Lehi council members deny hotel because of applicant's callous behavior
Group of Lehi residents oppose planned hotel
Melanie Platt looks out the window of her home at back yards and the neighboring plot where a hotel development is planned on Monday, Jan. 11, 2016 in Lehi. Platt and some of her neighbors oppose the building of the 4-story hotel.
Shocked by rude and callous behavior by representatives for Glacier Investment, Lehi city officials on Tuesday night shot down an application to build a Holiday Inn Express hotel abutting Thanksgiving Meadows homes.
“I can’t honestly remember a time when the applicant wasn’t willing to sit down with the neighbors, and even though legally they had the ability and the right to do exactly what they want to do, every time they have been able to meet with the residents and maybe the residents didn’t get exactly what they want but they felt like there was a little bit of give and take, a little bit of meeting in the middle,” said Councilman Johnny Revill, who has served on the council for 12 years.
The mid-priced hotel chain had plans to build a four-story hotel at 3851 N. Thanksgiving Way. Guests would have a view of the Wasatch Mountains to the east and children playing in backyards to the west.
There is a setback of 90 feet from the hotel rooms to the property line. The indoor pool and food bar are part of a one-story extension at the back of the hotel.
The possibility of transient strangers watching their children from hotel windows had neighbors alarmed. The Lehi Planning Commission recommended a hotel concept plan approval in January.
At that time, the commissioners recommended the applicant work with the residents. Bruce Baird, counsel to Glacier Investments, said he did not know of that recommendation.
“The issue here is that it follows code,” Baird said. “This is perfectly legal. It follows the code.”
Baird denied having known about the commissioners' recommendation even though he had the city’s documents from the earlier meetings.
“I can honestly say I have never had an applicant, I feel, threaten us with a lawsuit basically if we vote this thing down,” Revill said. “I guess I’m disappointed in the applicant.”
According to Councilman Paul Hancock, if the council voted the application down, the city would likely be sued by the applicant and lose. Still, four council members gave an adamant “no” after Councilman Chris Condie made the motion to approve and voted yes.
Condie wondered if there was an eight-story office building going in adjacent to homes if that would be thought better than a four-story hotel. According to resident Melanie Platt, there are no other hotels in Lehi nor in the remainder of Utah County that back up to residential properties.
Before casting their vote the council members discussed asking the applicant to meet with the residents adjacent to the 2.5-acre site. The city attorney told them that legally the applicant did not need to comply with such a request.
“Given the attitude by the applicant, it would be a waste of time,” Councilwoman Paige Albrecht said of a proposed cottage meeting.
Comment:
A city DOES HAVE the right to deny an applicants application. According to "The Utah League of Cities and Towns Powers and Duties, a handbook for Utah Municipal Officials" a city may be able to deny an application, if on the record (public meeting) finds that a compelling countervailing public interest would be jeopardized by approving the application. The law does specifically provide that any applicant is ENTITLED to approval of their application if it conforms to the local ordinance. However, the law also allows for the denial of an application as described above. Most city council men and woman do not know the law allows them to deny an application (Chris Condie) and erroneously believe they MUST approve an application IF it meets all local ordinance criteria. This is simply NOT TRUE. (page 134 in the handbook). The reason most city councilmen and woman typically do not deny an application is fear of a lawsuit brought on by the applicant. Most cities do not have the budget to fight a lawsuit so they accept applications that may be harmful to their citizens. I applaud the city of Lehi in one respect for denying the application. On the other hand, it appears their reason for their denial may be more personal than denying it based on a compelling countervailing public interest. The case needs to be made by the City Council as to WHY there is a compelling countervailing public interest rather than simply denying it based on the applicants inability to meet with the local residents and not come to some middle ground in those discussions.
Click on the link below to view the agenda notes given to the Lehi City Council prior to the vote. The relevant section regarding the note from Morgan L Cummings, Assistant City Attorney is on pages 6 - 8. He wrote a lengthy explanation defining a compelling, countervailing public interest in the notes received by the Lehi City Council.
Agenda - Holiday Inn notes given to Lehi City Council
“I can’t honestly remember a time when the applicant wasn’t willing to sit down with the neighbors, and even though legally they had the ability and the right to do exactly what they want to do, every time they have been able to meet with the residents and maybe the residents didn’t get exactly what they want but they felt like there was a little bit of give and take, a little bit of meeting in the middle,” said Councilman Johnny Revill, who has served on the council for 12 years.
The mid-priced hotel chain had plans to build a four-story hotel at 3851 N. Thanksgiving Way. Guests would have a view of the Wasatch Mountains to the east and children playing in backyards to the west.
There is a setback of 90 feet from the hotel rooms to the property line. The indoor pool and food bar are part of a one-story extension at the back of the hotel.
The possibility of transient strangers watching their children from hotel windows had neighbors alarmed. The Lehi Planning Commission recommended a hotel concept plan approval in January.
At that time, the commissioners recommended the applicant work with the residents. Bruce Baird, counsel to Glacier Investments, said he did not know of that recommendation.
“The issue here is that it follows code,” Baird said. “This is perfectly legal. It follows the code.”
Baird denied having known about the commissioners' recommendation even though he had the city’s documents from the earlier meetings.
“I can honestly say I have never had an applicant, I feel, threaten us with a lawsuit basically if we vote this thing down,” Revill said. “I guess I’m disappointed in the applicant.”
According to Councilman Paul Hancock, if the council voted the application down, the city would likely be sued by the applicant and lose. Still, four council members gave an adamant “no” after Councilman Chris Condie made the motion to approve and voted yes.
Before casting their vote the council members discussed asking the applicant to meet with the residents adjacent to the 2.5-acre site. The city attorney told them that legally the applicant did not need to comply with such a request.
“Given the attitude by the applicant, it would be a waste of time,” Councilwoman Paige Albrecht said of a proposed cottage meeting.
Comment:
A city DOES HAVE the right to deny an applicants application. According to "The Utah League of Cities and Towns Powers and Duties, a handbook for Utah Municipal Officials" a city may be able to deny an application, if on the record (public meeting) finds that a compelling countervailing public interest would be jeopardized by approving the application. The law does specifically provide that any applicant is ENTITLED to approval of their application if it conforms to the local ordinance. However, the law also allows for the denial of an application as described above. Most city council men and woman do not know the law allows them to deny an application (Chris Condie) and erroneously believe they MUST approve an application IF it meets all local ordinance criteria. This is simply NOT TRUE. (page 134 in the handbook). The reason most city councilmen and woman typically do not deny an application is fear of a lawsuit brought on by the applicant. Most cities do not have the budget to fight a lawsuit so they accept applications that may be harmful to their citizens. I applaud the city of Lehi in one respect for denying the application. On the other hand, it appears their reason for their denial may be more personal than denying it based on a compelling countervailing public interest. The case needs to be made by the City Council as to WHY there is a compelling countervailing public interest rather than simply denying it based on the applicants inability to meet with the local residents and not come to some middle ground in those discussions.
Click on the link below to view the agenda notes given to the Lehi City Council prior to the vote. The relevant section regarding the note from Morgan L Cummings, Assistant City Attorney is on pages 6 - 8. He wrote a lengthy explanation defining a compelling, countervailing public interest in the notes received by the Lehi City Council.
Agenda - Holiday Inn notes given to Lehi City Council
No comments:
Post a Comment