Dale Coulam stated this section needed clarification so we would know true offset on ridgelines are required. It now says the same lengths used for determining the minimum number of wall offsets shall also apply in determining the minimum number of roof offsets. There is a two-foot separation for walls and 12 inch minimum for roof offsets. It previously said parapets for flat roofs or eave lines for pitched roofs shall be 12". Now it says for ridgelines and eave lines for pitched roofs shall be 12" or 5%, whichever is greater. We have made clear that there are two different roof types. This applies to both roof types. It did not specifically mention ridgelines before. It went on to say "the use of front-facing gables, dormers, hip-roof formations may be regarded as." He has added in "considered in determining if the required offsets have been provided." That helps break up the variations to the ridgelines and the eave lines. On pitched formations he added "to ridgelines and eavelines." This is to clarify areas that have been vague. Is this close enough to set for a Public Hearing at the next meeting? Commissioner Lance Anderson stated that the eave line was never important. Ridgeline was what we meant all along. Commissioner Jeff Loris stated that 4th line down, we had also talked about horizontal planes being walls and vertical planes being roof and he would like to add "horizontal" wall offsets and "vertical" roof offsets. That would help to clarify them. Commissioner Doug Clifford stated that the lengths are not called out in this section. Should we add that to this paragraph or reference it? Dale Coulam stated Section 103.1(ii) is wall variations. We could indicate that section number. Chairman Bryan Pack stated we will set it for Public Hearing.
Dale Coulam stated that there was homework to do, but the Planning Commission didn't like 15 units per acre as a base density being allowed. You recently had one at 9 that you felt was too high of a density. On maximum density bonuses, these design incentives could use some fleshing out. Commissioner Lance Anderson stated more important than how many units, is the open space. Mike Rodriguez stated our recent developments have averaged 9 to 11 units per acre. We have parameters in our code that restrict how large these buildings and the individual dwelling units can be. Commissioner Lance Anderson stated quantity is not as important as the height, the length, the open space, the parking. Commissioner Bob Morris stated we have talked about making it a low number and then incentive to get bigger. Dale Coulam stated that is what our ordinance currently does, but for example, design criteria for usable open space. It says 'may include.' So these items were not required. We need to think about what constitutes open space and look at the draft ordinance that he left blanks for them to fill in and look at some of the density bonuses that developers can get. They can go from 15 to 30 under the existing ordinance. Commissioner Doug Clifford stated if we start with an analysis of what we want on a site and then had guidance on that the number would pop out. You can only get so much sq ft on an acre. Dwelling and parking a certain size, parking, streets, and what recreational open space in that area. The number will come back. Commissioner Lance Anderson stated we can define units if we say what is a reasonable size. Mike Rodriguez stated in an RM zone which could be apartments. Mostly what we are seeing is townhomes in the Townhome zone. In an apartment project you are going to get more dense. But that is not the kind of product being proposed in Ivins. Chairman Bryan Pack stated that this ordinance doesn't distinguish between zones. We could split out maximum and minimum densities for each zone. Commissioner Lance Anderson stated we are just not getting any recreation areas. Commissioner Jeff Loris inquired what is the benefit? Where is the incentive for developers to use this? Commissioner Lance Anderson stated if we say 7 and want to get 10 they need to build their units tighter and have area outside for people. Commissioner Jeff Loris stated you want to create a micro-city itself. Dale Coulam stated these projects we have listed off are zoned Multi-Family so they have a longer building, but they chose to put two-car garages in. Red Mountain Vistas is a Townhome zone. Kanta was a Multi-Family, and Sage Villas was Multi-Family. Robert Ence was Multi-Family and the parking was outside with no garage. Commissioner Doug Clifford stated that it seems counter-intuitive for us to say if the developer adds density they can have these features, but they can't really, because they added all these features, now they can't get the density. Maybe the way to approach this is to penalize people who are coming in with a plan with just open space. It needs to be planned open space. Give them a density bonus for putting money into the development for a better quality recreational aspect. It costs money to put in courts, pagodas, trees. It all costs money. If the developer is going to do that they get the density. Back off our basic density and so less than 10, and move it more towards 10 or 11 if they put in a well planned open space area in their subdivision. Commissioner Lance Anderson stated there are two types of open space and amenities to focus on, for those who are driving by and the other is for those living there. Chairman Bryan Pack stated that he would like to know what is the maximum density someone can get on an acre with no bonus, no amenities. Mike Rodriguez stated that in an R-M zone you would get smaller units and larger buildings to get more dense. Chairman Bryan Pack stated on Townhomes and Multi-Family we already have those zones. We just need to pick different numbers. What is realistic? Mike Rodriguez stated Townhome is maximizing their densities and minimizing the amount of open space and amenities. An example is Red Mountain Vistas was thinking of putting in parking for recreational vehicles for the homeowners on-site. RVs and boats, etc. The only way they could do that, was to lose buildings in order to comply with our setbacks, building lengths and building heights. Chairman Bryan Pack inquired if we did 7 or 8 would developers still have enough incentive? Commissioner Lance Anderson stated in Santa Clara, there is no parking and they have boats, four-wheelers, jetskis and cars all in the street with no place to put them. These being built here at least have two-car garages. Commissioner Jeff Loris stated that Red Mountain Vistas maxed out at 10 or 11. What benefit would they get by going to 7 or 8? By trying to increase their density and get a density bonus, there would be no benefit to them. R-1-7.5 and R-1-10 is around 3500. The density there is tighter. Duplexes are R-2-10 and are around 5000 sq ft lots. That is about the equivalent of 7 or 8. They could choose to go that way instead. Red Mountain Vistas have 25 ft backyards. There is no benefit to a developer if they come in at 15 and wind up at 10 with no benefit. R-M zoning is really getting down to 3500 after you take out 20% for open space and for roads. Commissioner Lance Anderson stated take the plat and lots and see how much square footage it is. Then we would have something to go off of. Commissioner Jeff Loris stated he thinks 7 is too low, but maybe 8 or 9 and give them one or two more units per acre, as long as it is open space and not a building, they could keep higher density with recreational open space. Mike Rodriguez stated get a higher bonus for active open space instead of passive open space. They get a higher density bonus if they do that. If they provide other amenities that could be counted towards density bonuses. Setbacks are already established. Commissioner Bryan Pack stated that this framework ordinance is good to work with. It has ABCD, we take those different kinds of amenities and classify them. Let us go through and prioritize and do some math. Commissioner Doug Clifford stated get existing plats that we have and break them out into buildings, parking, yards and streets. Mike Rodriguez stated Tuscano, Red Mountain Vistas, Sage Villas and Kanta Village as examples and provide site plans and layouts and calculate the amount of open space they provided and look at it at a future date. Commissioner Jeff Loris inquired where do we potentially see this happening again? Commissioner Lance Anderson stated the SITLA property is the only place big enough he could see apartments potentially. Commissioner Jeff Loris stated the only one he thinks is next to Red Mountain Vistas that is all low-density residential around it but the door is open to become Townhome on that side of the highway. 600 West has commercial area that could potentially be something else. It could happen in the lava flow area. Commissioner Doug Clifford inquired if there was any areas that could be annexed? Dale Coulam stated that it is part of the annexation plan, but the County residents out there do not want to be annexed into the City. On large parcels, the current owners do not want to develop, but their children may want to develop it. Commissioner Doug Clifford stated that low-income housing needs to be addressed. How does that fit in? Chairman Bryan Pack stated that Committee is meeting again soon. Commissioner Lance Anderson stated when he moved here Ivins was low-income. Chairman Bryan Pack stated get the examples prepared and Jeff Loris will work on empty piece of land and look at sideyards, backyards, roads, footprints of buildings, etc. Commissioner Doug Clifford inquired that while in this process, can we put something in place so that we don't receive a new application before we get the new rules in place? Chairman Bryan Pack stated that if it is already zoned they have those rights. If it is a zone change we see that first. Dale Coulam stated you can pass a moratorium up to 6 months, but usually that is used for some larger purpose. Can you do it in a relatively short time frame, less than 6 months? Chairman Bryan Pack stated we could say we resolve this issue before we allow another zone change. Commissioner Doug Clifford stated if it is 15 on the books someone could still come in and apply for that. Dale Coulam stated a temporary ordinance freezes it as it currently stands. It is not a moratorium against building, just zoning changes. Commissioner Lance Anderson stated even existing ones would need to stop while we work on the ordinance. Dale Coulam stated the Planning Commission can come up with a better number than 15 or 30 and then take time to flesh it out. That is a better approach than a temporary ordinance. If there is no application, they are not vested.