included property owned by the Jordan Basin

5

Improvement District, which was unlikely to be considered for rezoning. Council Member Aston

6

indicated that they had expansion plans that would include the property, so it would not be sold.

7

Ms. Tubbs stated that it was included on the map because it is a parcel in Bluffdale that is greater than

8

10 acres in size, but the map was not indicative of pending applications.

9
10

The map of properties between two and five acres in size was displayed. Council Member Smith

11

remarked that he believed these property owners would likely benefit from the Text Amendment.

12
13

Council Member Austin stated it had been pointed out that there were comments both in favor of and

14

opposed to the Text Amendment. While technically true, as he had heard a handful of comments in

15

favor, the majority of feedback received was against the proposal.

16
17

Mayor Hall thanked the audience for being respectful and stated that the City Council was looking

18

forward to hearing from them. However, if there were any interruptions from the audience, including

19

clapping or jeering, the public comment period would be closed and comments taken via email.

20
21

Council Member Austin stated that a comment was made indicating that the proposal would not

22

rezone any property, and any requests would have their own public hearing. He took issue with that

23

as he had heard comments that the public was not being heard. He asked what comfort the fact that

24

there would be another public hearing would give to people who were already not feeling heard. He

25

did not believe it gave them any comfort, as they would just be given the same response that their

26

opinions do not matter. He was afraid of that being the norm and believed it was, and that was not

27

why the Council was there as elected officials. They were there to listen to people in the City.

28
29

Council Member Lord stated that he received a copy of Bluffdale Times the previous week, which

30

provided an overview of events and other information. When the Council spoke in May about having

31

more dialog with citizens, they agreed to put a notice in the June Bluffdale Times. He then read the

32

notice of the June 22 zoning open house and stated that he did not know anyone who came because

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

of that brief announcement. Citizens created a flyer and volunteers passed them out, and most of the

2

people at the open house came because of that flyer. It was not the City communicating to citizens

3

but the efforts of citizens and others. He agreed with Council Member Austin that public hearings in

4

and of themselves do not bring people out.

5
6

Council Member Lord did not believe the Council was ready to pass the Text Amendment because

7

they had not allowed the citizens of Bluffdale to really understand it. When there is an issue on the

8

ballot, there are always arguments for and against. There had been a lot of arguments for the new

9

zoning, but they had not provided people with the opportunity to state why they might be opposed to

10

it. He had listened carefully to all the arguments for the past year and a half, but he did not believe

11

the City had done an adequate job informing citizens of the proposal. He believed a mailer should be

12

sent to citizens in the areas that would be most affected.

13
14

He had talked to two people who were in favor of the zoning change and dozens who were against it.

15

When residents moved to Bluffdale and purchased large lots, they did so for a reason. As he had

16

visited new one-acre development and spoken with those residents, he learned that they came to the

17

City because they wanted a big lot and open space. They did not come for animals but for a big house

18

and a pool or trail on their property, and they wanted areas with one-acre zoning to remain that way.

19
20

Council Member Lord asked if the City was catering to the desires of developers. He was confident

21

that the Council would not approve most applications to rezone one-acre lots. However, a new

22

Council could go in a different direction. He asked if there was a problem that needed to be solved

23

or if the City was trying to create an opportunity for developers. He liked the current zoning gap

24

because he likes the idea of preserving the character of Bluffdale without opening the door for

25

developers. It had been explained that no current zoning would change and the new zones would

26

have to be applied for, but the Text Amendment would encourage that outcome. When he re-read the

27

Text Amendment, he thought of 2010 when Congress passed the Affordable Care Act, and

28

Representative Nancy Pelosi stated, “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it away

29

from the fog of controversy.” He believed that they first needed to hear from a lot more citizens and

30

get more input like they received at the open house.

31

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

A lot of time had been put into the proposal, and he applauded the Planning Department for their

2

efforts. It had good components, but he was not in favor of it at the time. He was also not in favor

3

of allowing 20,000-square-foot lots. One-acre lots were still in demand, and the people who have the

4

money to buy them build incredible homes. They would put large homes on 0.50-acre lots as well,

5

but he did not want to fundamentally change the character of certain neighborhoods. There were

6

areas where higher density lots would make sense, and he was not opposed to that. He did not believe

7

a Council of three votes should make the decision for hundreds and maybe thousands of citizens who

8

were not in favor of the proposal.

9
10

Council Member Austin stated that the current zoning had existed for years. If someone wanted to

11

change it, they should prove that it is a benefit and need. It should not simply be because there is a

12

gap to be filled or another option should be available. The City had not conducted a fiscal impact or

13

cost-benefit analysis. He also has not seen traffic or infrastructure analyses, information on impacts

14

to the Police and Fire Departments or parks and utilities, or a long-term buildout analysis. When he

15

requested those items, he was told that the City does not have the resources. In that case, then he

16

believed they were moving too fast and should wait until the resources were available, as it was

17

important to do those things before the Council acted rather than later regretting their decision.

18
19

Council Member Austin referenced Council Member Wilding’s statement that most of the current

20

one-acre lots do not have animals. He also does not have large animals, but that is not why he has a

21

one-acre lot. He agreed that some people find animal rights very important, but he believed that the

22

majority of people want the open space and the character of Bluffdale. In his opinion, 0.50- and 0.33-

23

acre zoning would change the character of the west side. It was also brought up that many one-acre

24

lots were going to weeds, and the need for water conservation was mentioned in the same sentence.

25

Council Member Austin did not understand how 0.50- and 0.33-acre zones would save water when

26

weeds do not need water. Fully landscaped smaller lots would not save water if the current property

27

was not being watered at all.

28
29

Prior to opening the public hearing, Mr. Donaldson explained that there should be no yelling, calling,

30

or other disruptions from the audience. He asked that comments be kept on topic and appropriate for

31

the setting.

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1
2

Mayor Hall opened the public hearing, noting the large number in attendance and stating that, to

3

accommodate everyone, each person would be allotted two minutes to comment.

4
5

Council Member Lord asked how many people wanted to talk, as he had been to open houses that

6

extended to 11:30 p.m. because everyone was allowed to speak. Mayor Hall asked those who wished

7

to comment to raise their hands. It was determined that at two minutes per person, the public hearing

8

would last approximately one-and-a-half hours. There was a two-minute time limit on individual

9

comments.

10
11

Erik Swanson stated that he is a resident of Bluffdale and wanted to add to his comments at previous

12

City Council and Planning Commission meetings. The proposed 0.33- and 0.50-acre zones would

13

provide invaluable tools that bridge a huge gap in available residential zones. The gap had been at

14

the center of numerous lively City Council and Planning Commission meetings in the past. Some

15

examples included the Senior Living residential zone adopted several years ago, and more recently

16

the remaining infill plots in the Springview Farms area. To the remarks of not seeing the need for

17

this before, the zoning would have exactly fit those needs. In each case, having 0.33- and 0.50-acre

18

zones available could have led to different proposals that were more compatible with the surrounding

19

density. Instead, there is a higher-density boutique zone and 0.25-acre homes infilled among 0.33-

20

acre homes. The eastern portion of the City and much other new development had been handled with

21

higher-density Special Districts that are often tailor-made to the developer and less often to the

22

surrounding community. Without the proposed options, there continued to be a higher likelihood of

23

more Special Districts and boutique zones that could be requested by those seeking to develop the

24

remaining large lots scattered through the City. He believed that inclusion of the proposed zone types

25

in the City’s planning toolbox, combined with thoughtful community engagement on the General

26

Plan, would better protect the character of Bluffdale’s lower density neighborhoods and provide more

27

graceful transitions between existing and new development. Right now, they were just a different

28

Council and two open public meetings away from 0.25-acre or smaller lots.

29
30

Vernon Dunn stated that his family had lived in Bluffdale for 48 years. When they moved to the City,

31

it had 1,200 residents and was largely agricultural. Gratefully, Bluffdale had not remained that way.

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

As people moved in, they saw a lot of things change for the better. However, most of the agricultural

2

land had been developed. People who wanted to come to Bluffdale could not do so because they

3

could not afford a one-acre lot. Their children are included in that group. Approximately one year

4

earlier, The Deseret News expressed the opinion that Utah’s housing crisis had reached a boiling point

5

and the average home price could soon approach $1 million, locking the door on the American dream

6

for many people. One of their suggestions was “Reform zoning and arbitrary minimum lot and home

7

size requirements so smaller, more attainable homes can be built. Let landowners develop their

8

property to meet demand.” If Bluffdale City officials did not make the zoning changes they were

9

proposing and continued changes as needed in the future, state lawmakers may make laws superseding

10

City ordinances that will allow landowners to make free use of their property to its highest value and

11

very possibly go down to six or eight houses per acre. People who do not learn from history are

12

bound to repeat it. In 2007, Bluffdale lost 4,000 acres over this same issue.

13
14

Mike Muir is a Bluffdale resident. He asked if taxes were figured by percent. When inflation went

15

up, did not taxes go up? The value of your property goes up, the value of items goes up, and taxes

16

are a percent. He believed it was illogical to say that they needed more people or to raise taxes. He

17

asked what causes the need for more money and stated that the City should stop adding services and

18

unneeded employees. Employees should be required to put in a full day’s work for a full day’s pay.

19

He had observed employees standing around. He knew that Bluffdale had increased in size, but he

20

believed it was fiscally irresponsible. More people moving in increases income in concert with the

21

City’s needs. When decisions are made out of fear, they are often regretted. He had a one-acre lot.

22

If people could not afford one, he felt bad for them, but he could not afford one for 50 years.

23
24

Jan Perkins stated that she is a resident of Bluffdale and thanked Council Member Lord and Council

25

Member Austin for their comments. Ninety percent of people come to the City to get a big lot.

26

Bluffdale is different than any other town in the area. She moved from Sandy because she could not

27

stand their laws and what they were doing. She has a two-and-a-half-acre lot. When people come to

28

her home, they say that they want a similar lot. She was not born rich and had to work for her property,

29

and the City does not have to provide for everybody else. There are no towns like Bluffdale anymore,

30

and she did not understand why the City had to be like others. Other cities like Lehi are built up. It

31

used to be beautiful, and now it is all condominiums. Herriman is a mess. The City Council works

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

for citizens, and she wanted to make sure they knew that they had to listen. She spoke with someone

2

who stated that they had not heard about the meeting.

3
4

Mr. Kartchner read an email from Bluffdale resident Beverly Stauffer into the record. “I am unable

5

to attend the meeting today regarding Bluffdale’s longtime one-acre ordinance. I want to keep the

6

one-acre ordinance. Leave it alone. If people don’t want big lots, these people should move out of

7

Bluffdale. The open space here in Bluffdale is what makes it so special. Again, leave the one-acre

8

ordinance alone.”

9
10

Daniele Asay is a Bluffdale resident who was present on behalf of herself and her father, Jack Asay.

11

Keep Bluffdale the same. She was a flight attendant and had traveled the world.

12

Council Member Austin and Council Member Lord for their comments and the Council for listening

13

at the open house. Why would you change something from the reason people moved there in the first

14

place? This is why they are here, and they should not change it. If people wanted something different,

15

they should sell and move elsewhere. She did not live in Bluffdale for animals, and people who had

16

not been there for long. She believed it was an excuse. The changes would make it one valley from

17

Salt Lake City to Provo. People would miss what they had, and the Council would miss the seats

18

they were in if they changed the zoning.

19
20

Launie LeClair stated that she had lived in Bluffdale for 46 years and kept animals. She had watched

21

the Governor on the news for two years saying that he needed to deal with the cities that require one-

22

acre lots. She then read the following: “The Utah State Legislature holds ultimate legal authority over

23

local governments and can, and occasionally does, pass laws overriding municipal zoning for specific

24

housing needs or statewide affordability directives. Recently, addressing the housing crisis has been

25

a major priority for Utah lawmakers. While the State generally prefers to offer incentives to

26

municipalities to update their General Plans, lawmakers have debated and passed various housing

27

bills like House Bills 184 and 37 that require cities to allow density bonuses, smaller starter homes,

28

or accessory dwelling units.” She moved to Bluffdale because it was a small town, but it was not a

29

small town anymore. People should open their eyes. They moved here because they wanted one-

30

acre lots, but keeping their heads in the sand would not change anything. Either the local government

31

would fix it or the State would.

She thanked

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1
2

Brad Llewellyn stated that as a resident of Bluffdale, he was in favor of the Text Amendment. He

3

saw it as protecting the City. He lives on a one-acre lot and owns horses and was happy that Bluffdale

4

allowed that but agreed that the City should make its own decisions. The Council needed to make

5

this decision now because they did not want the State to do it. The Council had been considering the

6

new zones for a year and a half, and they gave Staff the assignment. It was time to vote on it.

7
8

Aaron Helm is a Bluffdale resident. He was concerned about removing the language “higher density

9

development is discouraged in the zone due to the lack of infrastructure and services.” Big homes

10

are not beautiful, but open space is. The City had that, and he did not want to lose it. A lot of the

11

loss would be to external people.

12

companies, and real estate investors would all make money off of Bluffdale. They had a beautiful

13

resource of open land that residents want to see. If you drive through other parts of the Salt Lake

14

Valley, it is not beautiful. You can feel the difference between Independence and western Bluffdale,

15

and he wanted to maintain that calmness and beauty.

16
17

Paxton Guymon is a resident of Bluffdale who also owns two acres near City Hall. He was in favor

18

of the proposed Text Amendment. He loves Bluffdale’s open space and larger lots, and he also

19

believed it was a good proposal. If the zoning change were adopted, it would just give the City

20

another option in its code. No property would have different zoning after it was adopted. Rather,

21

anyone who wants to rezone their property will have to go through the process and come back before

22

the City Council to ask them to exercise their legislative discretion to approve or deny their request.

23

They can deny a rezone if they do not believe it is a suitable use. They were not giving up any rights,

24

authority, or control over the land in the City but were instead adding a few more tools to the toolbox.

25

He works for a homebuilder and deals with land use and zoning every day. He also works with the

26

Governor’s housing advisors, and they were watching what was happening in Bluffdale. If the City

27

did not at least adopt a 0.50-acre zone, the State would take action, and the Council would lose its

28

ability to manage zoning. He heard people say they had to work their whole life to get a full acre,

29

and if others cannot afford it they should go somewhere else. Was that really the elitist position

30

residents wanted to take?

31

Developers, construction companies, property management

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

Jason Smith owns a 6.25-acre property in Bluffdale. He supported the Text Amendment because if

2

the City Council did not take action to approve 0.33- and 0.50-acre lots, which are considered large

3

lots everywhere else in the state, the option would be taken away from them. It would not take

4

decision-making authority away from the Council but would give them an option and help them

5

protect the City’s ability to make those decisions in the future. Otherwise, the legislature would do it

6

for them. He owns a large property. Without the opportunity to subdivide, neither his nor other

7

residents’ property values would continue to increase. The proposal would increase property values

8

throughout the community, which everyone will benefit from.

9
10

Diane Kelley stated that she had lived in Bluffdale for 32 years, and the City was all one-acre lots

11

when she moved here. There were now three stakes. Because the law was not followed, a third of

12

the City was lost to Herriman, which has a lot of high-density housing. She did not understand why

13

people were committed to living in Bluffdale if it was not zoned the way they wanted. They can live

14

in Herriman or Riverton. Before she moved to Bluffdale, she heard a ridiculous argument that

15

valuable land was being wasted under pastures. It was not right that residents had to give up what

16

they have so somebody can make a buck.

17
18

Kevin Olsen stated that he lives near Phillip Gates Memorial Park. His community is on the east side

19

of Bluffdale and comprised of lots smaller than those being considered. His family loves living there.

20

They moved to Bluffdale 13 years ago and had really enjoyed the community, partially because the

21

developers added open space and trails. He appreciated the Council’s efforts to protect the park’s

22

integrity and accessibility. His neighborhood had been developed very well, and those types of

23

developments should not be feared. Good planning benefits everybody.

24
25

Allen Larsen stated that Council Member Wilding mentioned he had developed houses in Bluffdale.

26

If he developed any homes on subdivided lots, he challenged him to recuse himself, as otherwise

27

there were things the State would allow people to do to ensure he is held liable for it as a sitting

28

Council Member who was voted in by the people. He was against any changes, especially on the

29

west side. All the homes in his area are worth $1 million or more. If someone decided to subdivide

30

their property, he believes his property value would drop between 10% and 20%. Water rates will

31

increase with more homes because it will decrease the number of agricultural uses. Most of the homes

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

that are dry are not watering anyway. He does not do anything with his yard. He has chickens, a

2

shed, and a large garden, and wants to keep it that way. They are not using up water, as stated by

3

Council Member Wilding, but building more residential properties would increase water usage. He

4

believes the City Council needed to provide residents with statistics to prove the new zones would

5

benefit residents of Bluffdale.

6
7

Daniel Allen is a resident of Bluffdale. He appreciated the thoughtful, circumspect work that had

8

gone into the Text Amendment over the past one-and-a-half years, and had heard good arguments on

9

both sides of the issue. He was against the proposal at that time and agreed with Council Member

10

Austin that sufficient impact studies had not been conducted to make the move. He believes those in

11

favor of the new zones were promoting a fear-based mentality that the State would take away

12

residents’ rights and force the action upon them as that would be a lengthy process. The Council was

13

present to listen to residents, not the other way around. He did not believe that Council Member

14

Wilding’s statement that the proposal would allow for more open space made sense. He also did not

15

understand why it was taken as a given that the City must be developed or that taxes must be increased

16

to maintain one-acre lots. Current code stated that the R-1-43 Zone was “established to provide areas

17

within the City for single-family dwellings on relatively large lots. Higher density is discouraged in

18

this zone due to lack of infrastructure and services.”

19
20

Karilee Olsen stated that she is a resident of Bluffdale who has been in real estate for 20 years. She

21

appreciated the City Council’s efforts to determine the best path for the community and asked that

22

the City maintain a balance. She is against high-density housing, but the Council needed to give itself

23

options. She was in favor of the Text Amendment. As a community progresses, it has more residents,

24

and they need affordable housing. She asked that the City install the infrastructure it needs because

25

progression will happen.

26
27

Brett Lovell is a Bluffdale property owner and developer. He thanked Staff and the Council for their

28

efforts on the Text Amendment. His family moved to the City from South Jordan and love the

29

community. Other residents mentioned studies, but those are provided by developers when they

30

propose a subdivision. No real change would be made through the Text Amendment. He could

31

currently request 0.25-acre lots, and the Council could approve or deny it, and the new zones would

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

allow him to request 0.33-acre lots. Traffic, water, and other studies are conducted by developers,

2

and many developments also have Development Agreements. His attorney had indicated that as long

3

as a developer goes through the legislative process, they could already ask for smaller lots, but the

4

new standards would help guide that process.

5
6

Andy Mollerup stated that he lives on a one-acre lot in Bluffdale and did not believe large animal

7

rights factored into most people’s decision. He asked Council Member Wilding to recuse himself as

8

he believed he stood to gain from the standards being put in place. He grew up in West Jordan, and

9

they likely had similar discussions 50 years ago. It was now a patchwork of different zoning because

10

the people who had that conversation were no longer there, and those currently in power only cared

11

about revenue and higher density. He was against the proposal because he believed it was a gateway

12

to that occurring in Bluffdale, not because he did not think provisions for different zoning or slightly

13

smaller lots were warranted.

14
15

Tammy Rasmussen is a Bluffdale resident who stated that the proposed zone changes, while claimed

16

to not allow subdivision of one-acre lots, opened the door to future issues that could potentially

17

destroy the Bluffdale many had come to love. Just because someone has a one-acre lot does not mean

18

they have large animals, as they often just like the space. Less-than-one-acre lots would not magically

19

create affordability for people to buy them. No water, traffic, pollution, or other studies had been

20

conducted on how adding the zones could adversely affect Bluffdale. If the City did not have the

21

monetary resources to do those studies, they also did not have the resources to fight a referendum

22

against the Text Amendment, and people had contacted her about doing so. In her experience, nothing

23

brings people together quicker than when a majority feels they are not being listened to or represented

24

by the Council that was elected to represent them. The current Zoning and General Plan Maps were

25

not broken and did not need to be fixed. She volunteered to join a citizen survey committee and speak

26

to residents, as the majority of citizens needed to be heard from. After living in the City for over 25

27

years, it was frustrating to attend Council meetings and hear that if they did not pass items citizens

28

were against, the only option would be to raise taxes. She believed that insulted their intelligence and

29

was designed to induce fear. She was also tired of hearing that if the City did not do it, the State

30

would.

31

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

Tyler Allen had lived in Bluffdale for 13 years. The best change to growth in the City had been that

2

he no longer had to hang fly tape near his back door. Bluffdale and Utah were growing. They lived

3

in one of the greatest and fastest-growing states in the nation, and with growth comes responsibility.

4

He is a developer who focuses on senior living and affordable housing, and 0.50-acre lots were not

5

affordable housing. However, when speaking to city councils about affordable housing, he stresses

6

that housing is an ecosystem consisting of a number of components from homeless shelters to

7

apartments to one-acre lots. He believed that the Text Amendment would help address the state’s

8

significant housing shortage. The Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute estimated that there would be a

9

shortage of over 40,000 homes within the next 10 years. Residents’ children and grandchildren will

10

not have a place to live unless every community puts forth effort to manage the issue.

11
12

Scerinda Johnson is a Bluffdale resident who indicated that there had not been enough studies and

13

the action was premature. She hoped that the City Council would pause the item. They had spent a

14

lot of time on the issue over the past one-and-a-half years but had missed the most important things.

15

Impact studies and surveys needed to be first, as that was responsible leadership. She did not

16

understand how more density would help with taxes because there was already a lot of density in

17

Independence. When she moved to the City, she was told that there was not enough money for police

18

and taxes needed to be increased. She asked Mayor Hall to stop comments and vote on the three-

19

minute rule. She was previously on a small organization board and had to hold a vote before she

20

could change anything in the public record, and residents were told that they had three minutes to

21

speak.

22
23

Connie Robbins is a Bluffdale resident who appreciated Council Member Austin and Council

24

Member Lord’s comments as she believed they were standing up for citizens. She agreed with

25

Ms. Johnson that they should have three minutes to speak. Mayor Timothy allowed four minutes.

26

She did not believe the change would create affordable housing, but it would hand greater influence

27

over the City’s future to developers and an engineering firm. Two developers, a real estate agent, and

28

an attorney had spoken in favor of the item, and she asked if their comments would take precedence

29

over other citizens. A General Plan goal is to maintain the character of established neighborhoods,

30

and she did not see how the Text Amendment would do that. The Council claimed the proposal would

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

not affect one-acre properties. However, changes to lot width, frontage, setbacks, and coverage would

2

affect them. Her property is surrounded by areas that would be directly impacted by the changes.

3
4

David Platt stated that his family lived in Murray for 40 years. They looked for a one-acre property

5

but could not find one there, so they moved to a 2.50-acre property in Bluffdale. He had a master’s

6

degree in urban planning and regional development and was taught that open space is precious. He

7

believed that 0.33- and 0.50-acre zoning would get rid of the City’s precious open space, and he was

8

not in favor of doing so.

9
10

Austin Day is a Bluffdale resident who spoke in favor of allowing 0.50-acre lots and giving the

11

Planning Department the tools they need to make case-by-case decisions. He lives on over two acres

12

on a private lane and would love for his children to be able to build a home on a portion of his land.

13

He should have the right to choose what he does with his land.

14
15

Emily Swanson stated that as a Bluffdale resident, she supported adding 0.33- and 0.50-acre lots as

16

options. It was important to remember that the proposal would not rezone any property or require the

17

lot sizes to be approved but would simply add options that future Councils may consider when

18

appropriate. She believed the options would preserve the one-acre neighborhoods residents valued.

19

Currently, code jumped from one-acre lots to 10,000-square-foot lots with no middle ground. Adding

20

the new zones would fill that gap and allow more flexibility to protect Bluffdale’s character while

21

responding to changing needs. The zoning could affect two plats east of Redwood Road, so it would

22

not only affect the west side. The decision would affect everyone no matter where they lived in the

23

City. She asked that the Council consider allowing bees in the R2 and R3 Zones, as many are native

24

to the area and they benefit everyone. A resident of Suncrest has a small bee hotel on a lot that is

25

much smaller than 0.33 acres. She also supported allowing home-based businesses in those zones, as

26

many residents run small businesses from their homes and ship them through sites like Etsy. Planning

27

is about preparing for the future, and the new zones were important tools to have.

28
29

Annette Broadhead has lived on a 1.25-acre lot in Bluffdale for 34 years. When her family built their

30

home, she had to wait for the sheep herder to take his herd across the road to get to the building site.

31

She moved to the City for the open space. She has five children who cannot afford to live in Bluffdale,

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

but they found homes elsewhere. Approval would open the door to massive growth like Herriman

2

and Lehi. The new zoning could directly impact the field across from her home. Bluffdale is diverse

3

and already has smaller lots in Independence. The west side has bigger lots, and she believed that

4

diversity should be maintained. There was a horse farm next door, and there were 12 horses within

5

20 feet of her front door. She believed the current setback needed to stay in place. She also asked

6

the Council to consider conducting impact studies, as she believed they were necessary.

7
8

Connie Pavlakis is a Bluffdale resident who stated that she had a long list of why she believed the

9

ordinance was very dangerous for the City but did not have time to go through it. The City had

10

existing standards that defined 0.50 acres as 21,780 square feet, and she asked why that was being

11

changed. She believed that fiscal, Fire, Public Works, and other analyses needed to be done so

12

residents could see what it would cost. If more homes made the City wealthier, it should have been

13

rich after Independence was added. She did not believe the new zones would use less water, and the

14

60-foot qualification was ambiguous and needed to be clarified.

15

Amendment as it would ruin the character of Bluffdale that most residents who owned larger lots

16

moved to the City for. There was no majority public demand for the new zoning. She had consistently

17

heard residents say they want to preserve Bluffdale’s existing character and had not heard a

18

community-wide desire to create the new zoning tools. It would permanently change Bluffdale.

19
20

Howard Schmidt owns property in Bluffdale and grew up on 80 acres. Things had changed. Bluffdale

21

is an awesome community. He spends a lot of money maintaining his 2.5-acre lot. He lives near

22

0.33-acre lots, and he was not worried about the proposal, as it was important to have variety. It was

23

a good change and would help people. He would love for his children to live in Bluffdale, but under

24

current circumstances that would be difficult.

25
26

Mark Hales is a resident of Bluffdale who stated that it was great to listen to different opinions for

27

and against the item, but it was time for the City Council to decide. He asked that they not make

28

decisions based on fear of what the State, the next Council, or future applicants may do, or on threats

29

from citizens. Studies cannot be conducted for unknown applicants because that would be ridiculous.

30

People may disagree on the facts, but the Council should make a decision and move forward.

31

She was against the Text

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

Sue Douglas stated that she had lived in Bluffdale for 14 years. She moved away from Herriman

2

because of high-density housing and to Bluffdale for its open space and the values and integrity of its

3

residents. She wanted to uphold those values and believed the Council should take the time to do it

4

right and not cut any corners. The research needed to be done before moving forward.

5
6

Mont Robbins is a resident of Bluffdale who stated that he went to dinner with someone who had

7

lived in Draper for 74 years and told him that Draper was ruined. There was so much traffic, and they

8

were trying to cram things into a small area. Developers were hounding the gentleman’s brother to

9

sell his six acres. He believed a lot more information was needed. His lot was 1.3 acres and well-

10

kept.

11
12

Kelly Ellis stated that she is a Bluffdale resident who supports responsible growth. Some of her

13

concerns were due to residents not taking care of their large lots. Smaller, 0.50-acre lots are more

14

manageable to maintain in an attractive condition. Allowing highly regulated, slightly smaller single-

15

family lots would create a more stable and efficient tax base to help the City fund high-quality

16

infrastructure and services without forcing aggressive property tax hikes on existing residents. Many

17

residents did not want tax increases, but everyone wanted the amenities that are a direct benefit. The

18

proposal rejected high density while providing a sensible single-family solution to the affordability

19

crisis. She wanted the Council to support her personal property rights and allow her to rezone to less

20

than one acre if she desired. If a homeowner requested a change but their plan did not fit the mold

21

the City desired, the Council could choose to decline. Their decision would simply provide options.

22

If the City refused to comply, the State could punish Bluffdale by withholding transportation and

23

infrastructure funding. The State can push Bluffdale into a corner through specific legal and financial

24

levers because there is a moderate-income housing mandate under Utah law requiring cities with a

25

population over 5,000 to adopt a moderate-income housing plan. It was not a choice. She supported

26

the R2 and R3 Zones. If Bluffdale did not adapt, they could be found noncompliant and lose State

27

funding needed for responsible growth. She understood that the State would not step in and rezone

28

her specific neighborhood, but it had been done with the ADA law and will happen again.

29
30

There were no further comments. The public hearing was closed. Mayor Hall thanked those present

31

for listening politely and being respectful of everyone’s time. Bluffdale is a great city with great

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

people, and she was proud to serve it with the Council and live in a community where they can share

2

opinions respectfully.

3
4

Council Member Smith asked for a tally of citizens who spoke for or against the Text Amendment.

5

Mayor Hall reported that the comments were exactly split.

6
7

Council Member Wilding requested that Mr. Donaldson speak to the requirements for recusal. It was

8

his understanding that his obligation was to disclose that he had clients who were interested in

9

rezoning. Mr. Donaldson reported that any direct conflict of interest must be disclosed. Council

10

Member Wilding restated that some Bluffdale citizens and developers were current clients of his

11

company and would continue to be his clients. His engineering firm works for many developers.

12
13

Council Member Austin stated that the proposed zones were a hot topic, and he was curious if there

14

was a way to make the proposal more palatable to those with concerns. He was personally against

15

the Text Amendment. He then read the Planning Commission recommendation that the City Council

16

concurrently initiate a General Plan Text Amendment identifying which land use categories were

17

appropriate for R2 and R3, and that no Zone Map Amendment be processed until the General Plan

18

Amendment was adopted. He suggested that the Council identify where new zoning designations

19

would apply.

20
21

Mayor Hall stated that the preferred approach was to leave the existing land use designations intact.

22

If a designation was changed for 0.50- or 0.33-acre lots, that would prevent a developer from building

23

a one-acre-lot subdivision. The process to update the General Plan is extremely long, and she believed

24

the Council would be doing the City a disservice by pre-determining where the zones should apply.

25

The Text Amendment was just a tool in the toolbox, but designating specific areas would take away

26

the opportunity for someone to develop a property to lower density. The matter at hand was the Text

27

Amendment. When an application is received, that is the appropriate time to ask for studies and

28

discuss whether a specific property should be rezoned. She did not want the Council to be backed

29

into a corner.

30
31

Council Member Wilding indicated that he would like to be able to analyze a project on its own

32

merits. He would prefer to require developers to defend their reasoning for rezoning from one acre

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

to 0.50 or 0.33 acres and explain how the City will benefit. The Council would lose some control by

2

predetermining zoning.

3
4

Council Member Austin appreciated that position but pointed to a comment made about the

5

patchwork zoning that had resulted from similar changes in other cities. It changed the character of

6

that city. If the Council reviewed applications on a case-by-case basis, his concern was that it would

7

turn into the same patchwork. There may be areas in the city where R2 and R3 zoning made sense.

8

He had a lot of tools but typically did not make a major tool purchase unless he intended to use it, and

9

he felt like the proposal was just to put a tool in the toolbox and was not a planned-out approach.

10
11

Council Member Aston agreed that there are areas of the City where the new zones would not make

12

sense, and she did not see them making sense on the west side of Bluffdale. However, it would make

13

sense in a large portion of the City. Areas near Camp Williams are so topographically challenging

14

that one-acre lots would not make sense. Different parts of the City were planned, with one-acre lots

15

on the west side and higher density in Independence, but the middle zoning was missing. If someone

16

cannot build on one-acre lots, she would rather they ask for 0.50 acres than the 0.25 acres they could

17

currently ask for. If an applicant wants to build on smaller lots, they will be required to submit studies

18

and show the benefits of granting a zone change. Costs for studies should not be accrued by the City

19

but by the person requesting the zone change. She understood that some people were apprehensive,

20

but the Text Amendment would not open a door, and the City already had 0.25-acre zoning.

21
22

Council Member Wilding remarked that when a land development project is proposed, if the City was

23

worried about issues like substandard or insufficient infrastructure, the developer is required to study

24

the matter. Traffic studies are also performed by the developer. He did not want Bluffdale to incur

25

the costs of impact studies for projects that may never materialize. He had completed projects in

26

other cities where the infrastructure was insufficient, and it was the developer’s responsibility to buy

27

land, build roads, install water lines, etc. He did not believe that the Text Amendment was haphazard,

28

as the City Council had been discussing it for a long time. He had never attended a City Council or

29

Planning Commission meeting in his professional capacity where the room was full of people who

30

wanted a new project next door, but everyone had likely benefited from a property owner or developer

31

from sticking their neck out to get the development approved.

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1
2

Bluffdale could not turn its head away from the fact that society was changing. The new zoning

3

would not be for moderate-income housing. However, as more housing units are provided in a

4

cautious, careful way as proposed with this Text Amendment so as not to change the nature of the

5

City, it would allow people to move out of less-expensive homes, which eventually does provide

6

affordable housing. That is how a community provides housing at all levels. One-third of comments

7

received by the Planning Commission were in favor of the proposal, and almost half of the comments

8

at the City Council meeting were also in favor. In his experience, those were large percentages.

9
10

Council Member Wilding asked how many residents liked the Maverik at the intersection of Redwood

11

Road and Bangerter Highway. He could not think of a better location for a gas station. However, 62

12

people spoke against its development, and only one spoke in favor of it. He believed everyone was

13

glad the City Council realized it was an appropriate location for a gas station that would benefit

14

citizens. When the request was made to rezone the property across the road from the Maverik to

15

commercial, the then-City Council was concerned they would be chased out of the City for approving

16

it, but they made the right decision. The property now has a Smith’s Grocery and other facilities that

17

support citizens, but their decision was not popular.

18
19

He moved to the City in 2003 and witnessed what happened when the Council was afraid of not

20

making the developer build on one-acre lots. That decision cost Bluffdale 40% of its land area, and

21

he was still angry about it. Everyone who fought against that development cost the City billions of

22

dollars in economic potential that could never be recovered because they could not consider other

23

people’s opinions. The Text Amendment would not change the nature of Bluffdale. It would allow

24

some properties to be developed with lots that may not be one acre but could still be a beautiful

25

supplement to the City. Sometimes City Councils should not listen to the loud majority, because

26

sometimes that causes great problems. The Council listens and considers those opinions, and he had

27

talked to a lot of people for the past year.

28
29

Council Member Wilding appreciated Council Member Austin and Council Member Lord’s

30

comments and opinions on the matter, but sometimes you must fight for what you truly believe is

31

better for the City, its citizens, and the future.

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1
2

Council Member Smith thanked citizens for taking the time to attend and share their concerns or

3

support. He had spent a lot of time on the decision. He was in Tampa a few weeks previously and

4

discussed the zoning issue with South Carolina Senator Tim Scott, who had previously served on a

5

county council. He had also discussed it with numerous residents and appreciated hearing their

6

thoughts. Change is scary, especially when the results cannot be predicted.

7
8

Many concerns expressed at the meeting were valid. It was not Bluffdale’s job to solve the state’s

9

housing issue, and the new zones would not fix the affordable housing crisis. The homes that could

10

be built on 0.33-acre lots would likely sell for $1.4 million, which is three times more than he could

11

afford. They would not attract riffraff but rather people who would spend a lot of money in the City.

12

However, developers who spoke in favor of the Text Amendment gave him pause.

13
14

Council Member Smith indicated that Staff had done a robust job of educating the public on the topic.

15

There had been an open house in addition to multiple public meetings. He agreed that the ad in the

16

newsletter could have been bigger, but it was also advertised on social media. The City had done

17

what it could to ensure that residents with concerns could voice them. The City Council’s chief duty

18

is to do its best to preserve the quality-of-life residents have grown to expect.

19
20

A survey issued earlier in 2026 had approximately 400 respondents. The survey included questions

21

related to growth, but he did not believe the results were conclusive. When discussing what people

22

want, it is important to consider the silent majority who often show up to the polls. Those who speak

23

at meetings are at times a vocal minority. Council Member Smith believed that 80% of Independence

24

residents would not take issue with the proposed changes, but that did not mean that they should

25

decide how the west side would look.

26
27

The City Council recently voted to impose the maximum allowed Impact Fees on development, so

28

Council Member Smith did not believe they were pro-developer. he relied on the logical arguments

29

in favor of and opposed to the proposal. The new Zoning Table would simplify code and make it

30

operationally efficient for Staff, which would save the City money in the long term. It would also

31

provide flexibility for development opportunities.

32

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

Comments were made indicating that Council Member Smith ran on preserving the west side, and he

2

did so because he believes in respecting each neighborhood. Each neighborhood deserves a voice

3

and to be represented. He then read a statement he made prior to the election in support of protecting

4

one-acre homes and not adding high density in areas without the infrastructure to support it. He did

5

not believe he was going back on his promise because he believes in protecting one-acre homes and

6

overall density on the west side. In his six months on the Council, he had learned that existing

7

infrastructure can support a lot more people than currently live on the west side. That did not mean

8

the density should be increased to capacity, as he still wanted to maintain the tranquil quality of life

9

residents had grown to expect. Impact studies are typically conducted when a specific development

10

is proposed.

11
12

Council Member Smith appreciated the robust discussion. Voting on a specific proposal would have

13

been lower profile and may have saved time, but the City Council was trading efficiency for being

14

more transparent, as that was more important. He had worked with several cities across the country

15

and knew that a decision like this was not what changed things. The decision that changes things is

16

the one to actually rezone property. They were not rezoning property. It was simply a Text

17

Amendment to City Code.

18
19

Regarding comments made about fearmongering, Council Member Smith had been worried about a

20

certain powerful legislator coming to the area and steamrolling the Council’s authority, and he had

21

shared that concern at the open house. However, comments that the Text Amendment would “ruin

22

the town” were fearmongering in the opposite direction. He did not believe it would ruin Bluffdale.

23

The vote was not the camel’s nose because the camel was already in the tent and had been for many

24

years. He was able to afford a home in Bluffdale because he moved to a neighborhood with smaller

25

lots. The City Council had the responsibility of ensuring that the camel does not crush the things

26

residents hold dear, including the open space and quality of life that is enjoyed in western and central

27

Bluffdale. Through density, Independence was able to create parks for its residents. The State could

28

step in, and the Text Amendment would mitigate that risk and give flexibility if it becomes clear that

29

they will be stepping in.

30

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

When Council Member Wilding mentioned the new zoning at the first meeting in January, Council

2

Member Smith’s first thought was that it should be leveraged east of Redwood Road, but he did not

3

believe zoning for specific neighborhoods should be specified in code. Spot zoning can be limited,

4

and the change would not alter the Council’s ability to prevent unnecessary flag lots or other things

5

that would not make sense in a neighborhood.

6
7

Some residents shared that having 0.50-acre homes nearby might change the quality of life they

8

expected when they moved to Bluffdale. Council Member Smith lives in a 2,400-square-foot

9

townhome. Two blocks away is another row of townhomes. The proposal was similar to two

10

townhomes turning into four homes two blocks away, which would not change his quality of life or

11

experience in his neighborhood. One-acre homes would be protected.

12
13

Comments had been made about people’s character. If Council Member Smith felt that someone was

14

voting a certain way out of greed, he would not support that vote. The elected officials provided

15

checks and balances for each other. They live in different parts of Bluffdale and talk to different

16

residents. He assumes good intentions because his colleagues care about the City, and he enjoyed

17

serving with them.

18
19

Council Member Smith was in favor of the Text Amendment because he loves the Constitution. The

20

United States is a constitutional republic. When he was sworn in, he swore to uphold the Constitution,

21

something he had never done before in his life. Property rights is a fundamental principle of the

22

Constitution and country. Cities have the right to limit property rights at times, which is why high

23

density or data centers are not allowed in certain areas. However, who were they to tell a widow with

24

four acres east of Redwood Road that she cannot gift each of her three children 0.50 acres of their

25

own? His fellow millennials want to live in the towns they grew up in, but they cannot afford it. The

26

City Council should not deny residents of Bluffdale the opportunity to provide a way for their children

27

to stay in the community. He had heard an argument that accessory dwelling units accomplish that,

28

but he did not want to live in a glorified version of his mother’s basement. He wanted to live in his

29

own home where he can build equity and enjoy the increasingly fading American dream. He did not

30

believe property owners should be told what they can do with their property unless it would create an

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

undue burden on their neighbors. The Council’s commitment should be that they would vote “no”

2

on any proposal that would create an undue burden.

3
4

The Text Amendment would provide the necessary flexibility without compromising their values,

5

and the Council needed to support the City’s principles even when it was not convenient to do so. He

6

loved the culture rooted in patriotism, and that was Council Member Smith’s motivation to support

7

it.

8
9

Council Member Lord stated that he was in the City when the great disconnect happened, and he

10

knew it more intimately than the majority of citizens. The proposed plan would have added 30,000

11

people. He was tired of hearing that it was a great loss to the City. Bluffdale did not even have

12

10,000 people at the time. He was glad that Herriman got the development. It would not bring in

13

revenue to compensate for the costs. Financial impact studies done at the time showed that had the

14

Council accepted it into the City, it could have almost bankrupted Bluffdale. It fell apart before the

15

Great Recession. He believes it had long-term benefits and protected Bluffdale from mushrooming

16

into Herriman. That project went to a citizen vote. The citizens voted in favor of the developer, but

17

he chose to disconnect. He was not forced out.

18
19

The Council and citizens had spoken for and against the Text Amendment. They had just celebrated

20

the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Thomas Jefferson and John

21

Adams were instrumental in bringing the country about, and for a time they were bitter political

22

enemies due to differences in how they thought the country should move forward. They only became

23

friends again after they both left political office. Council Member Lord applauded everyone for

24

attending and expressing their opinions. Strong disagreements are okay. He would be voting no on

25

the ordinance, but that did not mean the Council was not capable of having hard discussions. He

26

appreciated the efforts of City Staff and could see many things that could be improved in code.

27
28

Council Member Smith agreed with Council Member Lord that the conversation would not end that

29

evening. A resident who attended a Planning Commission meeting asked him and a Planning

30

Commissioner to tour their property to discuss a concern, and they were able to determine that the

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

property could not be combined with an adjoining parcel to circumvent the rules outlined in the Text

2

Amendment. He invited residents to reach out, as he likes learning more about the City.

3
4

Council Member Austin asked about a potential compromise, as some changes would make the

5

ordinance easier on some who were opposed to it. There had been comments about bees and home

6

occupations, and he wanted to discuss those issues. Buffer zones could be created, and there should

7

be more clarification. There was also a concern about the 0.33-acre lots and 60-foot boundary lines.

8

He offered to stay longer to find a solution that was more palatable for more people. Council Member

9

Wilding stated that he did not want to speak at length about issues that could be dealt with at a later

10

date, as citizens had been dragged through the issue for long enough.

11
12

Council Member Austin moved to TABLE Ordinance 2026-10.

13

seconded the motion. Vote on Motion: Council Member Aston-No, Council Member Wilding-

14

No, Council Member Smith-No, Council Member Lord-Yes, Council Member Austin-Yes. The

15

motion failed by a vote of 2-to-3.

16
17

Council Member Lord asked about the Zoning Administrator mentioned in the ordinance. Ms. Tubbs

18

reported that the Zoning Administrator is appointed by the City Manager, and the role was currently

19

filled by Mr. Crowell. The role had been in place for many years and is typically responsible for

20

minor subdivisions, administrative interpretations, and other administrative processes.

21
22

Council Member Wilding moved to APPROVE Ordinance 2026-10. Council Member Smith

23

seconded the motion. Vote on Motion: Council Member Smith-Yes, Council Member Lord-

24

No, Council Member Austin-No, Council Member Aston-Yes, Council Member Wilding-Yes.

25

The motion passed 3-to-2.

26
27
28
29

8.

Council Member Lord

Staff Reports, Additional Council Discussion, and Calendaring Items.

City Manager, Bruce Kartchner, reported that Staff had requested a federal grant for the Station Area

30

Plan that would be created in conjunction with the Utah Transit Authority ("UTA"). The Wasatch

31

Front Regional Council ("WFRC") had agreed to be part of the process and would assist with the City

32

match. Mr. Kartchner believed there was room in the budget for the City’s portion. Otherwise, a

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1

Budget Amendment may be required. The Station Area Plan must be completed by approximately

2

2030 when the FrontRunner station opens.

3
4

Staff also applied for a grant for Fire Station 3 on a parcel in Bringhurst Station. If the grant was

5

awarded, the City would move forward with full design. Cost estimates were based on a conceptual

6

design.

7
8

The rodeo would be held July 16 through July 18. Anyone who did not have tickets could contact

9

him. Mayor Hall asked the Council to inform her of their availability. Council Member Lord would

10

attend on Thursday and Friday, and Council Member Wilding would attend on Friday and Saturday.

11

Council Member Smith, Council Member Aston, and Council Member Austin would attend all three

12

nights. Mayor Hall would text details to the Council. Mr. Kartchner reported that there would be

13

hats to give out. Council Member Lord shared that he spoke with organizer Travis Osborne, who

14

indicated that there would be a State qualifying event on Wednesday. Mayor Hall would text the

15

Council with all of the relevant information.

16
17

Mr. Kartchner reported that July 24 is a State holiday and all City offices will be closed. Old West

18

Days will be held August 3 through 8. There will be fireworks each night of the rodeo, as well as at

19

Old West Days.

20
21

The City Council should meet at 4:00 p.m. on July 10 at the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day

22

Saints parking lot on Cinch Way for a site visit at the 13900 South project. Council Member Lord

23

and Council Member Austin indicated that they would be out of town on that date. After discussion,

24

it was decided that they would schedule a private tour, and a second visit would be scheduled in

25

October for the full Council.

26
27
28
29

Mayor Hall reported that the City Council will be needed on the following days for Old West Days:
•

Tuesday: Day Ranch Park birthday party;

30

•

Wednesday: Youth Night;

31

•

Thursday: Senior dinner;

32

•

Friday: Children’s Entrepreneur Market; and

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

•
9.

Saturday: Parade.
Closed Meeting.

There was no Closed Meeting.
10.

Adjournment.

Council Member Lord moved to ADJOURN.

Council Member Smith seconded the

motion. The motion passed with the unanimous consent of the Council.
The Regular Business Meeting adjourned at 9:36 PM.

_________________________________
Tami Timothy, UCC, CMC
City Recorder
Approved: _________________________

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
PUBLIC COMMENT EMAIL ADDENDUM
Wednesday, July 08, 2026

07-07-2026
Formal Public Comment & Evidence Submission for July 8, 2026 City Council Meeting
Dear City Recorder,
Please accept this written statement and the attached evidence as my formal public comment for
the Wednesday, July 8, 2026, City Council meeting. I am formally requesting that this statement
and all attachments be distributed to the Mayor and all City Council members prior to the
meeting and entered into the official meeting minutes.
Public Comment for the Record:
On Tuesday, June 23, during an "Unhealthy" air quality event, I contacted the Parks and
Recreation department concerned about the safety of continuing youth sports. What followed
was a highly concerning sequence of events wherein the city's official safety policy was silently
altered mid-inquiry to justify keeping children on the field.
As the attached evidence proves:
1. The Original Policy: At 3:56 PM, I downloaded the official Bluffdale Recreation Weather
Policy stating games are delayed or canceled at an AQI of 150.
2. The Alteration: By 4:28 PM, after I questioned the policy, Recreation Coordinator Jessica
Brandt emailed me stating the threshold was 200. The live document on the city website had
been silently altered to reflect this new number.
3. The Hazardous Conditions: At 6:03 PM, while young children with an average age of 5 were
actively playing T-ball on city fields, the AQI had spiked to 192 with a "Feels Like" temperature
of 95 degrees.
I escalated this issue and timeline to City Manager Bruce Kartchner. He acknowledged the
website alteration but has not provided a timeline to correct the policy, leaving Bluffdale children
at ongoing risk.
1

BLUFFDALE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
PUBLIC COMMENT EMAIL ADDENDUM
Wednesday, July 08, 2026
The EPA and pediatric guidelines strictly dictate that outdoor exertion for children should be
canceled at an AQI of 150. Furthermore, Bluffdale's altered threshold of 200 is a severe outlier
compared to neighboring municipalities, which consistently maintain a 150 AQI cancellation
policy. I am asking the City Council to immediately intervene, revert the youth recreation
cancellation threshold to a medically sound AQI of 150, and ensure city safety documents are
never again altered in this manner.
Attached Evidence for the Record:
1. Email thread with Jessica Brandt
2. Email thread with Bruce Kartchner
3. Original Bluffdale Policy (150 AQI)
4. Altered Bluffdale Policy (200 AQI)
5. Screenshot of download timestamps proving the sequence of events
6. Screenshot of the 192 AQI at 6:03 PM during game time
Thank you,
LauraKay Hunt
Bluffdale Resident

2

▪

▪

▪

▪

▪

▪

▪

▪

▪

▪

▪
▪

▪
▪

▪

▪

▪

RESOLUTION 2026-38
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF BLUFFDALE CITY, UTAH
AUTHORIZING A PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT AND AN OFFICIAL
STATEMENT, AND AN OFFICIAL NOTICE OF BOND SALE, REQUIRED IN
CONNECTION WITH THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF NOT MORE THAN
$15,000,000 AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF WATER REVENUE BONDS,
SERIES 2026 AND OTHER DOCUMENTS REQUIRED IN CONNECTION
THEREWITH; AUTHORIZING THE TAKING OF ALL OTHER ACTIONS
NECESSARY TO THE CONSUMMATION OF THE TRANSACTIONS
CONTEMPLATED BY THIS RESOLUTION; AND RELATED MATTERS.
WHEREAS, by resolution adopted on May 27, 2026 (the “Parameters Resolution”) the
City Council (the “Council”) of Bluffdale City, Utah (the “City”) approved the issuance by the
City of its Water Revenue Bonds, Series 2026 (the “Series 2026 Bonds”) (to be issued in one or
more series and with such other series or title designation(s) as may be determined by the City)
to (a) finance all or a portion of improvements to the City’s water system including, but not
limited to a new water tank, and related improvements (collectively, the “Series 2026 Project”),
(b) fund any required debt service reserve fund, if necessary, and (c) pay costs of issuance with
respect to the Series 2026 Bonds; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Parameters Resolution, the City previously authorized the
Designated Officers (as defined in the Parameters Resolution) to approve the selection of an
underwriter and determine the method of sale for the Series 2026 Bonds, and the Designated
Officers have elected to select an underwriter at a competitive public sale; and
WHEREAS, in connection with such sale, the City desires to authorize the use and
distribution of a preliminary official statement (including an official notice of bond sale)
relating to the Series 2026 Bonds (the “Preliminary Official Statement”) in substantially the
form attached hereto as Exhibit A, and to approve a final official statement (the “Official
Statement”) in substantially the form as the Preliminary Official Statement, a Continuing
Disclosure Undertaking in substantially the form attached to the Preliminary Official
Statement that is deemed final, and other documents relating thereto;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the Bluffdale City, Utah, as
follows:
Section 1.
The Preliminary Official Statement in the form attached hereto as Exhibit
A is hereby authorized and shall be utilized in the marketing of the Series 2026 Bonds and the
Official Statement is hereby approved in substantially the same form as the Preliminary Official
Statement. The Council further authorizes the Designated Officers to execute a Continuing
Disclosure Undertaking in substantially the form attached to the Preliminary Official
Statement that is deemed final.

4908-4591-6349, v. 2

Section 2.
Pursuant to the Parameters Resolution and this resolution, the City
hereby grants and further gives authority to the Designated Officers (as defined in the
Parameters Resolution) or other appropriate officials of the City the authority to make any
alterations, changes or additions to the Preliminary Official Statement, the Official Statement,
or any other document which may be necessary to conform the same to the final terms of the
Series 2026 Bonds (within the parameters set by the Parameters Resolution), to correct errors
or omissions therein, to complete the same, to remove ambiguities therefrom, or to conform
the same to other provisions of said instruments, to the provisions of this resolution or any
resolution adopted by the Council or the provisions of the laws of the State of Utah or the
United States.
Section 3.
Upon the issuance of the Series 2026 Bonds, this Resolution shall be and
shall remain irrepealable until the principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Series 2026
Bonds are deemed to have been duly discharged in accordance with the terms and provisions
of the Indenture (as defined in the Parameters Resolution).
Section 4.
All resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith are, to the extent of
such conflict, hereby repealed and this resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately
upon its approval and adoption.

4908-4591-6349, v. 2

2

PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED:

July 22, 2026.

______________________________
Mayor Natalie Hall
ATTEST:

[seal]

___________________________________
City Recorder
Voting by the Council:

Councilmember Aston
Councilmember Austin
Councilmember Lord
Councilmember Smith
Councilmember Wilding
Mayor Hall (tie only)

4908-4591-6349, v. 2

YES

NO

ABSTAIN

_____ _____ _____
_____ _____ _____
_____ _____ _____
_____ _____ _____
_____ _____ _____
_____ _____ _____

3

ABSENT
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____

EXHIBIT A
FORM OF PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT

4908-4591-6349

A-1

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-39
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BLUFFDALE, UTAH, AUTHORIZING
THE SURPLUS OF CITY-OWNED PROPERTY.
WHEREAS, the below-described property is no longer necessary, useful, or suitable for
municipal purposes; and
WHEREAS, Bluffdale City Council finds it prudent to dispose of said property in accordance
with the method provided thereby.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BLUFFDALE,
UTAH:
SECTION 1. Surplus of Property. The City Council hereby authorizes the surplus of the
following items:
Description of Property

Method of Surplus

Furniture and other Misc Office Items
from Old Public Works Bldg

Ksl.com/State Surplus Site/ Trans
Jordan Landfill

SECTION 2. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon
passage.
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BLUFFDALE, UTAH, ON THIS 22nd DAY
OF July, 2026 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
YES

NO

ABSTAIN

ABSENT

Councilmember Aston
Councilmember Austin
Councilmember Lord
Councilmember Smith
Councilmember Wilding
Mayor Hall (tie only)

Attest:
City Recorder

Mayor: __________________________
Natalie C. Hall

REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
To:
From:
Date:
Business Date:
Subject:

Staff Presentation:

Mayor and City Council
Caitlyn Tubbs, Planning Manager
July 15, 2026
July 22, 2026
Ordinance 2026-11: City-Initiated Land Use Tables Text
Amendment; Creating a definition for “Fulfillment Center” and
“Medical Transportation Establishment” and defining which nonresidential zones these new uses may be located within.
Caitlyn Tubbs

SUMMARY
In 2025, the Planning Commission expressed an interest in examining the table of Permitted,
Conditional, and Accessory Uses by Zone. Staff followed up on this request on March 18, 2026 during
a Planning Commission work session1 and was directed to proceed with creating definitions for
“Fulfillment Center” and “Medical Transportation Establishment.”
ANALYSIS
Building on the Commission’s prior direction summarized above, Staff next evaluated how these
proposed land uses could be defined and where they would be most appropriately accommodated
within the City’s zoning framework. Staff conducted research of surrounding communities’ codes to
determine if there is a consistent definition used for “fulfillment centers” or “medical transportation
establishments” (or similar terms) and did not find one for either term. Staff proposes the following
definitions:
FULFILLMENT CENTER: A FACILITY UP TO 10,000 SQUARE FEET IN FLOOR AREA WITHOUT ANY RETAIL
STOREFRONT THAT IS NOT OPEN TO THE PUBLIC WHERE TANGIBLE GOODS ARE STORED,
PACKAGED, AND SHIPPED DIRECTLY TO CUSTOMERS.
MEDICAL TRANSPORTATION ESTABLISHMENT: A SERVICE THAT TRANSPORTS PATIENTS ON AN
EMERGENCY OR NON-EMERGENCY BASIS TO AN OFF-SITE MEDICAL SERVICE PROVIDER OR
HOSPITAL. THIS USE MAY INCLUDE A DISPATCH OFFICE AND SLEEPING FACILITIES FOR UP TO FOUR
ON-CALL PROVIDERS.

1 March 18, 2026 Minutes (pg. 2)

Ordinance 2026-11 – Land Use Tables Amendments
July 22, 2026 City Council Meeting

Draper City’s code included a definition for “Transportation Service2” which included medical
transportation along with taxi and parcel services. Staff received at least three inquiries since 2025
from a private ambulance provider interested in establishing a location within the southwestern
quadrant of Salt Lake County. Sleeping facilities are typically necessary due to the “on-call” nature of
the service, so Staff has provided for sleeping facilities for up to four providers (two teams of two)
within each Medical Transportation Establishment. This number can be revised as needed.
“E-tail” retailers and other businesses with an online presence typically include a “warehousing”
component when filing their business license applications with Bluffdale. Staff proposes allowing
Fulfillment Centers in the same zones where warehouses are listed as permitted uses; Heavy
Commercial (HC), Light Industrial (I-1) and Heavy Industrial (I-2). Additionally, Staff proposes
allowing Medical Transportation Establishments in heavier commercial zones and industrial zones
due to the anticipated siren noise impacts.
Proposed Uses

PO-1 GC-1 HC RC NC I-1 I-2 SG-1 CI

Fulfillment center

N

N

P

N

N

P

P

N

N

P

P

P

N

P

N

N

N

N

Medical transportation establishment N

N

P

P

N

P

P

N

N

…
Medical service/urgent care clinic

…

RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission held a public hearing3 on June 3, 2026 to discuss this proposal and
unanimously forwarded a positive recommendation of the additions to the City Council.
EXHIBIT
Ordinance 2026-11 and Redlines

2 Draper City Code 9-3-040 “Transportation Service: An establishment that moves people or goods and services. Typical
uses include taxicab service, passengers autos for rent with drivers, ambulance service, and parcel delivery service.”
3 June 3, 2026 Planning Commission Meeting [Agenda, Packet (pg. 14), Minutes (pg. 11)

Ordinance 2026-11 – Land Use Tables Amendments
July 22, 2026 City Council Meeting

CITY OF BLUFFDALE, UTAH
ORDINANCE NO. 2026-11
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 11.20.020 OF THE BLUFFDALE CITY CODE
ADOPTING A DEFINITION FOR FULFILLMENT CENTER AND MEDICAL TRANSPORTATION
ESTABLISHMENT AND AMENDING SECTION 11.350.030 TO IDENTIFY ZONES WHERE
THESE USES ARE PERMITTED.
WHEREAS, the City of Bluffdale has identified land uses that are not currently
included in its table of permitted, conditional, and accessory land uses and desires to
include these uses therein;
WHEREAS, a notice of public hearings for the proposed Agreement was provided
pursuant to the Bluffdale City Code and Utah State Code;
WHEREAS on July 1, 2026, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing
and forwarded a positive recommendation of the proposed Text Amendment to the City
Council;
WHEREAS the City Council considered the effect of this Ordinance on family health,
stability, and formation pursuant to Utah Code 10-3-702.1 before enacting this Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BLUFFDALE,
UTAH AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
Adoption. Ordinance 2026-11 is hereby adopted, approving an
amendment to the City of Bluffdale’s Land Use Ordinances to allow Fulfillment Centers and
Medical Transportation Establishments as shown in Exhibit A.
Section 2.
Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately
upon publication or posting as required by law.
PASSED AND APPROVED: July 22, 2026

CITY OF BLUFFDALE

_________________________________
Mayor Natalie C. Hall

ATTEST:

[seal]

___________________________________
City Recorder

Voting by the City Council:
Councilmember Aston
Councilmember Austin
Councilmember Lord
Councilmember Smith
Councilmember Wilding
Mayor Hall (tie only)

Yes

No

Absent

____ ____ ____
____ ____ ____
____ ____ ____
____ ____ ____
____ ____ ____
____ ____ ____

EXHIBIT A

11.20.020 General Definitions
…
FULFILLMENT CENTER: A FACILITY UP TO 10,000 SQUARE FEET IN FLOOR AREA WITHOUT
ANY RETAIL STOREFRONT THAT IS NOT OPEN TO THE PUBLIC WHERE TANGIBLE GOODS
ARE STORED, PACKAGED, AND SHIPPED DIRECTLY TO CUSTOMERS.
…
MEDICAL TRANSPORTATION ESTABLISHMENT: A SERVICE THAT TRANSPORTS PATIENTS
ON AN EMERGENCY OR NON-EMERGENCY BASIS TO AN OFF-SITE MEDICAL SERVICE
PROVIDER OR HOSPITAL. THIS USE MAY INCLUDE A DISPATCH OFFICE AND SLEEPING
FACILITIES FOR UP TO FOUR ON-CALL PROVIDERS.
…
11.350.020 Table Of Permitted, Conditional, And Accessory Uses For Nonresidential
Zones
Proposed Uses

PO-1 GC-1 HC RC NC I-1 I-2 SG-1 CI

Fulfillment center

P

P

P

P

N

P

P

P

N

P

P

P

N

P

N

N

N

N

Medical transportation establishment P

N

P

P

N

P

P

N

N

…
Medical service/urgent care clinic
…

REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
To:
From:
Date:
Business Date:
Subject:

Staff Presentation:

Mayor and City Council
Caitlyn Tubbs, Planning Manager
July 15, 2026
July 22, 2026
Ordinance 2026-12: City-Initiated Text Amendment Enacting
Section 11.160.320 to allow for placement and use of cargo
containers within the City of Bluffdale and limiting the number and
locations of such within residential and non-residential zones.
Caitlyn Tubbs

BACKGROUND
Following two Work Sessions1,2, the City Council directed Staff to prepare an ordinance to regulate
the number and placement of cargo containers as accessory storage devices. On February 18, 2026,
the Planning Commission held a public hearing3 on proposed text changes regulating cargo
containers within the City of Bluffdale. Following public comment and requests from the
Commission, the item was tabled, and Staff was directed to return after modifying the proposed
ordinance.
The Planning Commission revisited the item on June 3, 20264, held and closed a public hearing, and
directed Staff to make allowances for temporary storage in instances of moving or remodeling
residences and to revise the allotment of containers from an overall count to cumulative linear
footage.
The Planning Commission discussed this item on July 1, 20265, and forwarded a unanimous (3-0)
positive recommendation to the City Council.
ANALYSIS
Bluffdale City Code (BCC) Section 11.20.020 defines “Open Storage” as:
“The storage of materials and goods not within an enclosed structure
for more than seventy-two (72) hours. This includes the storage of
inoperable vehicles for automobile-related primary uses.”
1 March 7, 2025 City Council Work Session (Agenda; Minutes, pg. 21)
2 January 9, 2026 City Council Legislative Priority Meeting (Agenda; Minutes, pg. 30)
3 February 18, 2026 Planning Commission Meeting (Agenda; Packet, pg. 71; Minutes, pg. 13)
4 June 3, 2026 Planning Commission Meeting (Agenda; Packet, pg. 4; Minutes, pg. 3)
5 July 1, 2026 Planning Commission Meeting (Agenda; Packet, pg. 38; minutes pending)

Ordinance 2026-12 – Cargo Containers Ordinance
July 22, 2026 City Council Meeting

Open Storage is not a permitted primary use in the City of Bluffdale and is permitted only as an
accessory use in the Heavy Commercial (HC) and Light Industrial (I-1) Zones. Many businesses and
residential property owners are turning to cargo containers as potential storage options. Currently,
the BCC is silent on the use of cargo containers and the City has initiated these Text Amendments to
provide a pathway for residents and businesses to utilize these containers while also maintaining an
attractive community.
Staff conducted research of surrounding municipalities’ codes and ordinances and found many
communities entirely prohibit the use of cargo containers, particularly in residential zones, unless
they are incorporated into an accessory structure (such as a shed or detached home office) and have
an approved building permit. Recognizing Bluffdale’s predominantly large-lot development pattern,
the City desires to provide flexibility for its residents and intends to allow usage of these containers
in residential and some non-residential zones with specific criteria.
This Text Amendment proposes a new definition for “Cargo Container” to be added to BCC
11.20.020:
“Cargo Container: A standardized, reusable vessel fabricated to transport freight or
goods on a truck, railroad, or ship, in accordance with international standards for
overseas shipping, including cargo containers, shipping containers, or other portable
storage units that are placed on private property and used for storage of items,
including, but not limited to: clothing, equipment, goods, household or office fixtures or
furnishings, materials and merchandise.”
Staff proposes the following general requirements for the use and placement of cargo containers:
1. Storage containers may only be placed as an accessory use, meaning any lot or parcel
containing a storage container must have an existing primary use before the container is
placed and throughout the duration of its placement. If the primary use is abandoned or
removed the storage container shall also be removed.
2. Vertical stacking of storage containers and stacking of any other materials on top of or
attached to storage containers is prohibited. Roofs, lean-tos, and other structures shall
not be affixed to or placed on storage containers, unless the cargo container is fully
integrated into an accessory building and complies with all adopted Building Codes.
3. Storage containers shall not be used as dwelling or living quarters, nor for camping
purposes, for any amount of time in any zone, except as permitted in Chapter 11.340 of
this Title.
Ordinance 2026-12 – Cargo Containers Ordinance
July 22, 2026 City Council Meeting

4. Property owners and users of cargo containers shall ensure the containers are kept in
good repair and are stored on a gravel or other compacted surface. For the purposes of
this section, a storage container is not considered in a good state of repair when it is
incapable of being moved intact, holes in the container exist due to damage or rust, or it
has been infested with vermin or other pests.
5. Cargo containers shall not be placed within required off-street parking spaces or public
rights of way.
The overall number of cargo containers permitted in the applicable non-residential zones (Heavy
Commercial and Light Industrial) were proposed to be limited to one per 8,000 square feet of lot
area. The draft ordinance also requires a user of cargo containers in non-residential zones to identify
the placement of the containers in their project site plan.
Residential zones will be similarly restricted as follows:
Lot Size *not including any abutting private
right of way
Less than 20,000 Square Feet
20,000 Square Feet up to One (1) Acre

One Acre or Larger

Number of Storage Containers Allowed
One (1) (up to 40-foot) container
One (1) (up to 40-foot) container per 5,000
square feet of lot area, not exceeding six (6)
containers total.
One (1) (up to 40-foot) container per 5,000
square feet of lot area, no more than nine(9)
storage containers total.

Additionally, the Planning Commission opined homeowners should have the ability to utilize pods or
containers on a temporary basis while remodeling or moving in/out of a residence. Staff has added
the following to allow temporary placement of a cargo container within the front yard:
“One (1) cargo container (up to twenty feet (20’) in length) may be placed within the front yard on a
temporary basis (no more than 120 calendar days in one calendar year) for the purposes of personal
storage while moving in, moving out, or remodeling a residence.”
Enforcement
During the discussion at the June 3rd Planning Commission meeting, the Commissioners noted the
potential for cargo containers to be used for signage outside of what is permitted by Chapter 11.220.
Staff noted that if this becomes the case, the City’s Administrative Code Enforcement proceedings
would be initiated.

Ordinance 2026-12 – Cargo Containers Ordinance
July 22, 2026 City Council Meeting

RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 1, 2026, to discuss this proposal and
unanimously forwarded a positive recommendation of the Ordinance to the City Council.
EXHIBIT
Ordinance 2026-12 and Redlines

Ordinance 2026-12 – Cargo Containers Ordinance
July 22, 2026 City Council Meeting

CITY OF BLUFFDALE, UTAH
ORDINANCE NO. 2026-12
AN ORDINANCE ENACTING SECTION 11.160.320 TO DEFINE CARGO CONTAINERS AND
REGULATE THE PLACEMENT AND NUMBER OF CARGO CONTAINERS IN RESIDENTIAL
AND NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONES
WHEREAS, the City of Bluffdale has identified land uses that are not currently
included in its table of permitted, conditional, and accessory land uses and desires to
include these uses therein;
WHEREAS, a notice of public hearings for the proposed Agreement was provided
pursuant to the Bluffdale City Code and Utah State Code;
WHEREAS on July 1, 2026, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing
and forwarded a positive recommendation of the proposed Text Amendment to the City
Council;
WHEREAS the City Council considered the effect of this Ordinance on family health,
stability, and formation pursuant to Utah Code 10-3-702.1 before enacting this Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BLUFFDALE,
UTAH AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
Adoption. Ordinance 2026-12 is hereby adopted, approving an
amendment to the City of Bluffdale’s Land Use Ordinances to regulate the placement and
number of cargo containers in residential and non-residential zones as shown in Exhibit A.
Section 2.
Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately
upon publication or posting as required by law.
PASSED AND APPROVED: July 22, 2026

CITY OF BLUFFDALE

_________________________________
Mayor Natalie C. Hall
ATTEST:

[seal]

___________________________________
City Recorder

Voting by the City Council:
Councilmember Aston
Councilmember Austin
Councilmember Lord
Councilmember Smith
Councilmember Wilding
Mayor Hall (tie only)

Yes

No

Absent

____ ____ ____
____ ____ ____
____ ____ ____
____ ____ ____
____ ____ ____
____ ____ ____

EXHIBIT A

11.20.020 Definitions
…
Cargo Container: a standardized, reusable vessel fabricated to transport freight or goods
on a truck, railroad, or ship, in accordance with international standards for overseas
shipping, including cargo containers, shipping containers, or other portable storage units
that are placed on private property and used for storage of items, including, but not
limited to, clothing, equipment, goods, household or office fixtures or furnishings,
materials and merchandise.
…
11.160.320 Placement and Usage of Accessory Cargo Containers
(A) Purpose: The purpose of this section is to regulate the use of accessory cargo
containers in the City, which regulations are adopted to protect the public health, safety,
and welfare of the community and to promote public aesthetics within the City. Nothing
in this code is intended to prevent the temporary use (less than 30 days) of a cargo
container for moving or temporary construction purposes.
(B) General Requirements
1. Cargo containers may only be placed as an accessory use, meaning any lot or
parcel containing a storage container must have an existing primary use before the
container is placed and throughout the duration of its placement. If the primary use is
abandoned or removed the storage container shall also be removed.
2. Vertical stacking of cargo containers and stacking of any other materials on top
of or attached to storage containers is prohibited. Roofs, lean-tos, and other structures
shall not be affixed to or placed on storage containers, unless the container is fully
integrated into an accessory building and complies with all adopted Building Codes.
3. Cargo containers shall not be used as dwelling or living quarters, nor for
camping purposes, for any amount of time in any zone, except as permitted in Chapter
340 of this Title.
4. Property owners and users of cargo containers shall ensure the containers are
kept in good repair and are stored on a gravel or other compacted surface. For the
purposes of this section, a storage container is not considered in a good state of repair
when it is incapable of being moved intact, holes in the container exist due to damage or
rust, or it has been infested with vermin or other pests.
5. Cargo containers shall not be placed within required off-street parking spaces or
public rights of way.
(C) Non-Residential Zones
1. Cargo containers may only be placed in non-residential zones where Open
Storage is a permitted accessory use. One container (up to 40-feet) may be placed for
each 8,000 square feet of lot size. Placement of cargo containers shall be indicated on the
approved site plan in accordance with Chapter 11.150 of this Title.
(D) Residential Zones
1. Cargo containers shall not be placed in any required front yard or corner side

yard. Cargo containers may only be placed within easements or utility corridors with the
prior written consent of the easement holder(s) or corridor owner(s).
a. One (1) cargo container (up to twenty feet (20’) in length) may be placed within
the front yard on a temporary basis (no more than 120 calendar days in one calendar year)
for the purposes of personal storage while moving in, moving out, or remodeling a
residence.
2. Number of storage containers allowed:
Lot Size *not including any abutting private
Number of Storage Containers Allowed
right of way
Less than 20,000 Square Feet
One (1) (up to 40-foot) container.
20,000 Square Feet up to One (1) Acre
One (1) (up to 40-foot) container per 5,000
square feet of lot area, no more than six (6)
containers total.
One Acre or Larger
One (1) (up to 40-foot) container per 5,000
square feet of lot area, no more than nine (9)
containers total.

REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
To:
Mayor and City Council
From:
Ellen Oakman, Associate Planner
Date:
July 14, 2026
Business Date:
July 22, 2026
Subject:
Ordinance 2026-13– Proposed Text Amendments as follows:
- Chapter 3.100 — to create a new chapter establishing definitions, permitted locations, inspections, local
contact requirements, fees, registration provisions, and compliance standards for short-term rentals.
- Chapter 11.20.020 — to add a general definition for “Short-Term Rental” within the zoning code
definitions section.
- Chapters 11.350.020 and 11.350.030 — to amend the Residential and Nonresidential Zones use tables to
allow short-term rentals within residential zoning districts and prohibit them within commercial and
industrial zoning districts.
- Chapter 11.110.070.090 — to amend the Mixed Use Land Use Requirements table to allow short-term
rentals, in accordance with BCC 3.100, as a permitted use.
- Chapter 11.110.100.040 — to amend the SD-X Bringhurst Station Project Zone standards to allow shortterm rentals, in accordance with BCC 3.100, as a permitted use.
- Chapter 11.110.090.040 — to amend the Development Standards and Design Guidelines to allow shortterm rentals, in accordance with BCC 3.100, as a permitted use.
Applicant(s):
Staff Presentation:

City of Bluffdale
Ellen Oakman

RECOMMENDATION: To approve Ordinance 2026-13 as recommended by the Planning Commission on June 3,
2026.
SUMMARY: Following City Council direction provided during the short-term rental discussion item at the March
25, 2026, City Council meeting, staff prepared the proposed ordinance to establish regulations for short-term
rentals and clarify how they are addressed within Bluffdale City Code. The proposed ordinance includes
business licensing, inspection, and local contact requirements and amends the zoning code by adding a
definition for short-term rentals and updating related land use tables to identify where short-term rentals are
permitted, while creating a process for the City to license, identify, and track short-term rentals. The ordinance
requires an initial life/safety inspection prior to business license issuance and annual inspections thereafter to
maintain licensure. It also requires short-term rentals to designate a local contact, available twenty-four (24)
hours per day, seven (7) days per week, who can respond on-site to complaints or emergencies within sixty (60)
minutes. The proposed ordinance also requires compliance with applicable federal, state, county, and local
laws and basic life/safety standards, including smoke alarms, emergency egress, fire extinguishers, and clear
egress pathways. The consolidated fee schedule will also be amended to create a new Short-Term Rental
business license fee of $110. On June 3, 2026, the Planning Commission unanimously forwarded a positive
recommendation to the City Council.
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: Zoning text amendments are a legislative decision of the City Council, after
receiving a recommendation from the Planning Commission. Broad discretion is given to the City’s Land Use

Authorities when making land use decisions. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 3, 2026,
and forwarded a positive recommendation to the City Council.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION:
Ordinance 2026-13
Proposed redlines
Planning Commission Staff Report dated May 29, 2026

CITY OF BLUFFDALE, UTAH
ORDINANCE NO. 2026-13
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING BLUFFDALE CITY CODE
RELATED TO SHORT TERM RENTALS IN THE CITY OF BLUFFDALE
WHEREAS, the City desires to adopt amendments to the Bluffdale City Code related to
short term rentals;
WHEREAS, a notice of public hearing for the proposed amendments was provided
pursuant to the Bluffdale City Code and Utah State Code;
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the impact of this ordinance on family
health, stability, and formation;
WHEREAS, on June 3, 2026, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and
unanimously forwarded a positive recommendation of the proposed amendments to the City
Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BLUFFDALE,
UTAH AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
Adoption. Ordinance 2026-13 is hereby adopted, amending Sections
3.100.010, 3.100.020, 3.100.030, 11.20.020, 11.350.020, 11.350.030, 11.110.070.090,
11.110.090.040, and 11.110.100.040 of the Bluffdale City Code as shown in Exhibit A.
Section 2.
Amendment of Conflicting Ordinances. If any ordinances, resolutions,
policies, or zoning maps of the City heretofore adopted are inconsistent herewith they are
hereby amended to comply with the provisions hereof. If they cannot be amended to comply
with the provisions hereof, they are hereby repealed.
Section 3.
Severability. If any section, part, or provision of this Ordinance is held
invalid or unenforceable, such provision shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and
independent provision, and such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect any other
portion of this Ordinance and all sections, parts, provisions and words of this Ordinance shall
be severable.
Section 4.
Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
publication or posting as required by law.
PASSED AND APPROVED: July 22, 2026

CITY OF BLUFFDALE

_________________________________
Mayor Natalie C. Hall
ATTEST:

[seal]

___________________________________
City Recorder

Voting by the City Council:
Councilmember Aston
Councilmember Austin
Councilmember Smith
Councilmember Lord
Councilmember Wilding
Mayor Hall (tie only)

Yes

No

Absent

____ ____ ____
____ ____ ____
____ ____ ____
____ ____ ____
____ ____ ____
____ ____ ____

EXHIBIT A
DRAFT ORDINANCE REDLINES

3.100 SHORT TERM RENTALS
3.100.010 Definitions
SHORT-TERM RENTAL: A complete dwelling unit (home), not including an accessory dwelling
unit or a portion of a dwelling unit, located within a residential zone district, that is rented or
offered for occupancy for periods of less than thirty (30) consecutive days in exchange for
compensation.
3.100.020 General Regulations
A. Inspections.
1. Initial life/safety inspections shall be completed by an authorized inspector prior to
issuance of a business license. Annual inspections shall thereafter be required to
maintain licensure.
2. All applicable safety and fire provisions shall be in place for initial and annual
inspections.
3. Inspections shall be conducted based on residential code requirements.
4. Short-term rentals shall include;
a. Properly mounted fire extinguishers;
b. Required emergency egress windows and exits;
c. Display of required licenses;
d. Smoke alarms;
e. Clear and unobstructed egress pathways; and
f. Any additional safety requirements established by adopted international
residential code.
B. Local Contact Required.
Short-term rentals shall designate a local contact on their business license application
that is available twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week, who can respond
to and resolve complaints or emergencies on-site within sixty (60) minutes.
C. Fees.
Annual business license fees shall be assessed pursuant to the City’s consolidated fee
schedule
D. Licensing.
Once licensed as a short-term rental, the property shall not be eligible for a home
occupation permit under BCC 3.80.

E. Compliance with Law.
All short-term rentals shall comply with applicable federal, state, county, and local laws,
regulations, and ordinances.
3.100.030 Permitted Locations
Short-term rentals shall be permitted only within residential and the residentially designated
areas of mixed-use zoning districts, subject to compliance with all applicable provisions of
this title.
11.20.020 General Definitions
SHORT-TERM RENTAL: A complete dwelling unit (home), not including an accessory dwelling
unit or a portion of a dwelling unit, located within a residential zone district, that is rented or
offered for occupancy for periods of less than thirty (30) consecutive days in exchange for
compensation.
11.350.020 Table Of Permitted, Conditional, And Accessory Uses For Nonresidential Zones
Use

PO-1

GC-1

HC

RC

NC

I-1

I-2

SG-1

CI

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Short-Term Rentals

11.350.030 Table Of Permitted, Conditional, And Accessory Uses For Residential Zones
Use

A-5

R-1-43

R-1-10

R-1-87

R-MF

Short-Term Rentals

P

P

P

P

P

11.110.070.090 Mixed Use Land Use Requirements
Use

Approval Required

Short Term Rentals

11.110.090 SD-R INDEPENDENCE VILLAGE PROJECT ZONE
11.110.090.040 Development Standards And Design Guidelines
A. Permitted, Conditional And Accessory Uses:

P

Short Term Rentals in accordance with BCC 3.100
11.110.100 SD-X BRINGHURST STATION PROJECT ZONE
11.110.100.040 Residential Development Standards And Design Guidelines
Use
Short Term Rentals in accordance with BCC 3.100

Approval Required
P

2222 West 14400 South  Bluffdale, Utah 84065  (801) 254-2200
Community Development Department
Planning Division

STAFF REPORT
May 29, 2026
To:
City of Bluffdale Planning Commission
Prepared By: Ellen Oakman, Associate Planner
Application No.: 2026-02
Applicant(s):
City of Bluffdale
Request:
To review the proposed amendments to Bluffdale City Code as follows:
- Chapter 3.100 — to create a new chapter establishing definitions, permitted locations,
inspections, local contact requirements, fees, registration provisions, and compliance
standards for short-term rentals.
- Chapter 11.20.020 — to add a general definition for “Short-Term Rental” within the zoning
code definitions section.
- Chapters 11.350.020 and 11.350.030 — to amend the Residential and Nonresidential Zones
use tables to allow short-term rentals within residential zoning districts and prohibit them
within commercial and industrial zoning districts.
- Chapter 11.110.070.090 — to amend the Mixed Use Land Use Requirements table to allow
short-term rentals, in accordance with BCC 3.100, as a permitted use.
- Chapter 11.110.100.040 — to amend the SD-X Bringhurst Station Project Zone standards to
allow short-term rentals, in accordance with BCC 3.100, as a permitted use.
- Chapter 11.110.090.040 — to amend the Development Standards and Design Guidelines to
allow short-term rentals, in accordance with BCC 3.100, as a permitted use.
SUMMARY
City staff presented information regarding short-term rentals to the City Council during a work session on
March 25, 2026, to discuss how short-term rentals are addressed in other jurisdictions and receive feedback
regarding the creation of a new short-term rental ordinance. As Bluffdale City Code does not currently
contain regulations specific to short-term rentals, the City Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance
establishing definitions, basic operational standards, and limited requirements while creating a process for
the City to identify and track short-term rentals operating within Bluffdale. Council feedback generally
supported establishing a framework that acknowledges short-term rentals while limiting requirements to
basic operational and licensing standards. Following the work session discussion and Council direction, staff
prepared the proposed text amendment to establish standards and clarify how short-term rentals are
addressed within Bluffdale City Code.
Currently, Bluffdale City Code does not contain regulations specifically addressing short-term rentals. The
Application 2026-02 – Short-Term Rental Text Amendment
June 3rd, 2026 Planning Commission Meeting
Page 1

proposed text amendment would create a new Chapter 3.100 within Title 3, Business and License
Regulations, establishing operational standards, licensing requirements, inspection requirements, and
compliance provisions for short-term rentals. The proposal would also amend related sections of Title 11,
Land Use Regulations, including definitions, land use tables, and permitted use lists within applicable zoning
districts and special zoning districts.
The proposed regulations include life/safety inspections, local contact requirements, business license
requirements, licensing limitations, and compliance standards. The proposal would establish short-term
rentals as a permitted use within residential zoning districts and special zoning districts, including the MixedUse Zone, Bringhurst Station Project Zone, and Independence Village Project Zone, while prohibiting them
within commercial and industrial zoning districts.
ANALYSIS
As Bluffdale City Code does not currently contain regulations specific to short-term rentals, the proposed
amendment would create a new regulatory framework and establish where this use is permitted within the
City.
The proposal would create Chapter 3.100, Short-Term Rentals, establishing definitions, operational
requirements, inspection requirements, and permitting standards. The proposed regulations would require
initial life/safety inspections prior to business license issuance and annual inspections thereafter. Separate
initial and renewal fees would apply for both licensing and inspections. The consolidated fee schedule will
also be amended to create a new Short-Term Rental business license fee of $110. Inspections would be
based on applicable residential code standards and include items such as smoke alarms, fire extinguishers,
emergency egress, and other life/safety requirements established by the City. The proposal does not require
short-term rentals to be owner occupied; however, non-owner-occupied rentals would be required to
designate a local contact available twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week who can respond
on-site within sixty (60) minutes.
The proposal would also require short-term rentals to obtain a business license, comply with applicable laws
and regulations, and prohibit registered short-term rental properties from also obtaining home occupation
permits.
The proposal also includes amendments to zoning definitions and land use tables to clarify where short-term
rentals would be permitted. Short-term rentals are proposed as a permitted use within residential zoning
districts and applicable mixed-use areas, while remaining prohibited within commercial and industrial
zoning districts. The proposed amendments are intended to establish operational and life/safety standards
while clarifying where short-term rentals are permitted within the City.
PROPOSAL
3.100.010 Definitions
SHORT-TERM RENTAL: A complete dwelling unit (home), not including an accessory dwelling unit or a
portion of a dwelling unit, located within a residential zone district, that is rented or offered for occupancy
for periods of less than thirty (30) consecutive days in exchange for compensation.
3.100.020 General Regulations
A. Inspections.
1. Initial life/safety inspections shall be completed by an authorized inspector prior to issuance of a
business license. Annual inspections shall thereafter be required to maintain licensure.
2. All applicable safety and fire provisions shall be in place for initial and annual inspections.
3. Inspections shall be conducted based on residential code requirements.
Application 2026-02 – Short-Term Rental Text Amendment
June 3rd, 2026 Planning Commission Meeting
Page 2

4. Short-term rentals shall include;
a. Properly mounted fire extinguishers;
b. Required emergency egress windows and exits;
c. Display of required licenses;
d. Smoke alarms;
e. Clear and unobstructed egress pathways; and
f. Any additional safety requirements established by adopted international residential code.
B. Local Contact Required.
Short-term rentals shall designate a local contact on their business license application that is available
twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week, who can respond to and resolve complaints or
emergencies on-site within sixty (60) minutes.
C. Fees.
Annual business license fees shall be assessed pursuant to the City’s consolidated fee schedule
D. Licensing.
Once licensed as a short-term rental, the property shall not be eligible for a home occupation permit
under BCC 3.80.
E. Compliance with Law.
All short-term rentals shall comply with applicable federal, state, county, and local laws, regulations, and
ordinances.
3.100.030 Permitted Locations
Short-term rentals shall be permitted only within residential and the residentially designated areas of mixeduse zoning districts, subject to compliance with all applicable provisions of this title.
11.20.020 General Definitions
SHORT-TERM RENTAL: A complete dwelling unit (home), not including an accessory dwelling unit or a
portion of a dwelling unit, located within a residential zone district, that is rented or offered for occupancy
for periods of less than thirty (30) consecutive days in exchange for compensation.
11.350.030 Table Of Permitted, Conditional, And Accessory Uses For Residential Zones
Use

A-5

R-1-43

R-1-10

R-1-87

R-MF

Short-Term Rentals

P

P

P

P

P

11.350.020 Table Of Permitted, Conditional, And Accessory Uses For Nonresidential Zones
Use
Short-Term Rentals

PO-1

GC-1

HC

RC

NC

N

N

N

N

N

I-1

I-2

SG-1

CI

N

N

N

N

11.11.070.090 Mixed Use Land Use Requirements
Application 2026-02 – Short-Term Rental Text Amendment
June 3rd, 2026 Planning Commission Meeting
Page 3

Approval Required

Use
Short Term Rentals

P

11.110.100 SD-X BRINGHURST STATION PROJECT ZONE
11.110.100.040 Residential Development Standards And Design Guidelines
Approval Required

Use
Short Term Rentals in accordance with BCC 3.100

P

11.110.090 SD-R INDEPENDENCE VILLAGE PROJECT ZONE
11.110.090.040 Development Standards And Design Guidelines
A. Permitted, Conditional And Accessory Uses:
Short Term Rentals in accordance with BCC 3.100

ENFORCEMENT
Code Enforcement would be responsible for enforcement of short-term rental regulations. As short-term
rentals are proposed to be regulated within the zoning code, Code Enforcement, in coordination with the
Business License Official, would be primarily responsible for administration and enforcement of the
proposed regulations.
NOTICE AND PUBLIC INPUT
A notice of this public hearing was provided as required by Bluffdale City Code 11.30.060.
The City did not receive any public input regarding this item before publishing this report.
MODEL MOTIONS FOR THE PROPOSED ADOPTION:
Model for a Positive Recommendation – “I move we forward a positive recommendation to the City Council
for the proposed Text Amendments, based on the findings presented in the Staff Report dated May 29, 2026
(and including the following additional findings):”
1.
List all findings for approval…
Motion for a Negative Recommendation – “I move we forward a negative recommendation to the City
Council for the proposed Text Amendments, based upon the following findings:”
1.
List all findings for negative recommendation…
Motion to Continue the Item to a Date Certain/Uncertain – “I move we continue the item to a date
certain/uncertain and direct Staff to provide additional information regarding the following:
1.
List any additional information, analysis, or findings the Planning Commission wishes Staff to
provide in advance of the date certain/uncertain…

Application 2026-02 – Short-Term Rental Text Amendment
June 3rd, 2026 Planning Commission Meeting
Page 4

EXHIBITS
A: Draft redlines
B: Consolidated Fee Schedule – Business License Fees

Application 2026-02 – Short-Term Rental Text Amendment
June 3rd, 2026 Planning Commission Meeting
Page 5

3.100 SHORT TERM RENTALS
3.100.010 Definitions
SHORT-TERM RENTAL: A complete dwelling unit (home), not including an accessory dwelling
unit or a portion of a dwelling unit, located within a residential zone district, that is rented or
offered for occupancy for periods of less than thirty (30) consecutive days in exchange for
compensation.
3.100.020 General Regulations
A. Inspections.
1. Initial life/safety inspections shall be completed by an authorized inspector prior to
issuance of a business license. Annual inspections shall thereafter be required to
maintain licensure.
2. All applicable safety and fire provisions shall be in place for initial and annual
inspections.
3. Inspections shall be conducted based on residential code requirements.
4. Short-term rentals shall include;
a. Properly mounted fire extinguishers;
b. Required emergency egress windows and exits;
c. Display of required licenses;
d. Smoke alarms;
e. Clear and unobstructed egress pathways; and
f. Any additional safety requirements established by adopted international
residential code.
B. Local Contact Required.
Short-term rentals shall designate a local contact on their business license application
that is available twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week, who can respond
to and resolve complaints or emergencies on-site within sixty (60) minutes.
C. Fees.
Annual business license fees shall be assessed pursuant to the City’s consolidated fee
schedule
D. Licensing.
Once licensed as a short-term rental, the property shall not be eligible for a home
occupation permit under BCC 3.80.

E. Compliance with Law.
All short-term rentals shall comply with applicable federal, state, county, and local laws,
regulations, and ordinances.
3.100.030 Permitted Locations
Short-term rentals shall be permitted only within residential and the residentially designated
areas of mixed-use zoning districts, subject to compliance with all applicable provisions of
this title.
11.20.020 General Definitions
SHORT-TERM RENTAL: A complete dwelling unit (home), not including an accessory dwelling
unit or a portion of a dwelling unit, located within a residential zone district, that is rented or
offered for occupancy for periods of less than thirty (30) consecutive days in exchange for
compensation.
11.350.020 Table Of Permitted, Conditional, And Accessory Uses For Nonresidential Zones
Use

PO-1

GC-1

HC

RC

NC

I-1

I-2

SG-1

CI

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Short-Term Rentals

11.350.030 Table Of Permitted, Conditional, And Accessory Uses For Residential Zones
Use

A-5

R-1-43

R-1-10

R-1-87

R-MF

Short-Term Rentals

P

P

P

P

P

11.110.070.090 Mixed Use Land Use Requirements
Use

Approval Required

Short Term Rentals

11.110.090 SD-R INDEPENDENCE VILLAGE PROJECT ZONE
11.110.090.040 Development Standards And Design Guidelines
A. Permitted, Conditional And Accessory Uses:

P

Short Term Rentals in accordance with BCC 3.100
11.110.100 SD-X BRINGHURST STATION PROJECT ZONE
11.110.100.040 Residential Development Standards And Design Guidelines
Use
Short Term Rentals in accordance with BCC 3.100

Approval Required
P

2.2.050. BUSINESS LICENSE FEES
Agricultural Activities ................................................................................................................ $110
Banks & Credit Unions .............................................................................................................. $110
Other Financial & Real Estate Services ..................................................................................... $110
Construction Related Businesses .............................................................................................. $110
Convenience Stores ............................................................................................................... $1,450
Department Stores.................................................................................................................... $360
Gas Stations ........................................................................................................................... $1,450
Grocery Stores ....................................................................................................................... $1,450
Hotels & Motels ..................................................................................................................... $1,025
Manufacturing Business............................................................................................................ $110
Medical Offices & Drugstores ................................................................................................... $110
Mining Related Business ........................................................................................................... $110
Mobile Home Parks ................................................................................................................... $410
Multiple-Family Dwelling Units............................................................................... $360 + $19/Unit
Other Types of Professional Offices.......................................................................................... $110
Pawnshops ................................................................................................................................ $360
Other Types of Retail Businesses .............................................................................................. $110
Retail Dwelling Units (Not Part of Multiple-Family Dwelling Units) ......................................... $360
Restaurants ............................................................................................................................... $110
Other Types of Service Business ............................................................................................... $110
Sand & Gravel, Concrete & Other Similar Business ............................................................... $1,450
Shopping Malls .......................................................................................................................... $360
Short-Term Rentals.......................................................................................................... $110
Transportation & Utilities ......................................................................................................... $110