Kevin Rudd presented the amendments to Chapters 18 (Multi-Family Design Guidelines) and 19 (Site Plan & Building Design Requirements). The current ordinance in Chapter 18 provided very strict measurement on the offsets of buildings. During a review of a recent application, Staff realized that these wall lengths and offsets made it difficult for architects to design a building. After discussion with the Planning Commission, it was determined that we should rewrite the ordinance in a way that it was not to be tied to a specific length.
This gives architects more flexibility in designing a building but still has the intent of the ordinance and still allows the Commission and Council to review the design review of the building.
Section 16.18.105 (4) (b) Architectural Detail was amended to be consistent with the change that the City Council made to Chapter 19.
Kevin Rudd commented the Council felt that it was too restrictive to require all sides to display a similar level of quality and architectural interest and that non-street facing sides of the building could have a lesser degree.
Chapter 19 deals with specific setbacks based upon building heights along major corridors within Ivins and amended as follows:
Section 16.19.102 (5) (a) was amended to identify the major corridors within the City (see amended ordinance for the listing).
A note was added that maximum and minimum heights shall not exceed those listed in other chapters and tables (a list of chapters was added).
Commissioner Anderson inquired as to why the list of corridors stopped at 200 East and Center Street instead of continuing to 600 West.
Kevin Rudd explained that between 200 East and 600 West on Center Street, the old section of town, there are a couple of vacant lots. The lots at 200 East and 200 West are small commercial lots and it could be difficult to comply with the requirements.
Commissioner Anderson noted that the old township ends at 200 West on Center but there is vacant land from 200 West to 600 West that he felt should be considered as a corridor and provide the views.
Kevin Rudd explained that two diagrams were added to show the setbacks and height limitations along the major corridors. Figure 2-A represents a maximum height line of 15 degree angle based on a level grade with a pitched roof and the second diagram represents a maximum height line of 15 degree angle based on a 8% slope. Figure 2-B represents how the 15 degree angle would affect the maximum height and setbacks of flat roofs and how it would affect the flat roofs based on an 8% slope.
Chair Loris opened the Public Hearing.
Stan Castleton with DDRM Company recently entered into a partnership with Allen Layton to develop the Layton property next to Tuacahn. They are a professional development company and have done about 5,000 hotel rooms around the country. Their most recent project is the Saint Regis in Park City. They try to marry the wishes of the hotel brands with the wishes of the City. He understands the intent of the ordinance and with the property next to Tuacahn there would be a few things to change. It does not impact them that much. However, his company is looking at another site in the City with an additional hospitality experience that would pretty much foreclose them coming to Ivins. The ordinance would not meet their standards. They focus on their street presence and recognition. This ordinance would really be tough on that project. Again, he understands the intent and it is admirable but it would impact who comes to Ivins. Our company likes to do more than one project in a location. He has found working with Disney in the past that doing multiple projects actually has a synergistic almost geometric affect on visitation. So the mix of what is here becomes the real attraction. So we are interested in doing a lot of things and there are not a lot of places to do it. That is our interest and focus.
Zack Renstrom with Bush & Gudgell Engineering asked how this would affect the current application that has been submitted.
Dale Coulam commented that if they already have an application submitted prior to the passage of a new ordinance, generally they would have vesting.
After no further response Chair Loris closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Murphy read the General Plan, Chapter 3 Visions and Goals, Natural Settings, "Preserve the natural beauty and views that give Ivins its unique identity, including the Red Mountain and the other natural hillsides that enclose the City, the natural washes, the lava beds, open spaces and the night sky" and under the Elements under Community Appearance Polices we talk about architectural design that says, "Encourage base design standards to ensure that the new buildings are good neighbors to existing development to ensure that it attracts the natural beauty of the area which can be achieved through low building heights, stepped building massing, protection of views, landscaping, lighting, etc." This explains why we are amending the ordinance. We are staying true to the General Plan.
Commissioner Scott commented that the General Plan is the Commission's guide and these changes follow the General Plan. We don't want to lose another development opportunity but we also want it to follow the General Plan.
Chair Loris referred to Commissioner's Anderson inquiry about including 200 East to 600 West as a corridor to be listed in Chapter 19.
Commissioner Anderson stated that there are a couple parcels that would be difficult to fall under the setbacks requirements but he would like to protect the rest of the corridor to 600 West. The school property on Center Street could trade their property.
Dale Coulam explained that schools have some exemptions and not all the requirements can be applied to schools. It's usually life safety, not aesthetics. He asked Commissioner Anderson if he was talking about protecting Center Street from 600 West all the way to the St. George border and was he referring to both the north side and south side of Center Street.
Commissioner Anderson stated that's how he interprets the ordinance.
Dale Coulam asked what was Commissioner Anderson trying to protect on the south side of Center. As Center gets to the St. George intersection there is quite a bit of bare space before it gets to the lava. The Western Corridor will be the best view of the lava because it would cut through the lava. Let's assume there was a development on the south side at the roundabout or going up the hill west are we talking about imposing view corridors at that location using the 15 degree angle as well?
Commissioner Anderson explained that it's not only views but more of the openness of the road is how he visualizes it. There's no particular view but just to keep from feeling like the buildings are coming in on us. That was his intent of the corridor listings.
Dale Coulam did not think that's what the ordinance states. He understood protecting views on the north side and as we get out to the west, it becomes more important but on the east side there is a lot of open space that could be developed before it gets to the lava. Some of that areas has been put into a conservancy easement already. The buildings cannot be pushed back into the lava nor does the Sensitive Lands Ordinance want it to. Several corridors have been listed to protect the views but he wasn't sure if the ordinance was clear.
Commissioner Anderson felt the purpose of the changes is to protect the corridors.
Dale Coulam asked if he was wanting to establish a fairly large setback regardless of view.
Commissioner Anderson commented he preferred a lower height setback along the corridors. It's not saying that they cannot build in an area but protect the openness. Maybe that's not the intent of all the Commissioners. It was what he was trying to accomplish.
Commissioner Loris referred to an example previously used. The clinic is close to the road but it was 25' to 30' tall which seemed massing on top of pedestrians. We used the view corridor as the basis to start the discussion and we found the elevation changed from Center Street up to the Red Mountain. The angle was 15 degrees and from that we moved onto what would that accomplish on both sides of the road with setbacks, massing, etc.
Dale Coulam suggested massaging the language in the ordinance to clarify the intent. The ordinance seems to be based on views and from what's being said there may be another basis that's not mentioned in the ordinance.
After further discussion of the intent and reviewing the ordinance it was decided that Figures 2-A and 2-B were intended to preserve significant views, openness and minimize massing."
Commissioner Anderson commented that anywhere it says "views" it needs to say "views, openness and minimize massing."
Chair Loris asked if the Commissioners want to add the corridor between 200 East and 600 West.
Commissioner Murphy felt they could since they have a provision for the smaller lots along Center Street because they cannot with the requirements.
Commissioner Anderson stated it should extend from 200 East all the way to 800 West.
Commissioner Scott stated that makes it consistent on all the corridors by running it the length of the corridor.
Kevin Rudd clarified that the reason that was left out of the list there are a number of smaller lots in the old township. Most of the other corridors listed have large parcels of property. There are no small 10,000 square foot lots along those corridors listed that would have to comply with these requirements. It would be more reasonable to go from 200 West to 800 West and leave out the old township area.
Commissioner Anderson suggested excluding the residential lots only in the old township from 200 East to 200 West.
Dale Coulam suggested excluding residential lots in the Old Township Overlay."
The Commissioners were in agreement to add 200 East to 800 West to the list of corridors and make the other amendment changes as mentioned.
Dale Coulam will make the amendments to the ordinance.
MOTION: Commissioner Adel Murphy moved to recommend the proposed amendments to Ivins City Code, Zoning Regulations Title 16, Chapter 18, Multi-Family Residential Design Guidelines and Standards, Section 16.18.105 Building Design and Chapter 19 Site Plan and Building Design Requirements, Section 16.19.102 Site Planning Requirements, and Section 16.19.103 Building Design Requirements as amended. Ivins City, applicant
SECOND: Commissioner Mike Scott
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Chair Jeffrey Loris |
AYE |
| Commissioner Lance Anderson |
AYE |
| Commissioner Adel Murphy |
AYE |
| Commissioner Bryan Pack |
AYE |
| Commissioner Mike Scott |
AYE |