Present: Chair Stephen Sanders, Commissioners Michael Hinckley, Anna Andregg, Dan Howard; Staff: Derek Imlay, Kevin Bennett, Kyle Gubler, Troylinn Benson; Public: Laura Justice, Ray Justice, Doug Wilson, Ken Anderson, Bob Porter, Scott Stratton, Tom Kuhlman, Dottie Higley, Maurine Roberts, Karl Rasmussen

Commissioners Allen Bice and Joe Webb not in attendance.

Call To Order:  Chair Stephen Sanders at 6:02 p.m., Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance – Doug Wilson

Approval of Minutes:  Motion by Commissioner Andregg to approve the minutes of the April 8, regular and work meetings, second by Commissioner Hinckley. Motion carried 4-0 with Sanders, Hinckley, Andregg, and Howard voting yes.

Approval of Agenda: Motion by Commissioner Andregg to approve the agenda with a title amendment for a regular planning commission meeting, second by Commissioner Hinckley. Motion carried 4-0 with Sanders, Hinckley, Andregg, and Howard voting yes.

Reports:  
Beautification Committee: Maurine Roberts reported that Dick Prince is the new chair of the committee. They are grateful for the $500.00 in their budget for the upcoming year. Goals include organizing a State Street clean up in June, finishing the beautification contest with announcement for locations of the 3 most beautiful yards and a most improved yard, focusing on designing the crescent at State and 500 N., and looking for grants for entry signs. They will prioritize at the next meeting.

Director of Operations: Derek informed that there are 3 new businesses in town. The old RM Precision building is going to be LV Swiss. They intend to do the same production that RM did. They expect to hire 30-40 people when fully operational. There is a new barbeque at the Route 9 inside Chevron that has been open for about 2 weeks. They report that they have been fairly successful so far. A shave ice shack is opening at the Chum’s building. The city is just waiting for their report from the Health Department to release the business license.

New Business:
Development Agreement Amendment: Dottie Higley represented Color Country Housing in requesting an amendment to the Development Agreement and CCR’s for lots 46-53 in The Chateaus at River Wood Estates Phase II. Property is zoned R-1-14 with a development agreement. Lots 24-45 have already been allowed this same amendment. They will have a minimum of 1350 s.f. with a modification to the roof pitch. All of the other development elements will be the same. There will be unfinished upstairs and the overall size will be 2000 s.f.

Commissioners wondered if there had been any concerns from the surrounding property owners. The adjacent lots are all owned by Color Country with the exception of lot 24. That home is part of the amended phase and the owner has no concerns.

Derek reported that staff favors the change for lots 46-49. Lots 50-53 are in close proximity of the existing homes in phase 1. Those property owners bought into the development with the idea that all the surrounding homes would be of a similar quality and size. Lots 46-49 sit above the existing homes and staff doesn’t believe that they affect the property value of phase 1 in the same way. There was discussion that there is a natural transition geographically from these homes into the lower area. Lots 50-53 also enjoy prime views of the creek similar to that of the phase 1 homes.

There is no development agreement prepared yet. Staff waited to see how all the property owners would be affected to make sure that the agreement binds the appropriate entities. Bob Porter and Dottie stated that legal paperwork was completed for a homeowners association for phase 2.

There was a great deal of discussion about requiring the existing homeowner’s to buy-in for the amendment because they purchased with the idea that the entire development would be of the same quality. The original amendment for lots 24-45 was allowed as a transition from the white apartments into the development. With this amendment, that transition justification changes – now the buffer is the rule. It is felt that the lots up to 50 are not invasive into phase 1.

Motion by Commissioner Howard to recommend approval of the development agreement for lots 46-49 and to leave lots 50-53 for future development under the original agreement. Howard and Hinckley agreed that there would be with no sign off from the existing property owners from phase 1. That expression was added to the motion. Second by Commissioner Andregg. Motion carried 4-0 with Sanders, Hinckley, Andregg, and Howard voting yes.

Unfinished Business:
Subdivision Code Amendment Discussion: Doug Wilson requested a review of the subdivision code to allow for possible undeveloped public country roads. Wilson’s sister Melanie Bourgoin, and his brother David Wilson approached planning commission for the same issue on June 25, 2008. At that time, commission suggested that properties of 10 acres or more could petition for an ordinance change for special conditions to maintain a rural atmosphere. As the Wilson family reviewed the lot sizes in Donkey Hollow, there were several that would not comply to that requirement. Wilson requested that the acreage allowance change to 6 acres – 5 for the green belt requirement and 1 for a home-site.

Staff met with Mr. Wilson and came up with a possible fit with the one-lot subdivision ordinance 2009-07 which just passed. Requiring a public road so that frontage could happen as required by code, but allowing the improvement of the road on only the “home frontage” area.

There have been divisions of property by deed through the county, but not done under the city code. The city requires the division to be done correctly in order to grant a building permit. Wilson expressed that when a developer divides property he recoups his cost by selling the parcels. The family will not be selling and so the cost has to be borne by them.

There was discussion that the road would need to meet safety, and welfare, fire restrictions including turn around, width, surfacing and fire flows. The requestor would like to retain the country flavor.

Commission expressed that they are on board with the interest. They want to require at least the 50’ road in case of future development, with the possible allowance of all-weather surface now, and full improvement as the land is developed.

The development could be handled in one of three ways: 1) 50’ public road with improvements; 2) a lot split allowed on a large parcel with a 50’ wide public road with all-weather surface and completely improved frontage with the building permit; or 3) a private street with a 50’ easement given to the city by all owners. This would be signed off by everyone and would be irrevocable. They would maintain and would carry all the liability. The city would not be allowed to cite. Emergency vehicles would need access. The road could be done by a deed or by a road dedication plat signed off by all interested parties. There is water line already in the proposed right-of-way.

Discussion of road design. Curvilinear road with meandering trail could keep country flavor and slow traffic if the road became public. With public road, one-lot subdivision would allow that the subdivision not require full-blown improvements as long as the property is subdivide-able and further division is held off for two years.

There is water table concern.  

Tom Kuhlmann stated that the fire department would require 26’ travel surface with 150’ turn around. There was discussion about different types of turn around design.

Wilson stated that it all came down to money. The family doesn’t want to sell lots.

Ordinance allows the building permit with frontage on a public street. This proposal would require the ordinance to change to allow the type of street being requested.

There was discussion that if the street is public and not required pavement, the city would be responsible for its maintenance and could be a yearly budget issue with flooding or other maintenance. Derek wondered if there could be an agreement for the family to maintain the road until it is paved. There was discussion about the standard required, PUDs, homeowner’s associations, responsibility for costs, and public interest.

Stephen Sanders closed the discussion by stating that the planning commission agrees with the change from 10 acres to 6 acres or more, that the road is public with possible all-weather surface as long as health and safety issues are handled. He directed Wilson to get with staff to hammer out the details for maintenance before coming back to planning commission.

Annexation Review: Ken Anderson and his engineer, Karl Rasmussen reviewed annexation plans and a proposal for Zion-Virgin River Zip Tour Program at Pah Tempe Hot Springs Resort located at 825 N. 800 E. in Hurricane Utah. They showed 4 maps with the annexation and the proposal plans. Commission felt that the annexation should be addressed first. There was discussion about the proposed division lines, and the development proposal.

Annexation has gone through public hearings and notifications. Ken believes that the annexation agreement is the next step.

Staff handed out the list of concerns from a staff meeting: Ken Anderson Annexation
Twelve new items were added to the list since it was sent in the planning commission packets. Two (starred items) came from the development meeting on 051109, and ten (checked items) from the 051209 staff meeting.

City Concerns:
Road width – dedication and improvements
One access – Hurricane side
Bridge stability
Fire Flow questions – Need minimum of 1500 gpm plus residual 20 psi for community.
Culinary water pressure 20 psi minimum (separate from fire flows)
Water Service from Hurricane – Has to be LaVerkin service or is illegal
Water Conservancy clearance
Proof of ownership – title search
Virgin River governing agencies clearance for zip line course
Trail stability – engineering
Inspection of all buildings – need to bring everything to current code
Rocky Mountain power clearance
Plans need to be stamped by licensed engineer
Traffic control
Parking
Hydrology study –drainage
Trash collection plan
Emergency vehicle turn around/access
Gating issues
250’ distance from any structure to fire hydrant
Current septic system – may need to bring to current city code with annexation according to Ash Creek requirements
Zip line will require treatment system as stated in letter from Ash Creek
Engineering Billing
Operational amusement permit – fire department
Combine the annexation and the development to lock up the requirements including the parking lot and building to be completed prior to annexation.
Road will be grandfathered as private with Anderson responsible for maintenance and enforcement
Hydrants are required by the Fire Department
City access easement to maintain water system
Water line engineering and service from LaVerkin up-front
LaVerkin road opened
Remove the gate from the bridge
Engineer the bridge to allow for walking and ATV traffic
Final engineered plan with no changes except through development agreement
Engineer to figure cost of development. Ken post bond for that amount as a requirement of annexation.

Karl had written a letter to address some of the listed issues. There was discussion including the bridge is historic and was condemned by the State, possible grants/loans to improve it, UDOT concerns, fire flow, trails stabilized, waterways, drainage, traffic control, congestion, access, traffic study through UDOT, and parking.

Stephen directed that the developer and his engineer work out the concerns and details with staff. He is concerned that the hillside ordinance requirements should have been addressed prior to digging. Direction from commission to look at the tourist ordinance to assure that it meets those requirements. Commission will look at the annexation, then the development under the tourist zoning.

Ken stated that the first phase is expected to produce $5-6,000 each week.

Commission stated that there is not enough information for the board to recommend approval. Michael suggested that Ken and his engineer go back to staff to address the bullet points, review by the city engineer, have the attorney draw up an agreement and come back to planning commission with a concrete proposal.

Moderate Income Housing Report: Planning Commission reviewed a Moderate Income Housing report to meet the requirements of State Code 10-9a-408. Kevin stated that the update is required to be in compliance with State Code. There was brief discussion about the desire to rewrite General Plan element. He recommended approval of this report independent of the General Plan rewrite to meet State requirements, and then to recommend that the General Plan study be done.

Planning Commission recommended approval of the Moderate Income Housing report with recommendation to rewrite the 2004 element of the General Plan by consensus.

Adjourn:  Motion by Commissioner Howard to adjourn, second by Commissioner Andregg. Motion carried 4-0 with Sanders, Hinckley, Andregg, and Howard voting yes.

Minutes transcribed by June Jeffery



Planning Commission Chair, Stephen Sanders

 

 

 

June 10, 2009, Date Approved