River Heights City
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Tuesday, August 25, 2026
Notice is hereby given that the River Heights Planning Commission will hold its regular meeting
beginning at 6:30 p.m., in the River Heights City Office Building at 520 S 500 E.
Pledge of Allegiance
Adoption of Previous Minutes and Agenda
Public Comment on Land Use
Public Hearing to Discuss a Boundary Adjustment Request from Derek Carlsen, of 520 S 600 E
Public Hearing to Discuss a Kennel Conditional Use Permit Request from Lynda Fisher
Adjourn
Posted this 20th day of August 2026
Sheila Lind, Recorder
Attachments for this meeting and previous meeting minutes can be found on the State's Public Notice Website (pmn.utah.gov) and
at riverheights.gov.
In compliance with the American Disabilities Act, individuals needing special accommodations (including auxiliary communicative
aids and services) during this meeting should notify Sheila Lind, (435) 770-2061 at least 24 hours before the meeting.
520 South 500 East River Heights, Utah 84321 Phone & Fax (435) 752-2646
River Heights City
River Heights City Planning Commission
3 Minutes of the Meeting
4 August 25, 2026
5
11
13
15
17
18
19 20
6 Present: Commission members: Keenan Ryan, Chairman
7 Noel Cooley
8 Anna Lisa Davidson
9 Morgan McKeown
10 Troy Wakefield
12 Recorder Sheila Lind
14 Excused Councilmember Mark Malmstrom
16 Others Present: Lynda Fisher, Derek Carlsen, Mackayla Graham
Motions Made During the Meeting
21 Motion #1
Commissioner Cooley moved to "approve the minutes of the August 11, 2026 Commission
Meeting with one correction noted, as well as the evening's agenda." Commissioner McKeown
24 seconded the motion, which carried with Cooley, Davidson, McKeown, Ryan, and Wakefield in favor.
25 No one opposed.
26
27 Motion #2
28 29 30 Commissioner Davidson moved to "approve the boundary adjustment request made by Derek
Carlsen." Commissioner Wakefield seconded the motion, which carried with Cooley, Davidson,
McKeown, Ryan, and Wakefield in favor. No one opposed.
31
32 Motion #3
33 34 35 36 Commissioner Cooley moved to "delay the approval of the Kennel Conditional Use Permit
application submitted by Lynda Fisher with the condition that if a refund is declined then they would
take up approval at a future meeting." Commissioner Davidson seconded the motion, which carried
with Cooley, Davidson, McKeown, Ryan, and Wakefield in favor. No one opposed.
37
38
39 Proceedings of the Meeting
40
41 42 The River Heights City Planning Commission met at 6:30 p.m. in the Ervin R. Crosbie Council
Chambers on August 25, 2026.
Pledge of Allegiance
520 South 500 East River Heights, Utah 84321 Phone & Fax (435) 752-2646
44 45 46 47 48 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 Adoption of Prior Minutes and Agenda: Minutes for the August 11, 2026, Planning
Commission Meeting were reviewed. One minor change was made.
Commissioner Cooley moved to "approve the minutes of the August 11, 2026 Commission -
Meeting with one correction noted, as well as the evening's agenda." Commissioner McKeown
seconded the motion, which carried with Cooley, Davidson, McKeown, Ryan, and Wakefield in
49 favor. No one opposed.
Public Comment on Land Use: There was none.
Public Hearing to Discuss a Boundary Adiustment Request from Derek Carson, of 520 S 600 E:
Derek Carlsen explained that he owned a long piece of property and would like to sell off two
parcels to Grahams and Gardners, who are adjacent property owners. The remaining parcel with the
house on it would still meet zone requirements.
Commissioner McKeown asked if any utility easements would be disrupted. Commissioner
Ryan said he hadn't seen any problems, looking at the parcel plat. He thought the title company
would double check on it.
Discussion was held on the zoning administrator taking care of boundary adjustments in the
future. Simple adjustments didn't need to come to the Commission for a hearing. The Commission
planned to tweak the code soon.
Public Comment. There was none.
Commissioner Davidson moved to "approve the boundary adjustment request made by
Derek Carlsen." Commissioner Wakefield seconded the motion, which carried with Cooley,
Davidson, McKeown, Ryan, and Wakefield in favor. No one opposed.
Public Hearing to Discuss a Kennel Conditional Use Permit Request from Lynda Fisher: Ms.
Fisher explained that she only lives in River Heights six months out of the year. She had a second
apartment in her home. She owned two dogs and her daughter (who lived in a separate dwelling on
the same property) owned one. She was told by the city that she needed to get a kennel license since
there were three dogs in the home. She spent $100 to apply for one. In the meantime, her
granddaughter felt so bad about the situation that she decided to give her dog away; therefore, the
kennel permit was no longer needed. She hoped that the city would address the allowance of more
than three dogs when an ADU was involved.
Lynda Fisher said she was irritated that the city didn't have a place for dogs to run off leash.
She used to take them to the old school lawn but was told it was against the city's code to allow dogs
on city park property. After presenting her frustration to the Council, the mayor sent her an email
with comments from the city attorney. The attorney advised that to allow off-leash dogs, the city
should have a fenced area. Ms. Fisher informed that Logan had a dog park that was not fenced and it
78 worked just fine.
Commissioner Ryan asked Ms. Fisher if her home's two dwellings each had their own kitchen
and separate entrances. She responded, "Yes," they had separate living spaces. Mr. Ryan informed
that the attorney's interpretation of the code was that a "residence" included all those who lived on
one parcel. Mr. Ryan assured that they would look into the number of dogs they felt should be
allowed when an accessory dwelling was involved.
Lynda Fisher asked for a refund of her $100 kennel license application fee since they no longer
had three dogs. She was told the decision didn't lie with the Commission. Recorder Lind would
present the request to the mayor.
River Heights Planning Commission Meeting. 8/25/26 2
Q Commissioner McKeown agreed with Mr. Fisher that the code wasn't clear. He had done
some research and found that other cities allow properties with ADUs to have up to four dogs. He
89 90 91 92 93 94 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 thought the code needed to be clarified. Commissioner Ryan felt the topic should be brought up to
the Council at their next meeting when they would review the ADU ordinance.
Commissioner Cooley suggested that the city should have verification that the third dog was
no longer on the property. lithe Mayor/Council determined that a refund wasn't possible then Mr.
Cooley suggested Ms. Fisher could go ahead with her kennel permit request, so she'd have something
for her money. He noted that the permit would run with the land, so they could get a third dog later if
95 they decided to do so. .
Commissioner McKeown brought up the written complaint they had received from a
neighbor. They felt it was a moot point.
Commissioner Cooley moved to "delay the approval of the Kennel Conditional Use Permit
application submitted by Lynda Fisher with the condition that if a refund is declined then they
would take up approval at a future meeting." Commissioner Davidson seconded the motion, which
carried with Cooley, Davidson, McKeown, Ryan, and Wakefield in favor. No one opposed.
Commissioner Ryan explained that he would be presenting the ADU ordinance to the City
Council at their next meeting. He had been curious how many lots in River Heights had less than
11,000 sf. He met with the person at Cache County who was over their GIS map. She created an
image which showed all the properties 11,000 sf and larger. He was surprised at how many would
qualify for an ADU with a minimum requirement of 11,000 sf.
It was noted that Commissioner Davidson had researched the pros and cons of smaller versus
larger lot minimums for ADUs which was helpful to review.
Commissioner McKeown had researched and found that 65% of the parcels in an 8,000 sf
110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 zone would be eligible for an ADU option at 11,000 sf. In the 10,000 sf zone 43% of lots would qualify
and in the 12,000 sf zone 95% of lots would be eligible. It averaged out to 65% of lots in River Heights
could potentially qualify for an ADU.
Mr. Ryan said he was glad to find out that the lot sizes didn't favor certain areas but were
spread equally throughout the city. He was relieved since he didn't want the ADU code to favor
certain areas. They all agreed that an 11,000 sf minimum would be appropriate since they now had
data to back up their decision. Mr. Ryan clarified that not all lots large enough to meet the code
would be able to fit a DADU on their property, considering setbacks and other structures that might
be present on the property.
Commissioner McKeown said numerically about 1/4 of the parcels with 8,000 sf and above
could easily fit a DADU. Half of them could fit one in tight and another '% of the parcels it would be
impossible. The 11,000 sf lots would be an easy fit. The tight fit group would be the most relevant.
Based on his research (knowing there were limited lots that would qualify for an ADUD, he suggested
not having a size limitation at all.
Commissioner Cooley argued for 11,000 sf to see how much of a demand there was. In the
past, the city had tried to allow smaller condensed units and there was a big push back from
residents. He didn't like that the state doesn't allow a resident to object to their neighbor installing a
rental unit because they would not allow conditional use permits. He wanted to start with 11,000 sf
minimums. If the city wanted to change it later, it would be easier to give more allowance than it
would to become more restrictive. Due to parking requirements and having to connect to the sewer,
he didn't foresee very many ADUs in the city.
River Heights Planning Commission Meeting, 8/25/26
131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139
140
Commissioner Wakefield asked if it was an income issue. He suggested it could be
discriminatory to require 11,000 sf if those with smaller lots are of a lower income. Commissioner
Ryan said they were concerned about this and discussed it at length at their last meeting. This was
the reason they did extra homework and were driven for more data. They noted there were several
larger lots in the older parts of town as well as small lots in newer neighborhoods. Commissioner
Cooley felt they had done their due diligence. Commissioner McKeown pointed out that they didn't
want to discriminate based on income, but they do want to on over-crowding residences.
The meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m.
.Sheila Lind, Re rder
144 Keenan Ryan, Commission Chair
River Heights Planning Commission Meeting, 8/25/26
River Heights City
Application for Project Review
Type of Application
r
Subdivision' Minor Subdivision Flag Lot Rezone V. Boundary Adjustment
Commercial Development Commercial Parking RPUD
Applicant Information
'l e4( CorIs - -
Applicant Phone Number Email Address
Mailing Address, City, State, Zip
`JL c c ope
Property Owner of Record Phone Number Email Address
Mailing Address, City, State, Zip
Project Name and Property Address
County Parcel ID Number Size of Lot Number of Dwellings/Units/Lo ts
Describe the proposed project f
SoJ( 7_ ot tIMJ-i4-q . /`l4 _ he w i tr/ o/LrQ 7O
4I CrL w(
We certify we are the developer and record owner of this property, and we consent to the submittal of this application.
i r Zo76
Developer Date ;Property ner Date
*See additional Application and Requirements specific to subdivisions.
Administrative Land Use Authority (ALUA): The local authority designated to review and approve applications to subdivide land.
The River Heights Planning Commission shall serve this role for preliminary plat applications; and the Development Review
Committee (DRC) shall serve the role for final plat and minor subdivision applications.
Application Fee Schedule
Flag Lot
Minor Subdivision
Pre-Application Meeting, optional
DRC Review (professional fees not included')
Subdivision
150.00
400.00 (applied to DRC fees)
1,500.00
Pre-Application Meeting, optional
10 lots and under
ALUA Review
DRC Review (professional fees not included')
11 lots and over
ALUA Review
DRC Review (professional fees not included')
Commercial/CommercialParking Lot Development
Preliminary Layout and Design Review
Final Layout Submittal
Petition for Zone Change
Boundary Une Adjustment
400.00 (applied to ALUA fees)
500.00
1,500.00
500.00
3,000.00
200.00
400.00
300.00
150.00
'River Heights City shall have the following professionals review the preliminary and final applications for all proposed subdivisions:
city engineer, city attorney, and citizen planner. The cost for all professional reviews shall be billed to and paid by the City. The City
will then bill the developer for 100% of the actual cost Incurred by the City for the professional review of applications. Payment is
required within thirty (30) days of the time the bill is sent by the City. The applicant/developer shall be responsible for all legal
expenses and costs by the City for collection of any fees required herein. The final plat shall not be recorded until all final application
(plat and construction drawings) review fees incurred by the City are paid in full.
Applicant/Developer Signature
Date
Checklist of needed items
✓ Application
✓ Fee
✓ Current Cache County Recorders Plat map showing applicants' property and adjacent properties.•'
✓ Plat map with all information required."
"Not required for subdivisions or minor subdivisions.
City Use Only: Amt Paid _[Q±o1L.Date Received _ ?]49 Check It _____` __ 1 By
Amt Paid Date Received Check U By
Amt Paid Date Received Check fl By
E Chft 4\
THE TOWNE SUBDIVISION
#ON COYPLI1E SIRKY CATA
SEE 0m0DUL OEDICAna, P A7 R+ PART OF SEC 3, T.1 1N.,N., R.1 E., S.L.B. & M.
DOOR 1977 OF P1A79. PAGE 332,
DUTY YW(BER 409997 RIVER HEIGHTS dTY
SCALE 1' - 30 TAXING UNIT: 010
03-1os '
-a- I
SEt 02-022
-- -- arA9 .b u --- - - - - -
ueY fro
g
0001 0002 0003 0004
RENHETT FA RO
FAY TRUST LYLE OAO4LRKARLEY 0AR0U1ER GEORGE HDREY C RRIS J i
Qf9 AC YEUSSA WY 44YOROAH
0.10 AC 0.19 AC
O.Y3 AG fey
S
9 s*1sie 1.J0.0]
R.f{.eR
d
f1 f 2 r 3
- --' - -- 600 SOUTN STREET
40.000 */DE
(1-;030-A1»{ _-.- ------` - -^ -
lel, E RG4O cN1e.gE lmao'
N
3
..0..,2
9 .f e5
S
.111.f
2*42
0005 0000
0007
tr
JOSIOJA HORTIR y F Y ST
OARDR P0404.7 TRUST
ER
a
0.17 AC 0.19 AC 0.21 AC RLIXE 0 OWIAY
an
0006
0.24 AC
' S409 1 6 2 A
7 70 10'
SEE 02-022
Neuj Bounda ry
F- Linos -p
p rrk.4 r--{ 1
•IWS WVP IS CREATED fROY DOCIMYTS OP RECORD PCR TAX PURPOSES ONLY c*o.E cry 0*IcRJ.zoH„
Section 3 Township II North Range I East a'
Scale 1 Inch = 100 FEET
pt. SW4NE4 p1. NW4 SE4 TM UNIT 10
PT. BLOCKS 9, 10 PLAT '1C" PROVIDENCE FARM SURVEY
SEE 02-024
SEE 02-016
uv
a
e
2
. 1
n
400 SOUTH STREI
mn.x
Date Mon 8/24/2026 11:22 AM
To Sheila Lind
- ----- -- Forwarded message ---------
From: Julie Young
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 2026, 8:22AM
Subject: Kennel conditional permit
To: keeanrnvan12@igmail.com
Hello,
We received a letter about the public hearing on Aug 25, but I will be out of town for a work trip.
hope it's ok that I send my comment via email.
am hopeful this request will be rejected. The dogs at this house bark at everyone walking on the
street. The third dog has been there a lot this summer, and often escapes the house and is roaming
freely, unsupervised in their yard, our yard, other neighbor's yards, and in the middle.of the street.
While the two smaller dogs are taken on walks and appear to be well looked after, despite their
incessant barking, the third dog is not properly cared for. At least that's how it appears when I see it
outside unattended, roaming the area for hours alone. And never have I seen it get taken on walks.
walk.my dog a lot and am very familiar with which dogs in our community are walked well-taken care
of, and the sad cases of ones not getting enough or any attention.
These rules are written to keep the community safe and liveable (i.e., peaceful). Please don't give this
exception as it will violate keeping our neighborhood liveable.
Thanks,
Julie
about:blank 1/1
