The Commissioners discussed the comments from the work meeting with the commercial property owners that was held on April 19, 2011.
Chairman Reed commented that the meeting was lacking a good statement of purpose and he felt that the Commissioners need to work on that before another work meeting. He suggested that the Commissioners focus on three things: The Scope of Work, Specification and Product. The Scope of Work is to review the Ivins City Zoning Ordinance and update it to match the General Plan. The language needs to be refined to make it more accessible to commercial development, match the intent of the ordinance and intent of the General Plan.
The Commissioners were in agreement with the definition of the Scope of Work. They revisited the Commercial and Business sections of the General Plan located on Page 18-19 and Page 24 (a copy is available at Ivins City offices and on the internet).
Commissioner Benson commented that the property owners were stuck on uses and couldn’t say what they wanted to do with their property until someone was willing to purchase the property and design it. Therefore, the owners didn’t comment on the technical aspects of parking, profiles, pedestrian friendly, etc.
Chairman Reed explained that the uses are also guided by the General Plan such as core commercial and neighborhood commercial areas. In addition to the above mentioned Scope of Work, there needs to be a review of Section 19 Design Guidelines, the Table of Uses and review General Standards Chapter 11 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Commissioner Murphy felt that it was important that the pages in the General Plan are distributed or read before the meeting. It sets the essence of what the Commission is trying to do. The owners were stuck on the fact that they didn’t know what they wanted to do with the property until someone purchased it. But they didn’t want any limits put on the property.
Chairman Reed felt that public input could be done when the Commission has a rough draft. Any input should be in harmony with the General Plan. The Zoning Ordinance falls short of being specific. An ordinance should say what the City wants, what is required and be clear. It needs to be spelled out and, if not, left out of the ordinance.
Commissioner Benson questioned how they could get the commercial property owners past the general process and Table of Uses and get to the technical aspects. He suggested giving an example of a piece of property and walking them through a commercial neighborhood block showing setbacks, etc.
Chairman Reed felt that was beyond the scope of the Commission. The Scope of Work is to revise the ordinance to match the General Plan. If we want to take on a commercial education class, it would be nice but he did not see that as part of the role of the Planning Commission. All the information is available on the internet. The owners need to review the information. It depends on how much someone wants to be involved.
Commissioner Benson understood that the work meeting was held to get comments on the difficult part of the ordinance such as technical questions on parking, setbacks, etc.
Chairman Reed commented that was the idea. But they almost have to be a design professional to ask those technical questions. When Commission McDonald was on the Commission, he asked the Commission to invite the owners in and listen to what they have to say. We tried that but we found it’s not that easy. He felt the next step is to have a rough draft, have a public hearing and receive input back. If someone wants government to work, they need to be involved.
Judy Gubler commented that there wasn’t a clear purpose for the meeting and there was confusion. However, there was discussion about having an educational meeting. She suggested that the Commissioners determine whether the educational meeting should be property specific, a civic process such as how the Planning Commission works or if the Commissioners want to know specific things such as building heights, parking (front or back), walkability, etc. Chairman Reed saw an educational meeting as reviewing the commercial section of the General Plan, the current Zoning Ordinance and zoning, and Table of Uses. The Commission doesn’t have a rough draft specific enough for the commercial property owners to comment on.
Commissioner Murphy commented that the original idea was to gather the property owners to see what ideas they had for their property. But then the City Council members wanted to see some specifics. The property owners do not know what they want to do with their property but they also did not want the City telling them what they can’t do. The owners did not come with enough ideas.
Chairman Reed felt that the Commission is trying to accommodate the owners but the meeting should be within the Scope of Work. He did not want to go into another meeting without specific focus and specific objectivity.
Judy Gubler commented that commercial owners did request a draft of the ordinance to respond to. Maybe the Commissioners should think about the specifics that are within the Commission’s framework that you would like input on.
Chairman Reed felt they should go through the educational process but the time for input is when they have a rough draft. At present there is not a rough draft compiled to go through.
After further discussion, Judy Gubler suggested having Staff prepare a presentation on the general process using Power Point. A draft of the PowerPoint will be forwarded to the Commissioners before the work meeting. The tentative work meeting date is June 14, 2011 but will be discussed further at the next Commission meeting.