The meeting was called to order at
05:30 p.m. All present included
Chair Adel Murphy,
Commissioner Lance Anderson,
Commissioner Todd Benson,
and Commissioner Mike Scott.
Commissioner Scott referred to the citizen comments during the public hearing and categorized them as follows:
1. Expectations and promises: Some people expected there would be no future development on pristine desert or if there was future development, it would look like their development or were told by realtors, etc. that no one would be building next door to them on these parcels. These are issues that the individuals would have to deal with personally. However, Ivins is very transparent in that there is a General Plan, Land Use Plan and Zoning maps that have been in place for everyone to see for a long time. He appreciates people's frustrations and concerns about maybe being led astray but that hasn't been by the City.
2. Zoning issues versus the HOA, ACC or CC&R's: There were concerns whether the developments would look the same as the current developments, and would only 30% of the property be disturbed and the rest be undisturbed. Those would be regulations in the community's CC&R's. Other concerns were parking cars outside versus requirements to park inside. Again, these are CC&R's issues and the City does not enforce HOA or CC&R's requirements.
3. Traffic, noise and construction activity occurring as a result to more development and the over use of Paiute Drive: The Transportation Master Plan anticipates connection of 450 North to Kwavasa. He asked how that would tie into future development.
Kevin Rudd explained that 450 North and the roads on the Transportation Master Plan will be built as development occurs along those roads. The City does not feel it is necessary to develop those roads at this time.
Dale Coulam commented that generally the City does not build roads, rather it maintains roads. Development puts in the roads. If a road is public, we cannot restrict the use of that road. There were some requests to make a zone change conditional upon a road being put in but the City cannot do that. In the Subdivision Ordinance there is a Development Agreement where plans are submitted and sometimes there are concessions put in the agreement but at the zoning stage it is for the Commission to decide on the appropriate density for the property.
4. Environment, ground water runoff from more development and wildlife that relies on the wash and the desert: Again, under the Land Use Plan these areas are designated for development. He asked if the City has a plan in place to deal with groundwater runoff.
Kevin Rudd stated every residential or commercial development has a review process that requires the developer to submit a drainage study. The engineers are able to determine the hard surfaces, how much runoff it will produce, and how it will be put into the City's storm drainage whether it's an actual storm drain or a wash.
5. Building on the wash areas: FEMA indicates the wash areas on their maps and where building could not occur. Kevin Rudd explained that FEMA regulates the distances, etc.
6. Issue about this rezone not following the General Plan: It was suggested that the changes were higher density than the Land Use Plan showed. That occurred because of the first map that went out which was confusing. He noted that he saw one area where some of the property in the rezone application would be higher density than we show on the Land Use Plan which is between west 200 North and west 200 South and south 600 West and south 800 West. Some of the area shows Low Density Residential on the Land Use Plan which would be a maximum 2.32 units per acre but the proposed rezone is RE-12.5 which is 3.4 units per acre. The rezoned area also shows on the Land Use Plan Medium and High Density Residential. It's a combination of the three.
The Commissioners reviewed the map and determined there is a bubble of high density residential that extends down in the majority of the property.
Commissioner Scott indicated that all the proposed zone changes fit within the densities of the Land Use Plan.
Commissioner Benson understood that the developer laid out what they felt was the most ideal zones for these locations, and they had to choose the zoning that fits the smallest lot. He asked if he understood that correctly.
Dale Coulam stated that is correct. If they were to base it on the average lot size, they could go to a lower density but because of the smallest lot within the plan they had to go to the next higher density.
Commissioner Benson noted that not every lot would be at the higher density.
Dale Coulam explained that the Concept Plan does not show every lot at the higher density.
Chair Murphy indicated that other concerns were about building on the berm, the noise and questions about the Sensitive Lands Ordinance which would apply if the property is on sensitive lands. There have been public hearings on all of these areas when the Land Use Plan was approved. All the blue (RE-15) and green (RE-20) areas proposed are earmarked as Low Density Residential which the zoning request fit into Low Density Residential. The orange (RE-12.5) area is earmarked on the Land Use Plan as High Density Residential what is proposed is actually Medium Density Residential. Given the fact that a lot of the concerns will be addressed when there are development plans that deal with building in washes and the FEMA rules, she did not see a compelling reason to deny the zone changes. In regards to the proposed blue (RE-15) area next to Willow Springs Subdivision, she asked if the developer could go up a zone to RE-17.5. Would that help to mitigate some of the issues? She asked for some discussion from the other Commissioners although the proposed zones do fit within the Land Use Plan.
Commissioner Scott felt that if it fits within the guidelines of the Land Use Plan, we should go with it.
Chair Murphy stated that there were several comments requesting that the zoning match the existing zone in their subdivision. If we did that from the start of the City, we would have one zone throughout the entire City. It's not a feasible thing for the City to do.
There were no further comments from the Commissioners.
MOTION: Commissioner Mike Scott moved to recommend approval on Proposed Zone Changes from RA-1 (Residential Agriculture Min. 1-Acre) and RA-5 (Residential Agriculture Min. 5-Acres) to RE-12.5 (Residential Estates Min. 12,500 sq ft), RE-15 (Residential Estates Min. 15,000 sq ft), and RE-20 (Residential Estates Min. 20,000 sq ft) on various parcels adjoining the Kayenta and Taviawk Subdivisions. Kayenta Development, Inc., applicant
SECOND: Commissioner Todd Benson
VOTE: The motion carried.
| Chair Adel Murphy |
AYE |
| Commissioner Todd Benson |
AYE |
| Commissioner Mike Scott |
AYE |
| Commissioner Lance Anderson |
ABSTAIN |
| Commissioner Jeffrey Loris |
ABSENT |
Chair Murphy asked that the Commissioners dispense of the proposed zone change to RE-20 since they have approved the zone changes for the previous proposed zones unless someone has a question. The zone change is appropriate and is Low Density on the Land Use Plan. The Commissioners were in agreement and moved to the discussion on the zone change to Resort Commercial (RC). There are two parcels that are being proposed as RC.
Dale Coulam explained that on the Land Use Plan map there is a bubble. The bubbles are intended to be a little flexible. It does not follow property lines and the current RC zoning does include a portion of one of the lots at issue. Zoning tends to follow lot lines more so than the Land Use Plan.
Kevin Rudd referred to the smaller parcel and explained that the proposed zoning does cut across the bottom portion of a lot and across Sally Morrow's lot.
Chair Murphy noted that the larger parcel contains a fairly large wash and is close to the homeowners. A comment during the public hearing was that the developer wanted to fill in the wash. There will have to be some creativeness in placement of buildings.
Kevin Rudd stated that the City has not analyzed it at this point. The drainage will have to be addressed when it is developed.
Dale Coulam noted that sometimes a wash can be filled but it is something that the developer would have to design and provide for when they come in with a plan.
Commissioner Benson indicated that most comments were about the smaller parcel. The smaller parcel is not located within the bubble of commercial shown on the Land Use Plan Map. However, on the current Zone Map the hatched out area doesn't quite match the bubble from the Land Use Plan either. There are portions that were not in the bubble that have already been added to the commercial property. He asked if that was correct.
Kevin Rudd stated that is correct and referred to the map and explained where the commercial area is located.
Commissioner Benson noted that the bubble is a little flexible, and the City has granted zoning outside of the bubble. It's not like we are trying to grab a piece of property that's in the middle it's adjacent to the RC zone. The map indicates there is a portion that is not included in the Land Use Plan bubble but is part of the Zoning Map as commercial.
Commissioner Scott agreed and stated that the General Plan looks to putting the uses next to each other rather than creating small pockets of commercial. Other concerns about the two commercial parcels were they don't fall under the HOA regulations. That is not something the Commission can deal with but commercial property does come under City requirements. The residents would still have a say over heights, color, etc. through the Ivins City requirements.
Kevin Rudd stated that is correct. The City does not regulate the time limit on residential property as far a putting in landscapes or house colors. But under commercial the City regulates every aspect, the color, the landscaping, the lighting, etc. These items are submitted to this body and the Council during the plan review.
Commissioner Scott stated that the Commissioners were asked to locate the commercial somewhere else. Again, we have to look at the Land Use Plan and this is an area designated for it. He supports the zone change.
MOTION: Commissioner Todd Benson moved to recommend the Proposed Zone Changes from RE-43 (Residential Estates minimum lot size 43,000 sq ft) to RC (Resort Commercial) and RE-25 (Residential Estates minimum lot size 25,000 sq ft) to RE-20 (Residential Estates minimum lot size 20,000 sq ft) on 1.99 acres adjoining Coyote Gulch and 10.71 acres adjoining Taviawk Subdivision. Kayenta Development, Inc., applicant
SECOND: Commissioner Mike Scott
VOTE: The motion carried.
| Chair Adel Murphy |
AYE |
| Commissioner Todd Benson |
AYE |
| Commissioner Mike Scott |
AYE |
| Commissioner Lance Anderson |
ABSTAIN |
| Commissioner Jeffrey Loris |
ABSENT |
Kevin Rudd explained that the first section is a description of each of the commercial zones.
Commercial Neighborhood: A residential component was added. An owner can have an apartment or living area above the business when the business is in a residential neighborhood.
Community Commercial: There were no significant changes.
Resort Commercial: There were no significant changes.
Resort Mixed Use: This is a new zone. This was added to the Land Use Plan several years ago and needed a zone created. It allows a mixed use of residential along with the commercial uses and requires a residential component with it. Also, the Commission is proposing that if the Resort Mixed Use is adjacent to a residential zone, that the developer creates a residential buffer along the property line. Example: If the zone is R-1-10, the developer would build some residential homes to create a buffer which is good planning.
Commercial Professional Research: This is a new zone. It is a new designation on the Land Use Plan that deals with Professional and Research and the use chart spells out the uses for this zone.
Commercial Light Manufacturing: Previously, the City had an Industrial Zone. This zone has never been industrial and has always been light use. The Land Use Plan was changed to Commercial Light Manufacturing. Under this zone there is minimal manufacturing.
Chapter 17: This is a new chapter and will have some Resort Mixed Use requirements spelled out such as the buffer being required when it abuts a residential zone. Also, the amount of residential component required in the rest of the development and a requirement to be an actual mixed use that some of the commercial has to have residential within the same building.
Site Plan and Building Design Requirement: This is an update of the existing section on the design requirements. The City uses this chapter to review commercial projects. This includes Building Location, Site Plans, Pedestrian Areas, Mix of Scales, Site Design and Layout (Arrangement, Open Space, Site Access, Trash and Refuse Collection, Buffers, Noise, Off Street Parking, Pedestrian Egress) Views, Landscaping
Pedestrian Access: The Commission decided to have a natural requirement to provide for pedestrian access from the street. In the west planning is more vehicle oriented than pedestrian access. From the City right-of-way, streets and sidewalks on commercial projects a pedestrian walkway will be added that is clearly identified so that pedestrians can get from the public right-of-way to an entrance to the store through a clearly defined walk-in area. The Figure 19-2 lays out the dimensions for pedestrian access.
Landscape design: The City regulates commercial landscape designs. The City also regulates Higher Density Residential regarding landscaping and architectural design of the buildings. There have been some changes on the landscaping section.
Off Street Buffering of Parking areas: Some changes were made.
Building Design Requirements: A commercial building cannot be a square box. There needs to be some definition in the building. The walls have to be offset to provide some definition. There has to be a minimal variation in the walls for every certain amount of distance. Examples are shown.
Upper Levels: The second story level cannot exceed more than 75% of the ground area to avoid roof dominance.
Mechanical Equipment: Changes were made to this section to define how mechanical equipment needs to be screened. There may need to have additional parapets on the roof to help screen the equipment.
Building Materials: This section remained the same.
Tables of Uses: This is the table referred to if someone wants to start a business. The table spells out what type of uses are allowed in Ivins. Two new zones were created which are Resort Mixed Use (RMU) and Professional and Research (P). The table also shows the Conditional Use Classes. Classes I and II Staff can approve. Class III, IV and V are uses that come before the Planning Commission or City Council for approval.
Art Studio and Art Workshop: These uses were modified to clarify the differences.
Professional and Research: There are primary uses allowed and there are secondary uses. The primary uses have to be built first and then the secondary uses can come in after the primary use. Examples: Churches are allowed in any zones. A day care and preschool would be a secondary use. A contractor's office would be a primary use.
Cultural Event Center: This is a new category. This came about when Kayenta talked to the City Council about having an indoor theater. We realized that we did not have that use in the Table of Uses. The original planner and the City did not have a vision of a Megaplex theater, etc. and this use was left off. But the City felt an indoor theater as proposed by Kayenta is desirable use. This category would allow for that type of facility.
Commissioner Anderson felt it should be a Class IV instead of a Class V to match the Reception Center category.
Kevin Rudd explained that the Planning Commission makes the decision on a Class IV but on a Class V it goes to the City Council as a recommendation from the Planning Commission.
Dwelling, Single Family and Two Family: These uses were added. These uses are allowed in the Mixed Use Overlay and the Resort Commercial Mixed Use.
Dwelling, Neighborhood Commercial: This use is allowed as a second story above commercial.
Recycling Binnies: This was added to regulate the use of binnies and a redefinition has been added for a Recycling Collection Center.
Chair Murphy opened the Public Hearing.
Kathy Bryant's question referred to the Table of Use under Art Studio and Art Workshop. She is one of the business owners in the Art Village since 2001, and under both categories it states that the process may not create smoke, fumes, noise and nuisance or health safety hazards outside the building. In a pottery studio, there are kilns and that is the nature of the beast. There is some smoke and fumes created by the firing process. She asked how this would impact an existing business.
Kevin Rudd stated that this language existed in the ordinance prior to this change. He felt it was not meant to exclude the use. We have to look at it based on a nuisance and health hazard. It would have to be something significant enough that it is affecting the safety and well being of a neighbor.
Dale Coulam concurred that it refers to the nuisance issue and producing odors or fumes that are a nuisance. If it has been in a business and a zone change comes about, the business has a legal nonconforming status and can continue to operate at that property. It does not change your business or make the business illegal.
Commissioner Anderson noted that he has been at the business and never noticed the fumes or the smoke.
Richard Bryant commented on the change of the Conditional Use on the theater from a Class V to IV. He asked that it stay a Class V so that the community can engage a little bit more. Also, increasing the art village impacts the nearby neighbors especially with the zone changes there will be more people. However, he is not opposed to the theater and thinks it's a great idea. But he wants the citizens to be able to have input to both the Planning Commission and City Council. It would bring another 100+ people a night into the Kayenta area and commercial is located on two sides of residential area.
John Curry thanked the City for furnishing the Planning Commission agenda. Under Item 4 Public Hearings, it appears there are 4-5 items that are not public hearings. He asked for consideration to revising the headings of the agendas.
Chair Murphy advised that the public hearing was closed at the last meeting on two of the zone changes and this was a discussion on the public hearings. Chair Murphy closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Benson referred to the Cultural Event Center category and indicated that he had no problem with keeping it at a Class V Conditional Use.
Chair Murphy and Commissioner Scott agreed with leaving it as a Class V.
Commissioner Anderson preferred the category to be Class IV because the review is on the forum and not the design.
The Cultural Event Center category was left as a Class V Conditional Use within the Table of Uses.
MOTION: Commissioner Mike Scott moved to approve recommendations on the proposed amendments to the Ivins City Commercial Zoning Districts, Commercial Site Plan and Building Design Requirements, and Table 33-2 Table of Uses. Ivins City, applicant
SECOND: Commissioner Todd Benson
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Chair Adel Murphy |
AYE |
| Commissioner Lance Anderson |
AYE |
| Commissioner Todd Benson |
AYE |
| Commissioner Mike Scott |
AYE |
| Commissioner Jeffrey Loris |
ABSENT |
Kevin Rudd reported that the two lot subdivision is located on Wcasa Way which is a private road. The road and subdivision was approved during the Preliminary Plan process. The cross hatch on the plan is a "no build zone" because there is a wash area that falls within the sensitive lands. During the original review of the Preliminary Plan, the area was defined and it cannot be disturbed. The Final Plat does comply with the Preliminary Plan and Staff recommends approval.
MOTION: Commissioner Todd Benson moved to approve the Final Plat for Taviawk Subdivision Phase 9-I located on Shinava Drive and Wicasa Way. Kayenta Development, applicant.
SECOND: Commissioner Mike Scott
VOTE: The motion carried.
| Chair Adel Murphy |
AYE |
| Commissioner Todd Benson |
AYE |
| Commissioner Mike Scott |
AYE |
| Commissioner Lance Anderson |
ABSTAIN |
| Commissioner Jeffrey Loris |
ABSENT |