Rob Dalley discussed the current ordinance and what is considered a noxious weed. The State has come up with a list of weeds we would like to include into ours. Commissioner Doug Clifford stated those weeds take over anytime there is water. In our ordinance we want to recognize the State's list of noxious weeds. There are no redlines in this document. Is the main thing we are concerned with is adding this particular weed into this list? Rob stated that is correct. Right now we allow it, but we want to comply with the State's ordinance and what they have listed. We want it to be clear and concise. We don't want any gray areas. Commissioner Doug Clifford inquired what is the primary reason for the change? Is it a fire danger? Rob Dalley stated yes, and it just grows back. The biggest reason for this modification is for fire. They can grow over 20 feet, then when the weed catches on fire it can start other structures on fire. There was a report recently that this is the driest it has been in this area in 132 years. Chair Pam Gardiol stated that Utah League of Cities and Towns recently had a discussion on the role that fire plays. She has read the entire document and wondered if there are some other areas that may need additional clarification. She looked at Section 7.04.103 (1) which stated that "weeds constitute a nuisance when they create a fire hazard, a source of contamination or pollution of the water, air or property, a danger to health, a breeding place or habitation for insects or rodents or other forms of life deleterious to humans or are unsightly or deleterious to their surroundings." "Unsightly" seems like a nebulous word. Section 7.04.101 shows the title head as "Health Director." Does Ivins have a health director? Rob Dalley stated that would be Code Enforcement. Chair Pam Gardiol inquired about Section 7.06.102 (a) nuisances "Befouling water in any spring, stream, well or water source supplying water for culinary purposes." Are we not worried about ground water? Chuck Gillette stated that all water is culinary water to someone. We can drop off the end of that sentence, and stop at water. Chair Pam Gardiol stated in that same section under (b) "Allowing any privy vault or cesspool or other individual wastewater disposal system to become a menace to health or a source of odors to air or water" Would soil not also be included? Add "soil" there as well. Going to that same Section (g) "Discharging or placing any offensive water," what is the criteria for offensive? Chuck Gillette stated that we have a stormwater definition of what is allowed to be discharged into the environment and there are exceptions made, like discharge from firefighting. There are about 15 items listed. This ordinance doesn't have any good definition of that and stormwater could be used. Maybe we call it the same thing as what stormwater calls it. Call it pollution. Bryan Pack stated that we may be addressing the same problem in two areas. On a broader level, if we already have stormwater regulations, is it all covered under that ordinance, and is there a reason to cover it in two different ordinances? Chuck Gillette stated that he can't think of a reason. We could cross-reference these at least. Commissioner Perry Brown stated he would suggest we do that and marry the two ordinances together. Chair Pam Gardiol stated that in the same Section (n) "offensive" is listed again. Section (o) should the word "wash" also be included? Bryan Pack stated any place that water goes. Chair Pam Gardiol stated that in Section 7.06.201 they use the term "unsightly" again. Section 7.06.401 it states "public nuisance is a crime against the public order and economy of this municipality." She doesn't know what that means. Chuck Gillette stated he believes that is regarding our wildlands, nature and open space. Public nuisance affects the economy of the municipality and potentially property values. Chair Pam Gardiol stated we should clarify what that focus is. Section 7.06.405 states that the City Attorney is empowered to institute an action in the name of this municipality to abate a public nuisance. Bryan Pack stated that means that litigation would go through him. Other ways of evading a nuisance is through Code Enforcement. Our practice has been to have an attorney hold the hearing, but Kaitlynn Kraus or Rob Dalley would testify. Chair Pam Gardiol stated in Section7.06.502 (4) it states that the "vat is to be used for the purpose of shearing or dipping sheep within twelve (12) miles of the municipality." Do we have that authority to oversee that? Bryan Pack stated while we don't have the authority to regulate that, we can call out nuisances. It is a Class B misdemeanor. Chuck Gillette stated when the City fed off the spring in Johnson Canyon they didn't want cattle going over the collection box. It fed into our water source. Chair Pam Gardiol inquired if those may no longer be relevant. Bryan Pack stated this is a holdover from 2004, so at least 21 years old. It may have been copied from an original code. Chair Pam Gardiol stated in Section 16.11.139 it says "All buildings, uses, lots and parcels located within the city shall be maintained and operated in a manner to enhance community pride and beautification. No junk, rubbish, weeds or other unsightly material or conditions shall be permitted on any lot, right of way or easement, or as part of any building or use." What is the criteria for pride? She is grateful that this ordinance has come forward. This will come back to us with the additional redlines. Commissioner Doug Clifford stated that the problem is when the old ones lay around in the code book it then becomes our 2025 document.
Chair Pam Gardiol stated that this an element of the General Plan. Chuck Gillette stated we talked about some quick easy wins within the General Plan. The idea is to complete this change before more commercial comes in. Rob Dalley stated that we will add a number nine line to include 7 bikes designed to allow the frame and one wheel to be locked by u-lock or some device for every 30 stalls. That is the language being added to this ordinance. Located near the primary building entrance That is all we are adding is that paragraph. Chair Pam Gardiol stated a minimum of 7 bikes. Commissioner Doug Clifford stated in a place where we have a lot of bikes. 30 parking stalls are those u-shaped parking that doesn't take a lot of room. No developer will push back on that. Chair Pam Gardiol stated 16.19.102 (2c) says "all buildings shall have an orientation to the street to encourage a pedestrian relationship. Building placement shall allow interconnected walkways and shared site accesses for increased convenience, accessibility and enhanced safety for pedestrians. She is thinking of Canyon Crossing. Did this ordinance exist when that development was laid out? Was that supposed to face the street? Commissioner Perry Brown stated they faced the parking lot inward and it would be a strange layout. Rob Dalley stated it could have been decided that way because of the roundabout. Having the parking lot be outward would be tough. Those buildings would not have been there and it would have changed the design. Commissioner Perry Brown stated if we make it too strict we get unattractive strip developments. We need to make sure that it is workable. Chair Pam Gardiol stated what we have in the ordinance is what we need to make sure we are doing. We need clarification there. Chuck Gillette stated we want flexibility. Commissioner Doug Clifford stated when this was designed they were for little shopping areas with the parking on the inside. The units face the parking. Use that as your definition. Chair Pam Gardiol stated that what she wants to be sure we create is having that interaction be a part of the community. Not a sterile environment, with nothing but walls along the way. What it says in the ordinance and the practice need to align. Section (4d) states "all solid waste and refuse collection areas shall be located to minimize the impact on adjacent property owners or users." The trash and refuse collection areas gives parameters but she did not see any hours of service. Refuse traffic interrupts sleeping people. Rob Dalley stated Section (4e) has a noise impact, but it doesn't give a time. Commissioner Perry Brown inquired what is the agreement with the trash collectors? Chuck Gillette stated if they are doing trash pickup before 6 am that is an actionable item we can enforce. This will come back to the Planning Commission reflecting these changes.
Rob Dalley stated that the State has taken a big swing at this and now we need to review if it applies to Ivins and our goals. We do townhomes, but do we want to get into fourplexes? Commissioner Doug Clifford stated that this is just actionable information to look at the spectrum. It shows a gradation from homes to smaller homes, and there were interesting ideas for thought-provoking concepts on what to do with smaller homes. We have to put more people in the same space. We have the old Ivins area and really deep lots for horses, chickens and no one uses that area for that anymore. Flaglots and Accessory Dwelling Units can use some of that area, but we need to encourage people to do that. Chair Pam Gardiol gave a handout and spoke of a wonderful courtyard community, that would be inviting for affordable housing. Her grandmothers house was like that. It is easy to integrate that into the surrounding area. Commissioner Perry Brown stated that he viewed this as a set of ideas or tools of what is available from small to large scale and find an interesting one that would fit into our community, and then look at the implications of that. Rob Dalley stated he came from a municipality that pushed those types of developments. Commissioner Perry Brown stated we aren't going to do that. Commissioner Doug Clifford stated that the Committee has started gathering information and so far there has not been a directive of what we would like to propose. This is a good tool because the Governor wants this to work somehow. These are creative ways to look at density. We have to find a way to do that and still make it nice. Rob Dalley stated that Ivins is unique and we need to fit high-density into this community as well as make it look good. Chair Pam Gardiol inquired what do we want to do with this information? Commissioner Doug Clifford stated take this seriously as a planning tool and pass it on to our Committee who is working on it right now and incorporate it. Sharon Gillespie stated that Chuck Gillette and she sat through the Urban League of Cities and Towns. Missing middle housing was confusing, and still is. She got clarity with some of the speakers afterward, and they helped her understand. This tool is referring to options on housing types to fill the gap between large homes and apartments. This would be for infill, central business districts with homes above. We don't have that type of units. These are not affordable or high-density housing. These are just options. The mansion model builds a large Kayenta-style home which is actually four homes. At this point we are focused on education so the Governor doesn't come down here and do it for us. There were smaller blocks with a variety of transportation options and those do not exist here. How do we build into our dynamics for more opportunities for gathering places? Not only for housing, but communities? Commissioner Doug Clifford stated that we are stuck in our own community behind the zoning requirements and lot sizes. We back ourselves into a corner in that way. There is not much left to zone for the missing middle housing and replat it. These larger homes don't look like multi-family, but if we find ways to put those into large lot sizes that could work. Rob Dalley stated it is a great plan, but that is a land use change and we would just need to lock us all into a room and get it done. If we don't, the State is serious about deciding for us. It was six months ago when the Governor came down with a last warning. Chair Pam Gardiol stated she is reading a book about how zoning has failed in the United States. We need to look at what zoning should be. Chuck Gillette stated we are planning a joint meeting for next month on November 6th at 4 pm meeting with SITLA for their plans. They are proposing 3000 square foot lots on their 40 acres. It is in the County, but if developed, it would likely be annexed into the City. We are working to find out more information and what are points we can all agree on. The Mayor has met with a few of us to put an agenda together as far as land use ordinances he would like to get in motion as soon as possible. We would have another joint meeting to discuss these priorities. There is a desire to kick that off and present the land use plan map to show what has been developed. It highlights the fact that if we are changing the map, it is not a big task. There are so many areas already developed. There is potential for infill. We need another land use area inside our plan to change smaller footprint areas. There will be a brainstorm session next month.