Buffer and Screening Development Code Amendment
Consultation has concluded
Lehi City wants to update Chapter 12 of the Development Code about buffering and screening rules. One change is removing the rule about "compatibility" because it's hard to really determine if two uses work well together because people have different opinions.
The new rules for fences say that Neighborhood Commercial and Commercial areas right next to residential areas only need a six-foot masonry fence. More intense businesses, like heavy commercial or light industrial, need an eight-foot masonry fence. These taller fences won’t need special permission (a conditional use permit).
The new buffering rules show how wide the space should be between different types of buildings. Neighborhood Commercial needs the smallest buffer at 12 feet, and Light Industrial or Historic Industrial need the largest at 30 feet. Taller buildings need even more space.
The landscaping rules say trees should be planted 30 feet apart and grow to at least 35 feet tall. It also lists what types of trees and shrubs can be used.
The update also says that in Mixed-Use or Transit-Oriented Zones, if a nonresidential use is next to a home, the Commercial buffering rules might apply.
Public Comments
Consultation has concludedCLOSED: This discussion has concluded.
Who's Listening
-
Planner 2
Phone 385-201-2519
To: Lehi City Building Council
From: Matthew Burgon
Subject: Concerns Regarding Compatibility of Non-Residential Construction
Dear Members of the Lehi City Building Council,
As a resident who has recently been affected by what I perceive to be a lack of compatibility between surrounding non-residential construction and our residential community, I am deeply concerned about any proposals to amend or eliminate existing regulations regarding compatibility in development.
I firmly believe that rather than removing subjective language based on personal opinions, we should take the opportunity to precisely define what compatibility entails when planning commercial development adjacent to residential areas. The current language addresses crucial factors such as bulk, height, design, potential nuisances, and material selection. I am not opposed to having residential areas next to commercial developments; however, I seek assurance that these developments will be compatible and will not detract from the use, enjoyment, or value of my property.
To achieve this clarity, I propose that we take the necessary time to delineate specific standards for compatibility. For instance, regarding height, we could establish a minimum buffer of 30 feet if the commercial building’s height matches the maximum height of the surrounding residential homes, including grade considerations. For two-story homes adjacent to commercial properties, we might allow a corresponding commercial height. Should developers wish to exceed this height, we could implement an additional setback requirement—perhaps an extra 50 feet for each additional story, up to a predetermined maximum.
We could apply similar principles to bulk, aesthetics, and design, ensuring that all new developments adhere to standards that also protect residential property values. There is a significant distinction between developments that enhance community value—such as the Lehi Temple—and those that do not. The excitement of residents living near the Temple illustrates how thoughtful development can positively impact property values, unlike the recent commercial construction near my home.
In conclusion, I urge the Council to engage in a thoughtful dialogue regarding these compatibility standards. By defining what compatibility means in practice, we can foster a development environment that respects both residential and commercial interests.
Thank you for considering my concerns.
Sincerely,
Matthew Burgon