Boulder planning commission to rework zoning code, clarify general plan; sets March deadline for chapter edits
February 17, 2026 | Boulder, Garfield County, Utah
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The Boulder Planning Commission on Feb. 17 agreed to continue a multi-step revision of the town’s general plan and to reformat the zoning code, assigning homework and a public input process as next steps.
Chair Nancy Tosta, a planning commissioner, said the commission will “extract the goals, clarify what we think they are as a planning commission, and then have a public meeting” to invite residents’ feedback. Commissioners set a March 3 deadline for draft edits to the chapters they are responsible for and scheduled the next regular meeting for March 17 at 7 p.m.
Commissioners asked staff and local volunteers to produce a clear starting point for the zoning rewrite. Kevin (staff member), who reviewed current code text during the meeting, recommended beginning with the short list of elements required by state law and “build[ing] a leaner structure” from there; he told the body, “If you go if you go to Utah code, it's title 10, chapter 20,” as the governing reference for land-use requirements.
The commission debated three sequencing options: rewrite both the general plan and the zoning code at the same time; reformat the zoning code first and update the general plan afterward; or focus first on commercial sections and then address other chapters. Commissioners and volunteers (including Michael Wynne and others) offered to split tasks: several commissioners will continue revising their assigned general plan chapters while Kevin and Michael will prepare an outline of state-required zoning sections to guide reformatting.
Several commissioners said the work should be practical and testable with the public. Commissioner Nick Vincent pressed for clarity on urgency, noting the town council’s recent special meeting raised concerns about commercial development. Commissioner Phoenix supported using survey results and the general plan forum as inputs for edits, while cautioning the group about taking on too many meetings.
Public commenters at the meeting urged the commission to treat survey results carefully. Jen Bach, a resident, told commissioners the survey and American Community Survey estimates “may not be fully representative of the population,” and Mark Nelson urged the group to keep a community vision statement central to the process.
What’s next: commissioners will submit revised chapter drafts by March 3. Kevin and Michael will return with an outline of the minimum zoning-code sections required by state law; staff will post Word versions of documents to the meeting folder to facilitate edits. The commission plans at least one public forum to gather additional input before formal hearings on any amendments.
Chair Nancy Tosta, a planning commissioner, said the commission will “extract the goals, clarify what we think they are as a planning commission, and then have a public meeting” to invite residents’ feedback. Commissioners set a March 3 deadline for draft edits to the chapters they are responsible for and scheduled the next regular meeting for March 17 at 7 p.m.
Commissioners asked staff and local volunteers to produce a clear starting point for the zoning rewrite. Kevin (staff member), who reviewed current code text during the meeting, recommended beginning with the short list of elements required by state law and “build[ing] a leaner structure” from there; he told the body, “If you go if you go to Utah code, it's title 10, chapter 20,” as the governing reference for land-use requirements.
The commission debated three sequencing options: rewrite both the general plan and the zoning code at the same time; reformat the zoning code first and update the general plan afterward; or focus first on commercial sections and then address other chapters. Commissioners and volunteers (including Michael Wynne and others) offered to split tasks: several commissioners will continue revising their assigned general plan chapters while Kevin and Michael will prepare an outline of state-required zoning sections to guide reformatting.
Several commissioners said the work should be practical and testable with the public. Commissioner Nick Vincent pressed for clarity on urgency, noting the town council’s recent special meeting raised concerns about commercial development. Commissioner Phoenix supported using survey results and the general plan forum as inputs for edits, while cautioning the group about taking on too many meetings.
Public commenters at the meeting urged the commission to treat survey results carefully. Jen Bach, a resident, told commissioners the survey and American Community Survey estimates “may not be fully representative of the population,” and Mark Nelson urged the group to keep a community vision statement central to the process.
What’s next: commissioners will submit revised chapter drafts by March 3. Kevin and Michael will return with an outline of the minimum zoning-code sections required by state law; staff will post Word versions of documents to the meeting folder to facilitate edits. The commission plans at least one public forum to gather additional input before formal hearings on any amendments.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
