South Jordan council takes up halved cell-tower spacing and a 11400 South rezone Nov. 17

SOUTH JORDAN — The City Council has set two public hearings for Nov. 17, beginning at 6:30 p.m. in the council chambers at City Hall, 1600 W. Towne Center Drive 12.

The notice, posted Nov. 6, lists Ordinance 2026-26, a zone text amendment that would cut the required distance between wireless monopoles from one mile to half a mile, and Ordinance 2026-07-Z, a rezone of 0.71 acres at 2929 W 11400 S from single-family residential at 1.8 units per acre to single-family residential at 3 1.

Written comments must reach City Planner Ryan Loose at rloose@sjc.utah.gov by noon on Nov. 17, and attachments cannot exceed 20 megabytes 12. The notice directs accommodation requests to the Assistant City Manager at 801-446-4357 at least 24 hours before the meeting, and questions to the city offices at 801-254-3742 1. It is signed by City Planner Greg Schindler 2.

The monopole amendment already has a recommendation. The Planning Commission voted 5-0 on Oct. 27 to recommend approval of Ordinance 2026-26, with Commissioner Steven Catmull absent; Commissioner Lori Harding moved and Chair Nathan Gedge seconded 3.

Planner Damir Drozdek told the commission that city code defines a monopole as any pole over 50 feet that carries telecommunications antennas 3. Gedge asked when the council would hear the item, and Drozdek answered, "it will be Tuesday November 17, 2026" 3.

The applicant, Rocky Schutjer of RAGE Development, described the change to commissioners as "basically one word from one mile down to a half mile" 3. He said his firm is working with Larry H. Miller Real Estate Group on four new monopoles for Daybreak and the growth west of Mountain View, that each is being engineered to carry three carriers with room for a fourth, and that applications for 100-foot poles — the maximum the code allows — are already with the city 3. Most existing monopoles in the city carry a single carrier, he said 3.

Where the four would go came up twice. Commissioner Nik Anderson said three of the sites are in his neighborhood and named one as going in "off Prosperity and Copper-hawk" 3. Schutjer described the fourth as "in the upper villages, just off of 118th South and about 65th West" 3.

Anderson said he supported the amendment and that people in his ward had switched carriers to improve service; Commissioner Bryan Farnsworth, a Daybreak resident of 14 years, said coverage complaints have recurred across the villages 3. Commissioner Michelle Hollist said she agreed that the change is "something that's been needed" but raised the prospect of carriers later seeking to backfill areas already built out 3.

The staff report behind the Oct. 27 hearing describes the amendment as "specifically designed to improve cellular coverage and network reliability within the Daybreak area" and records a timeline that began with a council study session on Sept. 15, an application on Sept. 30 and staff review on Oct. 6 5.

The Ledger reported on Oct. 25 that the amendment touches only subsection D of §17.112.070, and that the chapter's other limits stand: a 100-foot height cap, placement in rear yard areas, a 100-foot setback from a street right-of-way and a table of required distances from a residential property line that runs to 370 feet for a 100-foot pole 4. The same report drew on a January 2020 council discussion in which council members described poor coverage on the city's west side and said public sentiment against towers had not changed 4.

The second hearing is a denial recommendation. The Brown Residential Amendment, file PLZBA202600197, asks to rezone a 0.71-acre unplatted parcel at 2929 W 11400 S so the owner can subdivide it 3. City staff calculated that a two-lot layout under R-3 would come to about 2.8 units per acre, within the city's density standards, and that the change would lower the minimum lot size from 14,520 square feet to 10,000, the minimum lot width from 90 feet to 85, the front setback from 30 feet to 25 and the corner side setback from 30 feet to 25 3.

Staff listed four findings against the request — the parcel would be the only R-3 property within a quarter-mile, the surrounding property is zoned R-1.8 and R-2.5, the owner's stated intent is a two-lot split the current density maximum forbids, and a subdivision is possible only under R-3 — and concluded the application does not conform with the General Plan's LIVE goals or strategic directive BRE-1 3. "Staff recommends denial of the application," the report states 3.

The application was submitted Oct. 10, and the report lists no earlier hearing and no neighborhood meeting 3. The Planning Commission takes it up Nov. 10 at 6:30 p.m. in the council chambers, and the agenda directs written comments to City Planner Greg Schindler at gschindler@sjc.utah.gov by 3 p.m. on the day of the meeting, adding that anyone attending by Zoom or phone may not comment 3. That staff report says the application is scheduled to appear before the council on Dec. 1; the notice posted Nov. 6 sets the hearing for Nov. 17 31.

A council decision is legislative and final. Approving the text amendment would not by itself authorize a tower: each monopole application would still be measured against the chapter's other standards 45.