Chairman Reed explained that the Commissioners are revising the Zoning Ordinance to reflect the changes made in the General Plan, to make the ordinance more accessible, clean up the text and clarify the intent, to make it easier for property owners to make development decisions instead of coming to the Commission or Staff for clarification. The Commission is not rewriting the entire ordinance, but they want to get input from the property owners that will help make the ordinance work better for them. Some comments may be beyond the scope of the Commission, and we may not be able to accommodate your requests. The Commissioners are working on the ordinance, not specific properties.
Council Member McDonald thought it would be good to hear from commercial property owners as to what their intentions are for their property, what they would like to see, and get some of their ideas, so the Commission and City Council can try to accommodate them the best they can within the scope of what they can do.
Ron Densley asked about the road construction at the corner of Docena and Tuacahan Drive.
Dale Coulam advised that a contract was approved for the engineers to do further studies.
Mayor Hart commented that a roundabout seems to be the best solution. There have been a number of discussions with the City Engineer, etc. There are various property owners involved. The roundabout varies a little to the north and west and property owners are willing to sacrifice some of the property.
Ron Densley commented that the Council will spend a half million dollars on a roundabout and in addition acquire the land. The land values have gone down and appraisals would be lower. He doesn’t want to sell at current value and doesn’t want to go through condemnation process but may have to. He suggested leaving the road and property owners where they are and use street lights.
Mayor Hart explained that traffic signals are also expensive. But there’s no question there is a difference in cost. The plan has not been finalized.
Dale Coulam suggested he talk with the City Engineer Chuck Gillette since this is not within the scope of this meeting.
Steve Roberts suggested looking at some of the specifics that the Commission had been reviewing with Form Tomorrow such as setbacks, etc.
Chairman Reed clarified that he wanted to know what the commercial property owners are experiencing in reference to development under the current ordinance. We are trying to match the text with the intent of the ordinance. The intent of the ordinance is to preserve the views of the Red Mountain and to try and preserve a unique commercial viability. The Zoning Ordinance includes specific setbacks from property lines, property fronts and zone uses. The Commission has discussed "build-to-line" with Form Tomorrow and whether it preserves the view corridor. Mayor Hart suggested that it would not preserve the view corridor and the "build-to-line" may need to be moved back from the sidewalk. Other discussions with Form Tomorrow included sufficient parking, egress for traffic but still preserve the unique flavor of Ivins. Ivins has been called the destination community, and we have been looking at developing softer commercial businesses such as the Veteran Nursing Home, associated uses and the resorts. We’ve also discussed a walkable and bicycling community.
The consensus of the commercial owners was that it was very hard to say what they wanted on their commercial property because the market is down and there is no demand for commercial.
Ron Densley explained that the first step of development is submitting a plot plan to see if it conforms to what the Commission wants to see. The building, parking, landscape and signage have to be submitted to start the process. He suggested taking some of the commercial properties and have owners submit an example of what they may want on the property and have the Commission review it at another meeting. But Staff, Chairman Reed, and Council Members felt that was reviewing specific properties and could not be done without an application.
Troy Dennett had concerns about changing C-1 (Community Commercial) zone and limiting types of businesses that he could put on his property. He was also concerned that he wasn’t notified that his zones had been changed.
Lance Anderson explained that the Land Use Plan tells what the zones can be and the Zoning Map defines what can specifically be done within that zone. He didn’t feel there’s enough commercial property in Ivins to have so many definitions at the Land Use level. We need to decide what the Land Use Plan should say and then decide what zones should be in each land use.
Chairman Reed explained that several definitions have been changed on the Land Use Plan but the Zoning Map has the old zones on it. The Commission needs to redefine the zones to match the Land Use Plan. The Table of Uses defines the use within a commercial zone. The uses may not change much. Mr. Dennett is concerned about restricting the use but we are not rewriting the ordinance to make more restrictions.
Dale Coulam explained that the Land Use Plan is a general, visionary plan. We have been using the word zone and land use interchangeably which is not accurate. The Zoning Map designates specific zoning districts, identifies specific uses allowed in the zoning districts and sets forth the specifics such as setbacks, etc. After public hearings, a new Land Use Plan, which is part of the General Plan for the City, has been amended, and it has designated or foreseen possible other commercial uses. The Commission needs to flush those out. The purpose of this meeting is very broad. We appreciate input that you don’t want your use changed. Those specifics can be addressed in the future to the elected officials and let them know if you feel the vision has gone too far. The Commission is seeking the type of uses you are looking at, have you encountered difficulty with the current ordinance, are there concerns with general requirements such as setbacks, or ideas to make it a more walkable community, should buildings be forced to move closer to the sidewalks, signage, etc.
Council Member Rusick wanted to hear what kind of businesses the owners think Ivins needs that would enhance the future plans and what is suitable for Ivins. Example: When land was more economical everyone wanted to put up storage units and that’s where we would be today if that was allowed. There’s not much tax benefit or job benefit with storage units.
Ron Densley stated that Phoenix’s Commission was pushing mass transit and having stations to get mini buses to service commercial.
Randy Bowler commented that the Land Use Plan is a vision and guideline but the zoning is an entitlement to the property which is a big difference. Is it a requirement that the current zoning on a property match identically to the general Land Use Plan?
Dale Coulam explained that zoning can change so you are entitled to make use of the property as it is currently zoned but it is subject to change. If developing is put off into the future, there’s a risk of having a different zone to work with in the future. If there is an application in process, the question is at what level it attaches entitlement. That’s a legal issue but if there has not been an application filed the law is pretty clear that the zoning can change.
Randy Bowler asked if part of this gathering information is to try and match the existing zoning to the new implemented General Plan and Land Use Plan.
Chairman Reed commented that it would be accomplished during the next rewrite. At present, there are no specific definitions for those zones. It’s a work in progress.
Randy Bowler was concerned about changing the zones across the board to match the general Land Use Plan. He suggested furnishing the current ordinance and let the owners pencil in some ideas for the Commission to consider.
Chairman Reed suggested that the owners review the Table of Uses and current ordinance.
Mayor Hart felt the Commission was asking for the Table of Uses to match the zone.
Council Member Rusick stated if you are approaching this toward eliminating or adding some uses why not just change the Table of Uses instead of changing the Land Use designation. Then indicate what is allowed under each designation.
Council Member McDonald commented if we are not changing it very much; why not make the changes to the Table of Uses.
Chairman Reed explained that there is verbiage that doesn’t match "shall" and "shall not." There are discrepancies in the text on what we want and what is built. There needs to be some clarification. It is not a big rewrite. If we don’t know what problems developers have run into with the ordinance, we don’t know what to change.
Council Member Rusick felt it was more of a housekeeping of text changes unless the Commission is trying to revision the City by envisioning certain specific uses in certain areas, and if that is what the Commission is trying to do that’s okay. We all know what we don’t want on certain corners and most people will agree. Businesses can only flourish in a specific area. The business property owners have to be opportunists.
Robert Ence agreed with Ron Densley suggestions. We came to give input and that’s the best way to do it or tell us what you want.
Dale Coulam explained that the owners can access the current ordinance on the City website and select the City Code (Sterling Codified Code), Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 19 Design Guidelines, and Table Uses Chapter 33, Table 33-2. The Table of Uses shows what uses are in the current zoning districts. That’s a good place to start. He suggested that the Commission come up with a rough draft, submit it to the property owners to review and set another meeting to address any problems the owners have with the current ordinance.
Ron Densley suggested educating everyone to the different zoning areas and have a format for the next meeting.
Aprile Beardall inquired if the Zoning Map District was existing or new.
Chairman Reed explained that the Zoning Map is the existing map but the Land Use Plan is the new revised plan.
Commissioner Mehr inquired if the Zoning Map has to match the Land Use Plan and is it a legal requirement?
Dale Coulam explained that it should be consistent with the General Plan and allowed in the zoning district. He gave some examples. There can be overlapping uses within the zoning districts. It might be a little unusual to have so many land use designations on the Land Use Map. It’s usually a little more general with fewer designations than the Zoning District Map. The Land Use Map has been upgraded but the Zoning Districts have not been amended.
Kevin Rudd explained that Aprile Beardall’s property is zoned C-1. The Land Use Plan has changed C-1 to Neighborhood Commercial. The Commission will come up with a list of uses for that zone. Troy Dennett’s property is designated as Resort Mixed Use Town Center on the Land Use Plan, and his zoning may change from C-1 to Resort Commercial. Ron Densely’s property is zoned Resort Commercial but the Land Use Plan has changed to Resort Mixed Use Village. As the Commission makes those changes the owners need to be involved. A list of uses needs to be created for each zone. All the maps are located on the website.
Mike Guisinger referred to Council Member Rusick’s statement about what we all don’t want on a corner. It sounds like the Council has ideas of what they want to see on the corners.
Council Member Rusick was referring to adult book stores, auto dealerships, etc. as being undesirable.
Mike Guisinger had concerns about businesses zoned C-1 becoming non-conforming. That’s the problem we are in right now, in that, we have Lightfoot Chevron. He thought his business was non-conforming. They have explored the possibility of installing natural gas. But he understands that they cannot make any changes by adding another product in a non-conforming zone.
Dale Coulam explained that a legal non-conforming use can continue to operate and maintain but cannot expand. It may be a close enough use to add but if it’s a new island or expands the size of the operation, he didn’t think it could be done in a legal non-conforming status. If an existing pump was converted to change the type of fuel, it would probably fit but if the use is changed significantly there could be a problem.
Mike Guisinger asked if it would conform by putting the pumping station between the existing stations within the compound of the canopy.
Dale Coulam stated that it might.
Kevin Rudd advised that Mike Guisinger is not a legal non-conforming business. The business is conforming. A zone change was done in 2008 but the Council did not allow expanding the U-Hauls. He could add the natural gas but advised that he come in and talk with him.
Randy Bowler had concerns about the Land Use Plan being approved as a general direction with undefined specifics. If we are talking about matching the Zoning Map to the Land Use Plan, there should be more definition in the Land Use Plan. There are areas designated without a definition.
Chairman Reed advised that there is a broad statement on the Land Use Map. The Commission has some rough definitions. The General Plan does not define those specifically. The ordinance will give a specific definition and uses for each zone.
Mayor Hart advised that it’s how the process works. The next step gives the final definitions of each zone. All the documents are living documents and subject to change. A couple of years ago the City commissioned a study of the economic development within the City and they came back with recommendations on the potential commercial development and how much commercial space was needed. The Town Center designation came as a result of the study. The City has a potential population of 30,000, and it was recommended to have a central area such as the Town Center. The intent was to have a mixed use designation with higher density, commercial and civic uses. That is different from what the existing Land Use Plan showed. Some of recommendations were invalid for the City and were revised. The City has created an Economic Committee. By actively pursuing appropriate types of businesses that fit in the City, we can begin to build a base beyond roof tops. There’s not a lot of traffic in Ivins so the definition of Ivins being a destination community, commercially speaking, is an accurate statement. We are looking at the kind of business entities that will allow the value of your land to begin to develop quicker than relying on the number of roof tops to be in place. The committee wants to see to it that we enhance the businesses that exist, help them prosper by going out and bring in businesses that fit within the definition of the General Plan. The Veterans Nursing Home is a great example. It brings jobs, traffic and is not competing for existing services. He gave examples of associated businesses such as therapy, medical research and data centers, etc. It’s important that the overall vision is recognized.
Mike Guisinger expressed his appreciation to Council and Staff for getting the Veterans business to the City.
Aprile Beardall commented that commercial property taxes had tripled. She asked about taxation.
Adel Murphy explained that commercial property is taxed at 100% of the market value. A value is set and an Ivins tax rate is set. There are a lot of components involved. She explained the Truth and Taxation process.
Lance Bunnell, CEO at Fitness Ridge, commented that Fitness Ridge has approximately 2.5 million in payroll, employee 110 people, and 24 are local. Statistically, the payroll hits about six different merchants’ hands locally. We have researched twelve different places for the next location and out of all of them Ivins has a resource in hiking that no one can match. Malibu cannot match it and the next location is Peachtree, Georgia. The spa is the number two destination spa in North America which is based on 10% Fitness Ridge and 90% Ivins. As we have developed, there have been restraints. One problem is accepting a surety bond for improvements. The VA may have the same issue. This issue is on the City Council agenda. As a resort we have the same interest as the City and that is the place has to look nice. Some things such as parking and the closeness of buildings need to be tweaked.
Commissioner Benson felt that the commercial owners and Commissioners should do some homework. He likes the idea of having an educational opportunity and going over some of the guidelines the Commissioners have talked about. Also suggested inviting Form Tomorrow to a meeting and walk through some of the issues the Commissioners have discussed.
Chairman Reed suggested that the format be reviewing the current ordinance and Table of Uses and then schedule an educational meeting in June. A notice will be sent out to the commercial owners.
All of the commercial owners expressed their appreciation to the Commission for having a discussion on commercial property and giving them a chance to comment.
Troy Dennett explained that they don’t want their uses restricted or reduced. An educational meeting would be great but felt they need a rough draft of what the Commission has been working on. It’s hard for us to form an opinion without seeing a draft.
Chairman Reed commented that we have been trying to get input on the current ordinance before we do a rough draft. We want to see what direction the owners want us to head.
Aprile Beardall felt the education meeting is great because as they hear people talk about ideas for commercial property it has helped her think about her own land. We can learn and get ideas from each other on development.
Chairman Reed stated that we all have and interest in keeping Ivins unique and want people to come. If we are waiting for a number of roof tops to pop up to allow us to have a business, we will be waiting a lot longer. We need to make Ivins a place that people want to come to.