The meeting was called to order at
05:30 p.m. All present included
Commissioner Doug Clifford,
Commissioner Pam Gardiol,
Commissioner Perry Brown,
and Commissioner Derek Larsen.
Mike Haycock stated that this is off Main Street. We have vacated the exterior portion of the lot for the use of the parcel. They are both the same parcel number. The whole area is R-1-10 but there is one parcel that has the R-2-10 designation, and that is also the request of this applicant. Commissioner Doug Clifford opened the Public Hearing. Cheryl Sietz lives across the street and has lived here a long time. The applicant just bought the lot and wants to change it. She opposes the land use and zone change. Keep the low-profile low-density area in our quaint quiet neighborhood. We don't want to change what works for the majority that the City put in place. We don't want more noise, light, less privacy and more traffic. Don't set a precedent in our Old Ivins. Most of us are 60-85 years old and have been long term residents, 20+ years. This is our community and older people are pretty reluctant to change. We don't want to argue but will stand our ground. She is in a different subdivision but this would set a precedent to have a duplex in this subdivision. Do not rezone this. Please do not recommend any changes to these properties. Please don't tell us if we don't like it to move. You would cause us hardship if we had to move from this community because of medical issues, age and finances. We can't afford to move and most of us are on medicare and social security. This is my retirement community. We all hike and walk and talk together and help each other. Wayne Sietz lives across the street and also opposes the change. He researched for legal reasons to vote no. The proposed zone change is not consistent with any applicable comprehensive plan for the area and should be preserved Medium-Density Residential as it has since the beginning of Ivins. It is not consistent with surrounding areas. Rezoning to High-Density Residential lowers the market value of surrounding houses. It doesn't fit with the orderly development of public services to accommodate high density. He wrote a letter that has this information and he requests the application be denied on these grounds. Kirra Dixon stated she lives on 350 North and she and her husband just moved here about a year ago and love Ivins and the feel of it. They are both against the land use and zone change. Changing their residential area would disrupt the existing harmony in their neighborhood by introducing structures that are out of character with the surrounding area and establish a development pattern. This distastefully alters the visual identity created by the mix of architectural structures, causing disharmony and diminishing the distinctive charm that Ivins residents currently appreciate. It would be disharmonious, inconsistent and not compatible with the surrounding single family residential homes in our neighborhood. Matthew Dixon stated his primary concern is setting the precedent for future development. In this area, there are a lot of mobile homes as you know and it opens up developers to buy up the land, salvage the house and build whatever they want. If we do this here, there is nothing that prevents another developer coming in and creating a similar situation. Within the subdivision, there was insufficient water pressure and the water line along 350 North is a four-inch line. The infrastructure has not been regarded. Adding units could overwhelm it. This does not align with the General Plan and we are going against it. Doug Allinger stated he lives at 300 North and there is no reason why we would want this. Maybe for tax revenue, but there is no other identifiable benefit. He would not support the change. Robin Kirker stated she lives on 300 North one house separate from the zone change and she opposes it. She has a hard time grasping why we would allow high density housing. It does not go along with what the community looks like. We are a community of manufactured homes and interspersed with gigantic two-story houses which also affect views. There is a high-density townhouse area down the street. Don't let one lot open the doorway to allow others to do it. It doesn't fit in with the community and should not be rezoned. Dave Sullivan stated he lives on 350 North. We don't need a complex up there. There are other vacant lots there and if this passes, then there will be more High-Density Residential housing put there. That is not what this area is about. Chase Hamblin stated that they had a modular home that his family lived in for eight years. It became dangerous to live in, so they built a new home. We are against this because we have young kids that like to ride their bikes and motorbikes up and down the street. This will bring in more people, more cars and traffic. He has already lost one child. He doesn't want to lose another because of it. Another property near his home was denied having a duplex for the same reasoning. Considering this one seems like a conflict. He doesn't understand what the purpose of that would be. This area needs to be kept single-family. Tristan Lessing stated she lives next door to the proposed property. She read the letter her husband wrote. The owner stated he wants to live in the duplexes but there is no effective means of verifying this or from conducting short-term rentals at this property. Airbnb is not technically allowed but they still exist. She has young children and this is a safety concern to her with people coming in and out. If there were duplexes there when they were looking, she would never have bought and moved here. She would never have even considered it just as a safety precaution. The zone change does not enhance the community in any way. She is opposed to it. William Mcilrath via Zoom stated he is the property owner and is looking to build duplexes. It would be owner-occupied he and his wife and rent out the other unit to make his mortgage payment. We would remove the modular home. He is not looking to upset everyone. He respects the feedback and ultimately the community's decision. Hearing no further comments, Commissioner Doug Clifford closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Pam Gardiol stated that the reason why the Commission is reviewing this is that any citizen has the right to bring a petition forward. In looking at the property, for the Commission to make this change is spot-zoning. There is no transition to adjoining or other developments in the area. She is not in favor of this. Dale Coulam stated spot-zoning in and of itself is not illegal, but the concern is valid. Commissioner Pam Gardiol stated "incongruent" is a better word. Commissioner Derek Larsen inquired if water pressure is a concern in that area? Mike Haycock stated he has not heard about complaints in that area. Commissioner Perry Brown stated that the surrounding property is all Medium-Density Residential. There is just no transition to allow High-Density Residential to fit in this part of the city. Mike Haycock stated 99% of the area is Medium-Density Residential. The other lot is R-2-10. Also a duplex. Commissioner Doug Clifford stated we are trying to develop housing for all the people that want to live here. It is a main point of our city plan. We try to go into areas where there is something in place with the general area. We are trying to develop plans for moderate-income housing. There are other options for the applicant in doing something like this that would fit within Medium-Density Residential zoning. Dale Coulam stated that this is a legislative decision, so the final decision is made by the City Council when they see this item in a couple weeks. There will be another public hearing on December 7th. The public is free to make their comments there for the City Council to consider. Commissioner Pam Gardiol stated that the General Plan states that creating an area for everyone that lives here is an important thing, but there was no fluid area of integration with this proposal. This just did not meet the criteria.
MOTION: Commissioner Pam Gardiol moved to deny recommendation of a Concurrent Land Use Amendment from MDR (Medium-Density Residential) to HDR (High-Density Residential), and a Zone Amendment from R-1-10 (Residential, minimum lot size, 10,000 sq ft) to R-2-10 (Residential, Two-Family District, minimum lot size 10,000 sq ft) on approximately.70 acres, located at approximately 320 North Main Street. William Mcilrath-Owner/Applicant. Roll Call Unanimous.
SECOND: Commissioner Derek Larsen
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Commissioner Doug Clifford |
AYE |
| Commissioner Pam Gardiol |
AYE |
| Commissioner Perry Brown |
AYE |
| Commissioner Derek Larsen |
AYE |
Chuck Gillette stated that he is the City Engineer and Public Works Director, but he is also the Chair of the Sensitive Lands Committee. In May we made some edits to the ordinance and looked at potential problems with the ordinance and we corrected those things. The City Council sent it back to the Sensitive Lands Committee to do a more comprehensive change to the ordinance. Meanwhile there was an applicant waiting in the wings to see what the Sensitive Lands Committee was going to come up with. What we have ended up with is not everything that the Sensitive Lands Committee would like to do with the ordinance, but it addresses the major ridgeline issue, rock outcroppings and procedure. We made changes to the purpose section of the sensitive lands ordinance. We created Class A, B and C ridgelines. Class A is Land Hill. Class B is an interior bluff ridgeline overlooking an area that could create sightline problems. Class C is a new category where there is a unique aspect to the ridgeline that we want to preserve. The text now has a description on how to identify those ridgelines. The map is not a comprehensive inventory of all these types of ridgelines. We did add some Class B ridgelines, and Class C is still just the one ridgeline that is on the SITLA property. Also any property that lies within the overlay zone that we added a hatched area to, triggers a requirement for a sensitive lands application. That triggers a required site visit. There is also an optional pre-application meeting to help developers inventory whether they are on sensitive lands if they would like to request that. We have always had a berm section in ridgelines as a way to raise the sightline on top of ridgelines. We added a requirement that any berming or filling needs restored to look like its natural environment. Commissioner Doug Clifford opened the Public Hearing. Fred Castagne stated there was no one on Zoom. Hearing no comments, Commissioner Doug Clifford closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Pam Gardiol stated that it is an impressive document and has Chuck Gillette's touch of professionalism. Under 16.08.201 (4) it states "Preserve the natural setting of the city to maintain and strengthen private property values, provide a desirable environment for businesses and residents. Protect and enhance the city economy and protect the quality of life and amenities for existing and future residents." This sentence is missing the protection of the environment. Commissioner Perry Brown stated Item 5 adequately addresses that. "Guide and require responsible land use and development for those that lands that have development limitations due to environmental sensitivity." Commissioner Pam Gardiol stated she thinks that means something else. She means wildlife and the habitat, those elements. Commissioner Derek Larsen stated he would need to see something specific. Adding something broad could create a lot of environmental issues. He recommends leaving it as it is. Chuck Gillette stated we do consider habitat as sensitive lands. Those are identified in the Habitat Conservation Plan by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Commissioner Pam Gardiol inquired where is that criteria? Chuck Gillette stated that in section 16.08.204, Paragraph 5. Page 4 defines sensitive lands as habitat conservation areas as identified by the city sensitive lands map. That map is a replica of what is protected by the the Habitat Conservation Plan. Commissioner Pam Gardiol stated that addresses her concern. There are a few typos in the document she will send to Chuck Gillette. Commissioner Doug Clifford stated he applauds the excellent talent and work done by the Sensitive Lands Committee that put this together. It showed a lot of experience and depth, concern and understanding of the issue. It was a technical document that was well done.
MOTION: Commissioner Perry Brown moved to approve recommendation of a Zone Text and Sensitive Lands Map amendment. Roll Call Unanimous.
SECOND: Commissioner Derek Larsen
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Commissioner Doug Clifford |
AYE |
| Commissioner Pam Gardiol |
AYE |
| Commissioner Perry Brown |
AYE |
| Commissioner Derek Larsen |
AYE |
Dale Coulam stated that this chapter is titled Subdivision Application and Review. Last legislative session passed a couple of bills that changed the procedures for approving subdivisions. We have been mentioning this for some months now. There is no longer a concept plan required. In its place, a request by an applicant for a pre-consultation could be filed and TRC would give feedback from that presentation. Commissioner Pam Gardiol had made a request to add General Plan in this section. We need to be careful about that because this language is taken exactly from the State. Adding or deleting in this section would be at our risk. We could reference that they should be reviewing the General Plan as part of the purpose of the pre-consultation meeting. In Section 15.04.101, that would be appropriate. Commissioner Pam Gardiol stated that if we are going to reference the General Plan, might we create a guide section? Dale Coulam stated that there are certain things that have to be presented to the applicant that are outlined by statute. We can refer to where these things are on the website and where to find those documents. When they file an application, we then have a duty to review those issues. If they don't request a pre-consultation meeting then they start with an application for a Preliminary Plan and that is part two. If you have a pre-consultation meeting it is to get to the Preliminary Plan. He imagines we will still see pre-consultation meetings and some concept plans. He changed the order of the ordinance to make more sense but on the review process some is similar, but takes into account the new statute. It goes into more detail that if TRC meets for a review, there is a fee. We recoup our costs so that citizens don't pay those fees for development reviews. City Council gave an initial nod that the review body for the Preliminary Plan would be the Planning Commission, so it goes to them for consideration. Approvals and expirations stayed the same. A Final Plat is brought in to verify that it conforms with the approved Preliminary Plan and that no changes have been made. The review process and decision has been changed to a new administrative land use authority yet to be named by City Council. It cannot be City Council or Planning Commission. The City Council is completely out of the subdivision approval process. It could be staff or two staffers that approve the Final Plat. It is a fairly simple review. Our Assistant City Engineer Tom Jorgensen makes a lot of the review comments, and Mike Haycock does as well. Then possibly a Planning Commission member. That has not been decided yet. He also has a provision in for development agreements. The statute limited the use of development agreements, so it is not required as a condition for development if the city's land use regulations establish all applicable standards of development on the land. If our ordinances cover it all there are no development agreements, but it will be required for all phased subdivisions to tell us the infrastructure for that phasing. The Planning Commission had decided to only proceed with this Chapter. That is an overview of the changes. Commissioner Doug Clifford opened the Public Hearing. Tony Allen stated that he appreciates the explanation. He is the developer of Serenity Estates. He started the subdivision process about 18 months ago. He has developed in other areas in Washington County and this was an unusual process that added time and expense to the development process. This is a step forward and puts developers into what they are already doing similarly in other areas around us. The concept plan just added another step and additional cost that has been somewhat repetitive. In his case, his adjacent owner was the Catholic Church and they spent eighteen months trying to get a meeting with the Deacon to agree to a street. They could never get them to designate a representative that they could talk to. There was no solution and has been somewhat frustrating. By then, the Preliminary Plan had expired and they had to start over again. This is a great step forward. Fred Castagne stated there were no comments on Zoom. Hearing no further comments, Commissioner Doug Clifford closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Perry Brown stated that he appreciates the work that was done and that it was what the Planning Commission asked to have done. Could we make recommendation and add the amendment into 101 and 201? Dale Coulam stated yes you can reference the General Plan in those two sections. Commissioner Pam Gardiol stated that looking at the subdivision regulations chapter, the new document is Chapter 4 instead of Chapter 3. Dale Coulam stated yes he had rewritten the entire subdivision before, but the Planning Commission only wanted this chapter to move forward so it went back to its existing chapter numbering. Commissioner Pam Gardiol stated there is a resident on Peaceful Lane that has had some significant impact to her home and property as a result of an adjacent development. In Section 15.04.202 3B it states "The vicinity map showing the project location relevant to city boundaries, major roads and minor roads that serve the property." She wonders if it would inform the Commission to also show adjacent properties? Then we can consider mitigating factors. Dale Coulam stated that adjacent lots are shown on Preliminary Plans. That is a requirement and you see that already. We don't want to say we are a guarantor and that there will be no damage by a developer. Our insurance company would not cover that. We inspect the infrastructure that goes in. They are required to follow their geotechnical report and we don't inspect and confirm that. Their geotechnical engineer is who makes sure that is the case. If the developer is negligent it is heard by a civil court. When they are at an impasse, that is why they go to a court of law. They want the City to be involved so they won't have to incur the cost of an attorney. If we did that, we would be liable. If we hold up a Certificate of Occupancy, it is the homeowner who is punished, not the developer. We can't withhold bonds, because we have to refund bonds if the infrastructure is in and passes inspection by statute. It is a civil court matter to discuss the damages that were reasonably caused with expert testimony from both sides. Commissioner Pam Gardiol inquired if this document does due responsibility by the city to ensure that developments are being built to standard? In Ogden Canyon there are houses built on a precipice and drops down into the canyon and has been slipping away. A developer wanted to put houses on that land and because the city requires a geotechnical review, it was robust enough that we were able to say no. Is our document sound enough to address any weaknesses that need to be discovered in development? Dale Coulam stated it does not ensure that other property owners may not be damaged by a developer. It requires a geotechnical report and drainage studies. It is sufficient for what the city is responsible for to have those accomplished. We cannot ensure there will be no damage to a neighboring property. The mode of redress is a civil action.
MOTION: Commissioner Perry Brown moved to approve recommendation of proposed Subdivision Text Amendments regarding Subdivision Application and Review Process. Ivins City-Applicant, as amended to include the General Plan language in section 101 and 201. Roll Call Unanimous.
SECOND: Commissioner Pam Gardiol
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Commissioner Doug Clifford |
AYE |
| Commissioner Pam Gardiol |
AYE |
| Commissioner Perry Brown |
AYE |
| Commissioner Derek Larsen |
AYE |
Mike Haycock stated that this is south of Hwy 91 and is RE-12.5 and two lots are being added to the phased subdivision. Commissioner Pam Gardiol inquired if there were any agreements with adjacent owners as stated in the staff report? Mike Haycock stated there were none. That is a general statement on all final plats that gets checked off at TRC. Commissioner Derek Larsen inquired if both lots are over 12.5? Mike Haycock stated yes.
MOTION: Commissioner Derek Larsen moved to approve Indigo Trails Phase 2-E Final Plat, located at approximately Fillaree Circle and Wild Indigo Way. AnA Enterprises-Owner. Lance Anderson-Applicant. Roll Call Unanimous.
SECOND: Commissioner Perry Brown
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Commissioner Doug Clifford |
AYE |
| Commissioner Pam Gardiol |
AYE |
| Commissioner Perry Brown |
AYE |
| Commissioner Derek Larsen |
AYE |
Mike Haycock stated that this is Tony Allen's third time in regarding this project. This is off 600 South and Main Street. It is surrounded by R-1-10. The street on the original request tried to line up with 550 South but they could not negotiate with the parcel to the south, so the new plan lost two lots and no longer aligns with those streets. This is their proposal. They could not get the required easements for the road. Commissioner Derek Larsen inquired if all lots were over 10,000 sq ft? Mike Haycock stated yes. Commissioner Doug Clifford inquired so they lost two lots? Mike Haycock stated yes. Commissioner Perry Brown stated with the inability to get that roadway on the south, this is self-contained within walls and no connection to neighbors. Mike Haycock stated yes TRC reviewed and has approved these changes. Dale Coulam stated for fire, a single access is allowed with less than 30 lots. Commissioner Perry Brown stated we want connection as much as possible to the community, but he understands what happened. Tony Allen stated that the city even wrote a letter to the Church recommending this street, and still no response.
MOTION: Commissioner Derek Larsen moved to approve recommendation of an amended Preliminary Plan for Serenity Estates, located at approximately 600 South Main Street. Corner the Market, LLC-Owner. Tony Allen-Applicant. Roll Call Unanimous.
SECOND: Commissioner Perry Brown
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Commissioner Doug Clifford |
AYE |
| Commissioner Pam Gardiol |
AYE |
| Commissioner Perry Brown |
AYE |
| Commissioner Derek Larsen |
AYE |
Commissioner Doug Clifford stated that the General Plan is never done. This work however captures it. He found a few little things and he saw that Commissioner Pam Gardiol found a few things as well. It is time to let the City Council go through it. Commissioner Derek Larsen stated he has read through her changes. We can move forward with those amendments added. Commissioner Pam Gardiol stated that the overview had an incomplete sentence. Items she recommended otherwise were grammar, punctuation and clarification. Most can be corrected by a word search and formatting further may mess up the Table of Contents. Commissioner Derek Larsen thanked Sharon Allen for keeping up with what has been changed and added. Commissioner Pam Gardiol stated she drafted and read a cover letter for City Council that stated "Dear Mayor Hart and City Council Members, The Planning Commission has completed the General Plan review you directed us to undertake. We have respected all aspects of the 2015 General Plan. You will see the formatting of this document has changed. We used a variety of best-practice General Plan documents as resources for our work and synthesized what we learned to create a thorough, organized, and approachable document. We also used the voice of the citizens as we reviewed all Plan elements and the elements’ interconnection throughout the Plan. Vision–We have reformatted the Vision from a checklist to a statement with continuity of the past, present, and future of this area. We have organized the document to tie goals and actions to each of the Vision elements to make it easier for the citizens and city officials to use the General Plan. We believe this Vision will help all of us tie our decisions, actions, and problem-solving directly to the Vision. Structure–We have organized the General Plan into three chapters and two Appendix elements. Chapter One introduces the General Plan requirements and presents the Vision. Chapter Two presents the Vision elements within the context of land use and city services and the Plan goals related to the specific Vision Elements and policies. Chapter Three presents General Plan implementation tools to tie the city’s actions to the Vision. Appendix A covers the history, the natural and cultural resources of the city. We recommend the Appendix content be a companion to the General Plan as some of this information is important to understand but secondary to the Plan’s application in current/future decision-making. Appendix B provides statistics, population analysis, and financial and staffing plans. This information is dynamic and can change before there may be another complete General Plan review. General Plan Content Review-The Commission has reviewed every word in the Plan. We have removed obsolete and redundant information. Through our research of best-practice general plans, the dynamics of our community’s growth, and other environmental factors, we have added content to the Plan for your review. The Ivins City Planning Commission has worked collaboratively with a dedication to the common good of all of our citizens. We brought to our discussions multiple perspectives, listened to each other, and crafted a General Plan that represents our best recommendations." Commissioner Perry Brown stated that that sounded good. Commissioner Pam Gardiol inquired what happens now? Are we accountable to return and report to City Council? Do we take a long vacation? Dale Coulam stated the City Council will get the document with your cover letter, which was excellent, and they will decide when to set it for a Public Hearing.
MOTION: Commissioner Derek Larsen moved to approve recommendation on proposed amendments to the Ivins City General Plan, as amended. Roll Call Unanimous.
SECOND: Commissioner Pam Gardiol
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Commissioner Doug Clifford |
AYE |
| Commissioner Pam Gardiol |
AYE |
| Commissioner Perry Brown |
AYE |
| Commissioner Derek Larsen |
AYE |
MOTION: Commissioner Perry Brown moved to approve the Ivins City Planning Commission Work Meeting Minutes for October 16, 2023 and Ivins City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2023.
SECOND: Commissioner Derek Larsen
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.
| Commissioner Doug Clifford |
AYE |
| Commissioner Pam Gardiol |
AYE |
| Commissioner Perry Brown |
AYE |
| Commissioner Derek Larsen |
AYE |
Commissioner Pam Gardiol stated that she attended the Utah Land Institute conference in October and handed out her notes to the Commission. She was impressed with something that was said there, "places can open up the way we relate and feel." She had read a New York Times article the day before that said "philosophy has a geography." Our places as we know impact the way we think and feel and experience life. Another quote that struck her was "Growth is at odds with a community culture and belonging." They had adopted a non-negotiable value of protecting that culture and their goal is to become the best of the best of those non-negotiable values. Each community decides what those are. Our work with the General Plan has helped cement those even more. The primary reason she went to the conference was to attend Utah Life Elevated: How Resort Master Planned Communities Offer More to Residents and Visitors. The person that facilitated that session is the managing Director of the Office of Tourism and Film from the Governor's Office of Economic Opportunity. She stated that there is a "Red Emerald Strategy that will establish Utah as an industry leader in responsible visitation, changing the way we market and manage our beautiful destinations. The strategy contains objectives drawn from months of partner and stakeholder engagement. Red Emerald Strategy was named because that is exactly what they want the tourism experience to be in the state, both for visitors and for the communities. There has to be that integration that hosts our visitors. We want it to be rare and highly valued, highly sought after, unique to Utah. The plan also includes strategies to for dispersing visitation to more places around the state to limit overcrowding and environmental degradation." Patrick Manning was a panelist in the next session. She bulleted some quotes from him. She was stunned to hear that he is building a "Delta Center South arena" in Santa Clara. She is concerned about our infrastructure as people come to this area. For the arena, they have made arrangements with other entities around the community, including Tuacahn for parking and shuttling to the arena. That is an impact in our community. Patrick Manning also stated they will "create sustainability for the land, open space, water protection, and quality of life." She took away from the conference that we are looking at our non-negotiable values and we hold those tightly in our decisions, but also look in the periphery of the community that could have an impact. Dale Coulam stated that during the golf tournaments around the entire community into St George as well, the PGA and LPGA tournaments arrange to use parking lots and shuttle people in. A lot of access for Black Desert Resort will come up Red Mountain in Santa Clara. There will be some impact with the shuttles at Tuacahn and the Parkway and access through that direction. St George will get that impact also. He heard that the convention center in Santa Clara will also be used for concerts and basketball games. Commissioner Doug Clifford stated we also sponsor Ironman and softball and baseball tournaments and an incredible amount of things here. Commissioner Perry Brown inquired if we get copies of the proposals for Black Desert Resort in Santa Clara? We see our portion but it is relevant to be looking at the other half. How can the Commission know what is going on that relates to that half of the resort? We just need to documentation of what they are doing. Dale Coulam stated that it is his understanding no plans have been submitted for that yet. They are developing our portion first. Commissioner Derek Larsen wondered that if Ivins City Council had known what was being built in Santa Clara would they have still voted the same.
Commissioner Pam Gardiol or Dale Coulam will report to City Council. Mike Haycock stated that Moderate-Income Housing report had three requirements on it. We are still working on the first one. We just have to convince the State. Next is develop a Mixed-Use zone for Moderate-Income Housing. That next deadline is in July. Item Three was Accessory Dwelling Units. We would like to simplify the size limitations. If we said they could have 30% coverage on their property and a max Accessory Dwelling Unit size that is not based on the size of the house. We said we would look at that. The State wants us to report how this helps the Moderate-Income Housing in our city. Commissioner Doug Clifford stated the applicant that was denied could do a detached Accessory Dwelling Units. That may be the solution for a lot of people.
|
D. |
City Manager/Attorney Dale Coulam |
Dale Coulam stated that we are in the process of releasing the deed restrictions at the County to allow renting out Accessory Dwelling Units. We are approaching it from that front as well.
Mike Haycock stated we have another zone change.