General Information

Government Type

Municipality

Entity

Blanding

Public Body

Planning Commission

Notice Information

Add Notice to Calendar

Notice Title

2.12.2026 Planning Commission Minutes

Notice Type(s)

Meeting

Event Start Date & Time

February 12, 2026 07:00 PM

Description/Agenda

February Planning Commission Minutes February 12th, 2026-7:00 pm Commission Members Paul Murdock Tyler Nielson (absent) Regan Richmond Will McFarland Braden Reese (absent) City Council Rep: Kellen Nielson 50 West 100 South Street, Blanding Utah 84511 MAIN MEETING Call to Order 1. Roll Call 2. Approval: Consent Agenda and Minutes from January 8th, 2026 Regular Session Regan made a motion to approve the agenda and minutes from January 8, 2026. Will seconded the motion. It passed unanimously. Carrie Hughes Rezoning Public Hearing: Will made a motion to go into a public hearing for the Carrie Hughes rezoning request. Regan seconded the motion. It passed unanimously. Tom Cane was present at the meeting and voiced concern that the R1 to R2 change would not add value to the neighborhood, especially due to existing rentals where yard maintenance is an issue. He expressed concern that the change would negatively affect home values, and mentioned potential parking issues at the proposed site. Joni Cane was also present, her biggest concern is the upkeep of yards and parking. Kenydi Cane was also present, she thanked the commission for being present and pointed out that the public hearing was not listed on the city's website under public notices, making it difficult to find. She cited the city's general plan, arguing that the appeal should be rejected as it would create an R2 'peninsula,' and violate the goal of maintaining a basic zoning approach, and introduce higher-density housing that might not blend with the community's character. Kenydi requested that if the appeal is approved, the building structure should blend aesthetically with neighboring residences. She emphasized maintaining the purpose of zoning regulations to conserve land and building values, avoid population concentration, and prevent 'scattered haphazard new growth.' Linda Simmons submitted a letter via email, which expressed support for small lots but opposed the change if it negatively impacted property values or interfered with an existing private right of way. Ben confirmed that the proposed change would not affect the privately-owned right of way. Regan made it clear that he has a conflict of interest and that Carrie Hughes is his sister and he would not be voting on the matter. He agreed with the concern about property maintenance, stating that the city has codes but does not enforce them. He also commented as a real estate appraiser that he has not observed a huge factor in home value based on proximity to R1 or R2 zoning in Blanding, noting that the town is a 'mixed bag.' Regan made a motion to leave the public hearing. Will seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Public Input Dan Hurst raised a concern about the old Assembly of God Church property at 347 West 400 North, noting that any building put there would be non-conforming to current ordinances. They sought a recommendation from the commission to the city council to allow a non-conforming, potentially conditional use for the building, possibly as a gym or limited retail, under a historical building designation. Ben stated that staff would look into the possibility of fitting it in as a conditional use under the historic building category. Dan also discussed building affordable homes on a one-acre property north of town, currently outside city limits, where they want to put about six homes, which current R1 zoning doesn't allow. Ben explained that annexing the property would bring it in as R1, requiring a change to the general plan or a combined annexation/rezoning effort with neighbors to create an R2 'pocket'. Regan stated the commission wants to find ways to create affordable housing while protecting the community and simplifying processes. Reports 1. Council Representative Kellen said that the council for the most part likes the changes to the former mobile home zone, now known as manufactured home community. He brought up the question of having an owner of property and a separate owner of the home and how to rectify the outstanding utility bills when the home owner has abandoned the place. Regan stated that that issue isn't a concern of the council or the commission, it's a city finance department and policy issue. Kellen also stated it is not the council's goal to kick people out of homes. He stated that council is not super excited about the water wise ordinance as far as it being mandatory for new builds and then the enforcement of it after the fact. 2. Commissioners - None 3. Development Director a. Training on Mar 2, 2026 Land Use training - Ben announced that land use trainings are available, including a free session on Monday, March 2nd in Monticello, which counts towards required training hours. He also mentioned the Utah Land Use Institute conference on March 20th, which offers an online option that may count towards training hours, and noted free training resources available on the Institute's website. Discussion Items 1. Water Wise Ordinance- The commission returned to the water-wise ordinance, noting that the City Council's main concern was enforcement. Regan emphasized that ordinances for property maintenance already exist but are not enforced, suggesting the City Administrator should delegate this task. Ben suggested the commission review some of the city code related to penalties, noting that old fines like $299 are no longer sufficient. The mandatory aspect of the water-wise ordinance would only affect new homes, which are few per year, making widespread impact unlikely. The commission discussed that the true benefit of having such an ordinance might be to help secure future grants, even if the direct impact on water savings is small. 2. Mobile Home Edits from Council- The City Council suggested an amendment to require current mobile home parks to have a business license. Regan questioned the purpose of this, noting that in their experience across multiple cities, such requirements are often disorganized, wasteful of time, and fail to address underlying issues like poor tenant placement. Ben suggested the purpose is to ensure businesses are operating legally and properly licensed by the state. Regan argued that if a business is already breaking the law by operating without a required state license, adding a redundant city license is unnecessary and illogical, suggesting that if required, it should be applied to all landlords, not just manufactured home parks.. The matter of the business license requirement will be brought back to the City Council for their decision. Ben presented Pratt's thoughts on addressing abandoned trailers, which are owned by one party and the land by another and the tenants are more than two months and $500 behind on utilities. The suggestion is to send late utility fees to collections, but charge any subsequent fees to the property owner. Ben noted that most cities do not allow tenants to put city utilities in their name, keeping the responsibility with the owner, which allows the city recourse to levy a lien against the property. It was highlighted that Blanding is unique because it owns and combines all utilities in one bill. It was suggested that separating electric and gas from water and sewer on the bills would help solve the problem, as electricity can be shut off, unlike water/sewer which may have legal protections against being turned off for eviction purposes. The discussion touched on challenges in trailer parks where a single owner meter for water makes it difficult to track usage or leaks among tenants. Ben emphasized that managing these issues comes with the investment of owning rental properties, not a city obligation, similar to home ownership expenses. The conversation concluded that this utility fee issue should be a separate protocol, published, and applied across the board, not added to the current ordinance. 3. Minor Edits to R-2/R-1 - Ben brought up an issue pointed out by Will regarding R2 zoning, specifically addressing lots like 'flag lots' that do not have the required 45 feet of frontage and are not legal lots by current standards. The need for a change to the code was identified to make it clear that such lots are buildable if accessed by a private drive, potentially by defining lot width at the front setback line. It was suggested that flag-style lots should be considered buildable if they meet other size dimensions and are serviced by a legal private drive. The question was raised whether issues with non-conforming lots could be addressed through a variance process, noting that there is a process for minor variances (up to 10%) but not for broad, logical issues like the old church building lot. It was clarified that major variances are state-driven and limited in scope. Ben proposed that allowing flag lots is a way to create opportunities for affordable housing and ensure that currently vacant, unkempt lots are taken care of when they become buildable. The commission reviewed R1 zoning regarding ADUs, the consensus was that R1 should be limited to a single-family residence plus one accessory dwelling unit (ADU), whether attached or detached, provided the primary residence is owner-occupied. A concern was raised about the lack of significant differentiation between R1 and R2 zones, with the main distinction being lot size and minimum house size. Ben questioned if R1 should require stick-built homes with garages, noting that under current rules, a manufactured home development in R1 is permissible as long as it meets the minimum 1,000 square feet size and is on a permanent foundation. A suggestion was to require manufactured homes in R1 to include a garage to better conform to the area. 4. Future Projects - Ben asked the commission to set the direction for their next meeting, suggesting reviewing the commercial zone, discussing short-term rentals, or addressing the recently passed downtown improvement plan. A commissioner suggested focusing on mixed-use opportunities in the downtown area, but preferred to defer to the elected council, mayor, and city administration for direction on future projects, stating they do not want to have meetings for the sake of having them. The idea of the Planning Commission being in charge of the downtown plan, or creating a separate committee with vested interests, was also introduced. Business Items 1. Carrie Hughes Rezoning recommendation - The commission addressed the business item regarding Carrie Hugh's rezoning request. It was noted that some of the neighbors feel the proposed structure does not conform to the area's look, but the city is not an HOA or architectural review committee. The key point of the discussion was that the commission is voting on rezoning the area to R2, not on issuing a building permit for a specific structure. The discussion included concerns about proper public notice for the rezoning meeting. With Regan stating that he would abstain from voting, there wasn't enough for a full voting quorum. Regan made a motion to postpone this item and come back to it in the March meeting. Will seconded the motion. Adjournment Will made a motion to adjourn. Regan seconded the motion. The meeting adjourned.

Notice of Special Accommodations (ADA)

In compliance with the ADA, individuals needing special accommodations during this meeting may call the City Offices at (435) 678-2791 at least twenty-four hours in advance. Every effort will be made to provide the appropriate services.

Notice of Electronic or Telephone Participation

One or more commission members may participate electronically.

Meeting Information

Meeting Location

50 W 100 S
Blanding, UT 84511
Show in Apple Maps Show in Google Maps

Contact Name

Ben Muhlestein

Contact Email

bmuhlestein@blanding-ut.gov

Notice Posting Details

Notice Posted On

March 12, 2026 10:37 AM

Notice Last Edited On

March 12, 2026 10:37 AM

Subscribe by Email

Subscription options will send you alerts regarding future notices posted by this Body.