Upcoming Town Council

The notice of public hearings on the town website at <https://www.springdaletown.com/m/newsflash/home/detail/302> for the Town Council meeting on January 14, 2026, at 5 pm at the CCC lists the following items:

• 1. Public Hearing: Ordinance 2025-19 Amending Chapter 10-18 of the Town Code by Adding a Requirement for Enhanced Buffering and Screening on Commercial Properties Adjacent to Residential Uses.
• 2. Public Hearing: Zone Change from Valley Residential (VR) To Public Use (PU) On Parcel S-137-C, A Two-Acre Parcel Immediately Adjacent to the East of the Town Hall Property. Applicant: Town Of Springdale. Staff Contact: Thomas Dansie.
• 3. Public Hearing: Ordinance 2025-20 Amending Chapter 10-7A of the Town Code by Adding Medical Offices, Drugstores, Pharmacies, and Medical Clinics as Permitted Uses in The PU Zone. Staff Contact: Thomas Dansie.

Items 2 and 3 warrant public scrutiny. When planning commission approved changing the parcel next to town hall from Valley Residential to Public Use, they failed to discuss whether the proposed change met a need. They discussed whether the proposed medical clinic, new town hall, new post office would be appropriate use of PU land (which legally they are but only if, in the case of a medical clinic, it is nonprofit and only if the usage is needed) but neglected to discuss whether those things were, indeed, actually needed in Springdale. It’s a discussion worth having

An appropriate question for the council would be: What metrics indicate that each of those facilities is needed by Springdale, including, but not limited to data about the current medical clinic usage, town hall space issues, and facts supporting the idea that our current post office is overburdened or insufficient? Questions regarding Family Health’s commitment to Springdale and usage of a 4000 sq ft facility have not been addressed. What would Family Health pay for using such a facility and how much financial obligation can Springdale handle in order to have a medical facility of that nature? It seems relatively apparent that Springdale would have to subsidize it to some extent. The town needs more information, more transparency.

Item 3 raises some serious questions about Drugstores and Pharmacies which are absolutely not appropriate uses for PU land. It’s important to distinguish between “serving the public” (which pretty much all stores do — that’s how they make a profit) and “public use.”

Drugstores should NEVER be allowed on PU land. Pharmacies may but only if the following apply:

• 1. It is inside a medical center
• 2. The medical center itself is a nonprofit community health center with a public mission (Family Health would qualify)
• 3. It only serves patients of the medical center
• 4. It is physically small and internal
• 5. It has no separate exterior entrance
• 6. It does not sell general retail items
• 7. It does not advertise or function as a destination business.
• 8. Has no drive-through
• 9. Has limited hours tied to clinic hours
• 10. Has minimal parking demand beyond the medical center’s needs
• 11. Has no separate branding or signage

If any one of these restrictions is not met, the pharmacy starts to look like retail, and the public use justification collapses. So, If a pharmacy is permitted by Council, these caveats should be included in the wording.

A pharmacy that simply dispenses medication to patients inside a public medical facility is very different from a retail drugstore. The difference matters. One is a limited support service; the other is a commercial business. The question for Springdale is not whether healthcare is important — it is whether public land is being used for a truly public purpose, or whether private retail is being introduced under a different name.

Questions to which Springdale citizens should have the answers; attendance at the meeting to ask them is encouraged:

• Who would own and operate the medical center?
• Is it a public entity, nonprofit, or private company?
• Will the pharmacy serve only patients, or the general public?
• Will the pharmacy have a separate entrance or signage?
• What items will be sold besides prescription medications in the pharnacy?
• Is the pharmacy space leased separately?
• What prevents this “accessory” use from expanding later?

About the meaning of “public use”

• How does Springdale legally define “public use” in its land-use code?
• What specific uses are permitted by right in the public use zone?
• Is private retail listed anywhere as an allowed or conditional use in this zone?
• If not, what legal mechanism would allow a private drugstore on public use land?

About consistency and precedent

• Has Springdale ever allowed a private commercial business on public use land before?
• If this proposal is approved, what prevents future uses such as convenience stores, restaurants, or other retail from also locating on public land?
• How will the town ensure this decision does not undermine the purpose of the public use designation elsewhere?

About leasing public land

• Does Springdale intend to lease the land to a private operator?
• Under what authority does the town lease public land for private retail use?
• How will the town demonstrate that such a lease serves a public purpose, as required under Utah law?

About alternatives

• Why is this use proposed for public land rather than commercially zoned private land?

About process and transparency

• Will the town commit to a separate public hearing specifically on whether retail should be allowed on public land?
• Will the town publish a legal analysis supporting the decision before final approval?

Red flags to watch for (as a citizen) — If you hear any of these, the town’s argument is weak:

• “The pharmacy will also serve the general public”
• “It needs a separate entrance for convenience”
• “Retail sales help fund the medical center”
• “Other towns do this” (without citing zoning authority)
• “We’ll limit it later” (instead of codifying limits now)

These statements usually indicate a retail use being shoehorned into public land.