76-3-608. Criteria for local government review. (1) The basis for the governing body‘s decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny a proposed subdivision is whether the subdivision application, preliminary plat, applicable environmental assessment, public hearing, planning board recommendations, or additional information demonstrates that development of the proposed subdivision meets the requirements of this chapter. A governing body may not deny approval of a proposed subdivision based solely on the subdivision’s impacts on educational services or based solely on parcels within the subdivision having been designated as wildland-urban interface parcels under 76-13-145.

Ask a legal question, get an answer ASAP!
Click here to chat with a lawyer about your rights.

(2)The governing body shall issue written findings of fact that weigh the criteria in subsection (3), as applicable.

(3)A subdivision proposal must undergo review for the following primary criteria:

(a)except when the governing body has established an exemption pursuant to subsection (6) or except as provided in 76-3-509, 76-3-609(2) or (4), or 76-3-616, the specific, documentable, and clearly defined impact on agriculture, agricultural water user facilities, local services, the natural environment, wildlife, wildlife habitat, and public health and safety, excluding any consideration of whether the proposed subdivision will result in a loss of agricultural soils;

(b)compliance with:

(i)the survey requirements provided for in part 4 of this chapter;

(ii)the local subdivision regulations provided for in part 5 of this chapter; and

(iii)the local subdivision review procedure provided for in this part;

(c)the provision of easements within and to the proposed subdivision for the location and installation of any planned utilities; and

(d)the provision of legal and physical access to each parcel within the proposed subdivision and the required notation of that access on the applicable plat and any instrument of transfer concerning the parcel.

(4)The governing body may require the subdivider to design the proposed subdivision to reasonably minimize potentially significant adverse impacts identified through the review required under subsection (3) but may not require a set-aside of land or monetary contribution for the loss of agricultural soils. Pursuant to 76-3-620, the governing body shall issue written findings to justify the reasonable mitigation required under this subsection (4).

(5)(a) In reviewing a proposed subdivision under subsection (3) and when requiring mitigation under subsection (4), a governing body may not unreasonably restrict a landowner’s ability to develop land, but it is recognized that in some instances the impacts of a proposed development may be deemed unmitigable and will preclude approval of the subdivision.

(b)When requiring mitigation under subsection (4) and consistent with 76-3-620, a governing body shall consult with the subdivider and shall give due weight and consideration to the expressed preference of the subdivider.

(6)A governing body may conditionally approve or deny a proposed subdivision as a result of the water and sanitation information provided pursuant to 76-3-622 or public comment received pursuant to 76-3-604 on the information provided pursuant to 76-3-622 only if the conditional approval or denial is based on existing subdivision, zoning, or other regulations that the governing body has the authority to enforce.

(7)A governing body may not require as a condition of subdivision approval that a property owner waive a right to protest the creation of a special improvement district or a rural improvement district for capital improvement projects that does not identify the specific capital improvements for which protest is being waived. A waiver of a right to protest may not be valid for a time period longer than 20 years after the date that the final subdivision plat is filed with the county clerk and recorder.

(8)A governing body may not approve a proposed subdivision if any of the features and improvements of the subdivision encroach onto adjoining private property in a manner that is not otherwise provided for under chapter 4 or this chapter or if the well isolation zone of any proposed well to be drilled for the proposed subdivision encroaches onto adjoining private property unless the owner of the private property authorizes the encroachment. For the purposes of this section, “well isolation zone” has the meaning provided in 76-4-102.

(9)If a federal or state governmental entity submits a written or oral comment or an opinion regarding wildlife, wildlife habitat, or the natural environment relating to a subdivision application for the purpose of assisting a governing body’s review, the comment or opinion may be included in the governing body’s written statement under 76-3-620 only if the comment or opinion provides scientific information or a published study that supports the comment or opinion. A governmental entity that is or has been involved in an effort to acquire or assist others in acquiring an interest in the real property identified in the subdivision application shall disclose that the entity has been involved in that effort prior to submitting a comment, an opinion, or information as provided in this subsection.

(10)Findings of fact by the governing body concerning whether the development of the proposed subdivision meets the requirements of this chapter must be based on the record as a whole. The governing body’s findings of fact must be sustained unless they are arbitrary, capricious, or unlawful.