Vice Chair Scott reported that Chair Murphy submitted a revised Resort Mixed Use (RMU) zone definition and language to be included in Chapter 17 of the Zoning Ordinance (copies available at Ivins City offices).
Commissioner Benson suggested changing Section 3 (a) to read: "A minimum of 50% of the commercial structures must have a residential component and if it is a two-story structure the residential component needs to be on the upper floor" as per Commissioner Anderson’s suggestion from the previous meeting.
Commissioner Loris asked if it should say that residential cannot be on the first floor.
After some discussion not to allow residential on the first floor the definition was revised as follows:
"A minimum of 50% of the commercial structures must have a residential component and if the commercial structure is two or more stories no residential component will be on the ground floor."
Kevin Rudd commented that in most cases this would happen naturally.
Commissioner Benson mentioned that there would have to be a residential landing area within the commercial component but he did not think it would be considered as residential.
Vice Chair Scott referred to Section 3 (b): "The residential component required in Section 3 (a) shall not exceed 70% of the total building square footage," and he indicated that it seems to refer to a singular building. If there are multiple buildings, are we referring to the total square footage of all the buildings combined or just a singular building?
Commissioner Anderson commented that it is a singular building because we are allowing some buildings to be strictly commercial.
Vice Chair Scott asked if the goal is to keep it as a mixed use building.
Commissioner Anderson stated, "Yes" so that we don’t have all these big buildings around that are just residential. It takes away the walking and inviting people to the other building.
The consensus was that Section 3 (b) was okay as stated.
Vice Chair Scott referred to Chair Murphy’s caveat about having a minimum residential requirement. The original discussion required 25% of the commercial floor area then we considered 70%, etc.
Commissioner Anderson commented this brings up the question whether we should create more commercial or residential.
Commissioner Benson referred to Kevin Rudd’s previous comments that some of the parcels that are designated on the Land Use Map would be more desirous to open up residential.
Commissioner Anderson stated it seems that commercial is more beneficial than residential.
Commissioner Loris noted that the parcels are landlocked all around by residential. Those parcels will be mostly pushed toward residential.
Commissioner Anderson suggested having a maximum percentage for residential.
Commissioner Benson suggested a figure of 35%-45% has to be residential. That’s after building the residential buffer and not giving credit for the buffer.
Dale Coulam stated if the Commissioners felt that commercial is coming in any event, perhaps it’s not the minimum to be concerned about but rather the maximum. The definition specifies the percentage for a building, and now the Commissioners need to determine what’s the maximum or minimum or range for the entire complex. Some buildings could be 100% commercial, some are mixed use with no more than 70% residential in the building, there’s a buffer and excluding the buffer area what do the Commissioners want to see as far as the mixture of residential and commercial.
Commissioner Anderson suggested 50%-60% maximum residential for the overall project. It could go as high as 70%. If we want to encourage a little more commercial based on Kevin Rudd’s comments we could keep it at 50%-60% residential. The minimum is accounted for because they cannot have more 70%.
Vice Chair Scott explained that Section 3 (a) states a minimum which is: "A minimum of 50% of the commercial structures must have a residential component."
Commissioner Benson read the caveat submitted by Chair Murphy (a copy available at Ivins City offices).
After discussing some examples, they agreed that they still need a minimum and a maximum residential stated in the regulations. The Commissioners agreed to the following language for Section 3 (a):
The residential component shall be a minimum of 40% of the total building square footage and not to exceed a maximum of 60% residential.
Commissioner Benson asked Kevin Rudd if the above regulations speak to his concerns.
Kevin Rudd stated that ultimately the City Council would decide on the amount of commercial but it’s a good starting point. It’s a reasonable recommendation to make.
Dale Coulam referred to a previously proposed village concept that provided residential and a good commercial base to support the project. This proposed range encourages that type of concept. If a developer can draw more commercial from the outside and not so much within, they could go with a higher percentage of commercial which would be advantageous to the City. But a developer may think they can market residential faster to get some money. This gives the flexibility that we need without giving pure discretion.
Commissioner Benson asked if there should be a requirement, similar to the Professional and Research zone, that commercial needs to be there first or simultaneously before allowing the secondary uses. A developer could come in, build all the residential and leave the commercial land.
Commissioner Anderson explained that we cannot force commercial. It takes the residential component first and if the need is there commercial will come. Somebody has to subsidize the commercial to get it built.
Vice Chair Scott commented that the concern is a developer saying he will build half of the residential and half commercial but the commercial never gets built. But at least we have reserved that space for the commercial.
Commissioner Anderson indicated that’s what the Land Use Plan does. It reserves the area for when the need is there.
Commissioner Loris explained that there has to be a master plan.
Vice Chair Scott will rewrite the language and send it to Martha Wilson for distribution. After the Commissioners complete the RMU definition and the Professional and Research zone definition and uses, an ordinance will be created for these zones and the Table of Uses. The Commissioners will review the ordinance before it is submitted for public hearing.
Vice Chair Scott asked the Commissioners to comment on the definition and language for the Commercial Professional & Research zone.
Commissioner Anderson indicated that the definition refers to the term "educators." Therefore, does it allow a day care or preschool business as a use?
Commissioner Benson indicated that’s two types of uses: the primary use and a secondary use. A day care would be a secondary use. If there are several professional offices, etc., a day care would be nice.
Commissioner Anderson indicated that a day care could be a business that’s not just for the professionals working in that location but it could serve St. George, Santa Clara, etc. which would be a primary use.
Commissioner Loris’s vision is more medical and research professionals and a day care would not be included. The description is mostly about education and doing things mentally such as drafting designs, seeing clients, etc. but not a day care.
The Commissioners agreed that a preschool would be a primary use, and a day care is a secondary use.
Commissioner Benson read Chair Murphy’s statement on uses permitted from the minutes of October 2: "uses permitted such as administrative executives, professional and medical research offices, businesses of an office type nature, banking and financial institutions, general research that is not involved in any industrial processes, medical and biological laboratories, and real estate offices." These were the primary uses he envisioned.
The Commissioners discussed some secondary uses and also skilled construction and maintenance work which are generally thought of as trades or crafts. A related distinction would be that a professional does mainly mental or administrative work, as opposed to engaging in physical work.
Kevin Rudd asked if the retail component would be businesses that would provide for the primary uses but not be a place for a strip mall.
The consensus was the intent was not to have a strip mall and the retail uses would be serving the workers in that location.
Vice Chair Scott stated the best way to proceed was to take Chair Murphy’s comments from the minutes, plus the professional definition and trade definition and create a combination of the two with Commissioner Benson’s distinction of the primary and secondary uses. The revision will be submitted at the next meeting.
It was suggested that the Commissioners review the Table of Uses at the next meeting which would help determine the primary and secondary uses.
Dale Coulam favored the idea of having primary uses because we want to make sure the primary use goes in first followed by the secondary use, and it’s good to have the different classifications. He suggested listing some of the secondary uses but also state the uses it does not include such as industrial uses, sexually oriented businesses, etc.