Controversial zoning request draws packed crowd to Manti council

MANTI—A proposal to rezone 17 acres on the city’s east side from R1 (half-acre lots) to R3 (smaller lots and some multifamily options) sparked passionate debate last Wednesday April 2 during a Manti City Council meeting that drew a large, vocal crowd.

After nearly an hour of public testimony and discussion, council members announced they were not yet prepared to take a final vote, opting instead to study the issue further.

The rezoning request came from developer Addam Brouillette of True North Home Development, who was not present at the hearing.

Brouillette has described plans to offer smaller-lot, single-family homes in the mid-$300,000 range, saying he aims to “create more affordable price points for young families and retirees.” However, that vision has been met sharp resistance from many current property owners, who expected the area to remain R1.

“This is spot zoning, plain and simple,” said resident and property owner Tyler Ashton. Speaking on behalf of multiple neighbors, Ashton cited a 1974 Utah Supreme Court case, Marshall v. Salt Lake City, which he said serves as “a clear warning against changes that benefit a single developer at the expense of established zoning and residents’ expectations.”

Others echoed his concerns. Linda Nielsen took the floor in an effort to “dispel rumors” that the Governor’s Office was forcing any city in Utah to rezone for affordable housing.

“There are no mandates,” Nielsen said. She also argued that homes priced above $300,000 “are not actually affordable” at the average household income, estimated at about $60,000 per year in Sanpete County, because mortgage and utilities on such homes would eat up more than 30 percent of most families’ budgets. Those costs would be “more than half the monthly income for many households,” she noted.

Ashley Davis, who recently purchased property in Manti, questioned why the city might rush a major zoning change with its master plan due for an update next year.

Residents near the proposed site aired worries over traffic congestion on the roads leading up the east bench. Steve Pyper, who lives near the development, said, “It’s already tight,”

Another attendee, Ben Davis, described the lot sizes as “far more dense” than what local infrastructure can easily accommodate.

But not everyone in the room opposed the plan. Local resident, business-owner and longtime Manti resident Gerald “Big G” Christiansen said he sympathizes with younger families who struggle to find housing.

“Are we all okay with our kids having to move away because they can’t afford homes here?” Christiansen asked. “We’re growing, and we need to get used to that.”

Christiansen also said he felt like many of the opponents to the new housing development had moved in from out-of-area, have not been in Manti very long, but are making a lot of noise about how they want things to be run in Manti.

Erin Omer, who grew up in Manti, told the council that people moving onto smaller lots can still be “amazing neighbors who bring energy and growth.”

“Are we all okay with our kids having to move away because they can’t afford homes here? We’re growing, and we need to get used to that.”

Gerald “Big G” Christiansen

Omer recalled feeling unsettled as a child when quarter-acre subdivisions first popped up nearby, only to realize later “how many wonderful people came into the community.”

A local construction developer also spoke up in favor of the proposal, saying he remembered when other developments were planned for the area that he was not pleased with, but they came anyway and brought a lot of good people into the community.

During the discussion that followed the hearing, council members stressed they had no intention of rushing a decision, especially since Councilwoman Mary Wintch, who council members said would have a lot of insight on the issue, was not present at the meeting.

Council members noted that multiple factors come into play, including water capacity, local roads and state-level housing pressures.

Councilman A.J. Mower said he appreciated hearing from residents who had researched legal precedents, infrastructure concerns and legislative proposals. “Tonight’s input has raised points I hadn’t previously considered,” he said. “I need time to do more homework.”

Manti City Mayor Chuck Bigelow addressed concerns about potential multifamily units such as apartments, clarifying that even under an R3 zone, the city could restrict denser types of projects through property-specific development agreements.

“It’s not a simple matter of flipping a switch,” the mayor said, emphasizing that the council can put conditions in place if it moves forward with R3.

Bigelow also mentioned he was disappointed with some of the public discourse on the matter after comments from project opponents implied affordable housing would only attract lower-class residents to Manti.

In response to some of the concerns raised about how R3 could damage the property value of adjacent landowners, Councilwoman Mary Pipes, who has been researching property valuation in Sanpete County, said appraised value and market value are not the same

According to her conversations with a local appraiser, individual appraisals focus on the home itself, its specific features and nearby “comparables,” making the presence of a smaller or larger lot next door less of a direct factor.

Market value, however, hinges on broader supply-and-demand forces: the local economy, how many buyers are searching and the appeal of a neighborhood. She stressed that while changes in zoning might shape a property’s curb appeal or desirability to certain buyers, “there’s no guarantee it will directly move an appraisal up or down.”

During the council’s closing discussion, the mayor addressed concerns that the proposal might constitute “spot zoning” by reading sections from a Utah land-use handbook.

The mayor pointed out that Utah law does not treat a zoning change for a single parcel as automatic grounds for a spot-zoning challenge, particularly if the municipality can show that rezoning supports broader community goals.

Several council members concurred, emphasizing that “spot zoning” under Utah statutes is interpreted more narrowly than many residents might think and that the council retains tools to manage future development responsibly.

No firm timetable was set for a final decision. “We all want to make sure we do this right, not fast,” one council member remarked.

Wednesday’s hearing followed a tense March 27 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, where commissioners heard overwhelmingly negative public feedback on the proposal and later declined to make a formal approval recommendation on the request.

While the council has the last word, council members stressed they would review the planning commission’s stance alongside community feedback before making a final call.