Kevin Rudd indicated the Desert Rose subdivision is located on 200 East at approximately 950 South and disclosed that he lives on lot 13 and would be personally affected by the proposed development. The Subdivision Enhancement process allows a developer to present to the City a project that proposes amenities above what would be required. In return, the developer ,ay receive density bonuses. The applicant is requesting a twenty-five percent (25%) density bonus for a total of 55 homes and is proposing to build a public park in one area and a dog park in another area. The park areas consist of approximately 2 1/2 acres and the developer would dedicate the parks to the City. The Director of the Parks and Recreation Department feels that would be a good location for a small park. Mr. Rudd referred to a PowerPoint presentation regarding the Subdivision Enhancement process. A copy of the presentation is available by request through Ivins City Hall.
There are three (3) density incentives. The first density incentive is Improvements and Enhancements to Open Space Areas. There has to be a minimum of ten percent (10%) open space for an application for the overlay to be submitted and the open space must be improved. The Planning Commission has recommended the full ten percent (10%) density bonus due to the 2 1/2 acre park being donated to the City. The developer is requesting that the impact fees collected be used for the cost of the improvements of the park. The estimated cost of the improvements is two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000) and three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000). Kevin Rudd referred to the developers Supplement to the Narrative that outlines how funding and building the park would occur. A copy of the Supplement is available by request through Ivins City Hall. The second density incentive is Consistency in Design Elements. The Planning Commission has recommended the full density bonus of five percent (5%). Some of the neighbors are concerned with the height of the homes and the developer has agreed to a maximum height of twenty-two feet (22’) rather than the allowed twenty-five (25’). The third density incentive is Convenience in Layout, Variety of Lot Sizes and Unique Subdivision Features. The Planning Commission agreed that this project does not have a variation of lot sizes and recommended a six percent (6%) density bonus. The total density proposed is twenty-one percent (21%), which reduces two (2) homes from the plan and the Planning Commission recommended those two homes be removed from the lots on the south side of the development.
Mayor Hart reminded those in attendance that the Council has reviewed the written comments, listened to the Planning Commission audio meeting and are aware of the concerns. Mayor Hart opened the Public Hearing.
Marcus Christensen lives in Salt Lake City, Utah and owns a second home at 265 East 1020 South in Heritage Estates. He and his wife bought the home for the view of the Red Mountain. They are concerned with the density of the project, height of the homes and the current plans for the soccer field and dog park. He read from his email to the Mayor and City Council. A copy of the email is available by request through Ivins City Hall.
Harold Jones resides at 238 East 1020 South and inquired as to why the City has different zones in different areas of the City and is concerned with public parking for the proposed park, how the parks are going to be maintained, the smell and barking dogs at the dog park, traffic, destroying the view of the Red Mountain, and how much fill will be brought in for the project.
David Arndt resides at 347 East 1020 South. His concern is the height of the homes, how much fill will be brought in and blocking the views of the Red Mountain. The restrictions of Desert Rose should be the same as the restrictions of Heritage Estates.
Bryant Edgington resides at 281 East 1020 South and inquired as to the landscaping of the yards.
Stacy Young, the developers’ representative indicated he stands by the project and indicated it is a project of sound planning that is consistent with City requirements. The project as proposed would have no more homes along the shared property line than Heritage Estates has. The developer reluctantly stipulated to a reduced height restriction and the property is already sitting below Heritage Estates. Both subdivisions are zoned R-1-10. The bonus density provision for the third incentive has been a challenge for the developers. It is difficult to be creative with the size of the property.
Shellie Hurt resides at 250 East 1020 South and is concerned with the view lots which were sold at a higher price for the view of Red Mountain, high density projects start out great but the older the projects get they turn into investment properties and rentals and more troubles for the city. She is concerned with traffic, parking and crime.
There being no further comments, Mayor Hart closed the Public Hearing.
The following individuals disclosed they are residents or have interest in property in Heritage Estates subdivision: Kevin Rudd, Dale Coulam and Council Member Roberts.
The Mayor and City Council Members discussed the current zoning of the property; the previously approved Desert Rose subdivision that did not go forward due to the economy; the number of lots to be developed; height restrictions; grading and fill; setbacks; landscaping; lighting; parking, the developer donating approximately 2 1/2 acres of land to the City that would be developed as a park with the use of impact fees paid by the developer; establishing a fund to retain the park impact fees and at what phase in the project those fees would be used; the cost of the park improvements; competitive bidding for the park improvements; open space; density bonuses and the requirement for a development agreement.
The current zoning for this property is R-1-10. It was previously zoned R-1-8 which would allow a higher density development than the one being proposed. The adjacent Heritage Estates subdivision is zoned R-1-8 but the developer of Heritage Estates chose to utilize larger lots but was not required to. The Desert Rose subdivision plan that was previously approved consisted of fifty three (53) homes which is the same number of homes in the current Preliminary Plan. The developer has agreed to a height restriction of twenty-two feet (22’) rather than the allowed twenty-five feet (25’), in an attempt to be a good neighbor to the Heritage Estates residents. The Council Members were concerned with restricting the height due to the limitation of the developer to build diverse homes. The Council agreed that the twenty-two foot (22’) roof restriction would be subject to only the south lots and hip roof would be required on the homes built on the south lots.
The grade levels vary from one foot (1’) to two and a half feet (2 1/2’) along the backside of Heritage Estates and the building pads on the west end of Desert Rose are approximately five feet (5’) below Heritage Estates. The maximum height is measured from the building pad to the peak of the roof or the highest point on the home. The rear setback for the Desert Rose subdivision, as well as for Heritage Estates is ten feet (10’). The landscaping is in the preliminary stages and the developer intends to include the requirements for landscaping in the CC&R’s (covenants, conditions and restrictions). Lights will be installed by the developer pursuant to Ivins current light design requirements and the roads will be public roads that provide for on street parking on one side of the street.
The developer is proposing to donate approximately two and a half (2 1/2) acres of land to the City that would be developed as a park and the developer is requesting that the impact fees paid by the developer for each home be used to improve the park. Council Member Rusick was concerned with setting a precedent going forward with other subdivisions if this was allowed and inquired as to the legality or ability for the City to use the impact fees as requested by the developer. Dale Coulam clarified there is nothing legally that would prevent the City from using the impact fees as requested. The developer would be paying the full impact fee amount and is asking that the funds be used at the requested location for a park that would benefit the community. The Mayor and Council Members concluded the park would benefit the City as a whole and would be located in an area of the City that currently does not have a park and is projected to be a major entrance into Ivins. The developer is amenable to a separate fund being established to hold the park impact fees. There would be a provision in the development agreement that if the park is not completed as agreed the funds in the account would revert to the City’s impact fee account. The developer agreed that the improvements for the park would be put out for competitive bid with the City’s participation.
The Mayor and City Council agreed with the Planning Commission’s recommendation of a density bonus of twenty-one percent (21%), the requirement of a development agreement and CC&R’s. The Council inquired as to how the Planning Commission came to the six percent (6%) figure under the Creative Design Layout incentive. Judy Gubler indicated the Planning Commission felt clustering the homes resulted nsity bonus of six percent (6%) for Creative Design Layout is allowed. The Council inquired as to how the Planning Commission came to the six percent (6%) figure. Judy Gubler indicated the Planning Commission felt clustering the homes resulted in more open space and the developer agreed to limit the height of the homes beyond what is required by the ordinance.
MOTION: moved to
SECOND:
Judy Gubler suggested the dedication of the park property occur in phase one (1).
MOTION: Council Member McDonald moved to amend the above Motion to include the dedication of the park property to occur in phase one (1).
SECOND: Council Member Rusick
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Council Member Elwell |
AYE |
| Council Member Jolley |
AYE |
| Council Member McDonald |
AYE |
| Council Member Roberts |
AYE |
| Council Member Rusick |
AYE |
| 4) |
CITIZEN COMMENT & REQUEST FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS - NONE |
Chuck Gillette indicated language for the definition of pollutants has been added as previously requested. Council Member Roberts referred to the pollutant language and is concerned that if someone were to wash their vehicle in their driveway and the pollutants go into the storm drain, they would be in violation of this ordinance. Chuck Gillette stated there is an exclusion in the ordinance for washing personal vehicles. The fines and levels of fines are based on how deliberate the act is. Council Member Roberts indicated there are already laws that govern hazardous waste and inquired why there needs to be so many laws. The City would be infringing on peoples liberties and freedoms. He understands the EPA and the State of Utah are telling Ivins this ordinance is required but he does not agree with it. Chuck Gillette stated Staffs’ only choice is to recommend following Federal law. The consequences of the City failing to follow this Federal law is the City being fined up to $10,000 per day, per violation. Council Member Rusick stated the ordinance may seem imposing but you have to look at the big picture. Council Member Roberts does not have a problem with mitigating construction and development but has a problem imposing on everyday people.
MOTION: Council Member Rusick moved to approve Ordinance No. 2010-02, an Ordinance of Ivins City, Utah Adopting the Regulations for Storm Water Pollution Control with the changes provided this evening
SECOND: Council Member Elwell
VOTE: The motion carried.
| Council Member Elwell |
AYE |
| Council Member Jolley |
AYE |
| Council Member McDonald |
AYE |
| Council Member Rusick |
AYE |
| Council Member Roberts |
NAY |
Roll call vote. Four Council Members voted in favor and one Council Member voted in opposition.
Dale Coulam indicated this is a follow up of what the Mayor and Council discussed at the previous City Council meeting. Recently an article came out in the Salt Lake Tribune that indicated on a Federal level there is a temporary provision in place for a number of chemical compounds. The State of Utah is also considering what is being done on the Federal level and may be contemplating a broader statute. Council Member Rusick inquired as to the inclusion of probationers and parolees in the third whereas in the document. Dale Coulam stated it is not currently a parole violation because using the substance is not currently a violation of law. The probationers or parolees may have been convicted on drug use but they can continue to use something that has the effect of intoxication but is not illegal and therefore is not a parole violation. Council Member Rusick indicated that made sense and suggested some grammatical changes be made.
MOTION: Council Member Jolley moved to approve Ordinance No. 2010-18, an Ordinance of Ivins City, Utah Amending Title 6, Chapter 3 of the Ivins City Code Regarding Controlled Substances by Adding a Section Pertaining to the Purchase, Possession, Sale and Offering for Sale of Certain Intoxicating Chemical Compounds, with the language revisions put forth this evening
SECOND: Council Member McDonald
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Council Member Elwell |
AYE |
| Council Member Jolley |
AYE |
| Council Member McDonald |
AYE |
| Council Member Roberts |
AYE |
| Council Member Rusick |
AYE |
Roll call vote. All Council Members voted in favor.
Kevin Rudd indicated the last year the City Council approved a Class V Conditional Use Permit for an open air theater for the Cabaret Theater. The written text states that in the future consideration could be made to enclose the theater area. The applicants are proposing to put a roof system over the Cabaret Theater to assist with controlling the temperature of the theater. Judy Gubler stated the initial primary concerns with the Conditional Use Permit were with noise and the roof will help control that.
MOTION: moved to
SECOND:
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Council Member Elwell |
AYE |
| Council Member Jolley |
AYE |
| Council Member McDonald |
AYE |
| Council Member Roberts |
AYE |
| Council Member Rusick |
AYE |
| A. |
Approval of Request for Proposals for Ivins City Hall Photovoltaic Solar System |
| B. |
Approval of Meeting Minutes for November 18, 2010 |
| C. |
Approval of Special Meeting Minutes for November 23, 2010 |
MOTION: Council Member Jolley moved to approve Consent Agenda items A, B and C
SECOND: Council Member Roberts
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Council Member Elwell |
AYE |
| Council Member Jolley |
AYE |
| Council Member McDonald |
AYE |
| Council Member Roberts |
AYE |
| Council Member Rusick |
AYE |
| 7) |
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION |
Council Member Elwell - no report
Council Member McDonald reported there will be a budget hearing on December 13, 2010 for the Solid Waste District.
Council Member Jolley reported he was jogging on the path on Center Street in the early morning when a man came out from under the culvert and tried to stop him. It is extremely dark and difficult to traverse the path. Two (2) of the solar bollards are not operating. He has let Chief Flowers know about the culvert incident and requested the City look at lighting options for the path.
Council Member Roberts - no report
Council Member Rusick - no report
Mayor Hart thanked Tuacahn and Scott Raine for working out the details of the Miss Ivins Pageant which will be held in the Hafen Theater on Saturday, April 16, 2011. The only charge to the City will be for the support personnel and technicians. Mayor Hart and other Mayors from Southern Utah will be on a conference call with Senator Hatch tomorrow to discuss the delays and issues relating to the Tuacahn Detention Basin.
Judy Gubler provided a timeline to the City Council for the Historic Township SAA(Special Assessment Area) project. The timeline does not include the construction because the Notice to Proceed has not been given. Zions Bank has confirmed the financing and that will be addressed at the next City Council meeting. Council Member Jolley inquired as to the SAA payment timeline for the residents. Judy Gubler indicated the City’s first full payment is due on December 1, 2011 and the first payment for the residents will be in August or September, 2011. The formation of the Board of Equalization will also be addressed at the next City Council meeting. The Christmas party will be Friday, December 17th at the Tuacahn Dance Hall.
| D. |
City Attorney, Dale Coulam |
Dale Coulam provided the City Council with options for forming the Board of Equalization. A copy of the options is available by request through Ivins City Hall.
Discuss the Blue Sky program and discuss an assistance fund for the SAA (Special Assessment Area);
MOTION: Council Member McDonald moved to adjourn
SECOND: Council Member Elwell
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Council Member Elwell |
AYE |
| Council Member Jolley |
AYE |
| Council Member McDonald |
AYE |
| Council Member Roberts |
AYE |
| Council Member Rusick |
AYE |
The meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m.
Respectfully,
Kari D. Jimenez, CMC
Ivins City Recorder