CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS:
The meeting was called to order at
05:30 p.m. All present included
Commissioner Todd Benson,
Commissioner Jeffrey Loris,
Commissioner Adel Murphy,
and Commissioner Mike Scott.
STAFF: City Manager Judy Gubler, City Attorney Dale Coulam, Building and Zoning Administrator Kevin Rudd, and Deputy City Recorder Martha Wilson.
AUDIENCE: Grover Fridley, Lance Anderson, Claudette Larsen and Mayor Hart.
Vice Chair Murphy acknowledged there was a quorum.
Commissioner Benson led the Flag Salute.
Commissioner Loris led the Invocation.
There were no disclosures or conflict of interests with this agenda.
|
2) |
REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS (None) |
|
3) |
BUSINESS LICENSES (None) |
Dale Coulam reported that the Commission reviewed the proposed language at the previous meeting. This amendment requires a public hearing at the Planning Commission and City Council. The Commission will make a recommendation to the Council and then the Council will hold a public hearing and make a decision. The proposed addendum to the Transportation Master Plan indicates that at intersections where some type of traffic control is needed the preferred traffic control would be a roundabout. However, a roundabout may not apply in every case, and the City would have to look at the feasibility as to whether a roundabout will work.
Vice Chair Murphy opened the Public Hearing.
Lance Anderson asked if these roundabouts would be put into the capital facilities plan so that when the community grows they will be built at that time. Otherwise, he was in support of roundabouts.
Commissioner Loris advised that there were two places mentioned by Chuck Gillette where roundabouts might not be feasible. One is the intersection by Vista School and Puerto Drive. It doesn’t seem that areas already developed would be feasible to have a roundabout. But, he was also talking about a roundabout at 200 East and 400 South even though there is some development already there.
Lance Anderson encouraged the City to offset the intersections similar to Docena Drive.
After no further comments Vice Chair Murphy closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Benson asked Staff to address the question about the capital facilities plan.
Kevin Rudd explained that the City’s policy is to let development build roads, if possible, rather than the City building the roads. Example, the roundabout on 400 West and the roundabout by The Reserve was built largely by developers participating.
Dale Coulam explained that generally it would become part of the Capital Facilities Plan. The City tries to incorporate what is in the Transportation Master Plan. When a development comes in, the City informs the developers of the type of road or intersection that is planned. The Capital Facilities Plan may also be used to develop impact fees.
Commissioner Scott felt that the issues brought up by Chuck Gillette and Commissioner Loris at the last meeting were addressed in a paragraph within the addendum. He was okay with the addendum.
Commissioner Loris asked if there were any issues with the intersections shown in the Transportation Master Plan.
Kevin Rudd commented that several intersections on Highway 91 show a traffic light and/or a roundabout. There has not been an adequate study to see if a roundabout is feasible. The Western Corridor crosses Highway 91 and will be a major intersection if there is not an overpass. The proposed locations for roundabouts and/or traffic signals are located on Figure 12 of the Transportation Master Plan.
Dale Coulam explained that Chuck Gillette did not feel it was necessary to amend the Transportation Map because this language requires an analysis to determine if a roundabout is feasible.
MOTION: Commissioner Jeffrey Loris moved to recommend approval of the proposed amendment to the Ivins Transportation Master Plan of the General Plan.
SECOND: Commissioner Todd Benson
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Commissioner Todd Benson |
AYE |
| Commissioner Jeffrey Loris |
AYE |
| Commissioner Adel Murphy |
AYE |
| Commissioner Mike Scott |
AYE |
| Chairman John Reed |
ABSENT |
Vice Chair Murphy indicated that the Commissioners received a revised copy of Chapter 19 from Chairman Reed that had a few notations and changes from the last meeting. She asked the Commissioners that were present at the last meeting to give an update on how far they got with the revisions.
Commissioner Benson advised that they reviewed Purpose and Building Design sections through Item (d) Building Massing. The list in the minutes refer to some of the changes suggested such as combining Item (a) Horizontal Emphasis and (c) Roof Dominance and including those items under Item (v) Roof Silhouettes.
Commissioner Loris explained that they discussed three different areas on different ways to emphasize the horizontal/vertical elements of the roof. It was a matter of consolidating those into one section even though they were discussing two different ways of placing the roof. They discussed that the roofs should not dominate doable space. Also, Kevin Rudd talked about the maximum heights of the buildings being 25’ and 35’.
After reviewing Chairman Reed’s revised comments, Commissioner Benson felt that all the revisions discussed had not been included in the revised document. Also, in the last meeting Chairman Reed indicated that he was going to research some verbiage from other cities and forward it to the Commissioners to review.
Vice Chair Murphy suggested tabling the agenda since some of the members had some time restraints and until they received all the comments from Commissioner Reed.
The Commissioners agreed to table this agenda item until November 1, 2011.
Commissioner Scott distributed at the last meeting in August some of the community planning materials that he had received about "Fourteen Ways to Build a Better Commission." The Commission is doing most of these but the items that stood out to discuss and decide whether or not to do were:
Item 4, Annually reexamine what you are doing as a commission, how well we are doing it and how to do it better;
Item 5, Outline a year’s work active planning and stick to it. The Commission has been working on a major project with the commercial zones of which we may not be dealing with much longer. In addition, we deal with whatever comes to us which is not a good approach to doing business. If we had a plan of what we want to address next year, it would be useful.
Item 8, Consider a public forum every year; and
Item 11, Visit other communities as a commission to see what they are doing.
These items were brought forward to get a sense from the Commission as to whether or not these items are worth pursuing, and if so how do we implement them.
Dale Coulam felt the four items pointed out by Commissioner Scott where worthy for overall discussion but some of the points on the list apply to a large city and not to a smaller city.
Commissioner Scott stated that the question is, "Are these good ideas and if they are how do we get them on our agenda so that they get implemented?" If they are not good ideas, we just move on.
Vice Chair Murphy felt that Item 4 & 5 would be good to review at the end of this year since the Commission will be wrapping up the discussions on commercial zones.
Dale Coulam commented that the Commission did what is suggested in Item 8 when they had a public forum during the commercial review. It was opened up as a public forum but there was a lot of confusion on the part of the public in not knowing what the Commission wanted to hear from them. It seemed that the public wanted to hear where the Commission was headed before they commented. If the Commission is going to outline a plan for the year or if they take on a project, the Commission could ask the public to come and make comments or ask if they think we should be looking at other items. This could be done at the beginning of the year and see what kind of response the Commission gets.
Commissioner Scott liked Dale Coulam’s suggestion. He asked if they should put Item 4 and 5 on the agenda for discussion.
After some discussion as to when to put these items on the agenda, it was decided to put the discussion on the December 13, 2011 agenda, and if need be it could be pushed to another meeting. They wanted to wrap up the discussions on Chapter 19 before reexamining what and how the Commission is doing.
Kevin Rudd referred to Item 11 and suggested that the Commissioners visit Santa Clara Commission’s meeting. He will check on the meeting times for Santa Clara and report back to the Commission.
It was suggested that the Commissioners could go as a work meeting or go individually to the Santa Clara’s meeting. St. George’s meeting can be viewed on the website.
MOTION: Commissioner Todd Benson moved to approve the Ivins City Planning Commission minutes for October 4, 2011.
SECOND: Commissioner Jeffrey Loris
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Commissioner Todd Benson |
AYE |
| Commissioner Jeffrey Loris |
AYE |
| Commissioner Adel Murphy |
AYE |
| Commissioner Mike Scott |
AYE |
| Chairman John Reed |
ABSENT |
|
A. |
Planning Commission (None) |
Kevin Rudd reported that the Sensitive Lands Committee is an active committee made up of Chuck Gillette, myself and three citizens. At the last Council meeting, Chuck Gillette reported that the committee felt that the Sensitive Lands Ordinance needs to be reviewed particularly relating to commercial. When the Sensitive Lands Ordinance was written, it was more to do with residential than commercial. The Council directed Staff to forward the review to this body. At the next meeting, Chuck Gillette will make a presentation. He will go over the Sensitive Lands comments and then he will ask the Commission to set a formal meeting to start a review of the ordinance. This will take several months to review. There is commercial property located in the Sensitive Lands area. He suggested that the Commissioners read through the ordinance prior to the meeting.
|
D. |
City Attorney, Dale Coulam (None) |
1. Report and presentation on Sensitive Lands Committee.
2. Continue discussion of the Ivins City Zoning Ordinance and review Chapter 9, Design Guidelines.
3. Discuss Item 4 & 5 on "Building a Better Commission" on December 13.
MOTION: Commissioner Todd Benson moved to adjourn
SECOND: Commissioner Jeffrey Loris
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Commissioner Todd Benson |
AYE |
| Commissioner Jeffrey Loris |
AYE |
| Commissioner Adel Murphy |
AYE |
| Commissioner Mike Scott |
AYE |
| Chairman John Reed |
ABSENT |
The meeting adjourned at 5:58 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Martha S. Wilson, CMC
Deputy City Recorder