1. November 18, 2020 - Agenda
Documents:
111820.PCM.COURTESY.PDF
2. November 18, 2020 - Packet Materials
Documents:
ITEM A1 - EAST VH ZION ZONE CHANGE PC REPORT 11-18-2020.PDF ITEM A2 - 358 ZPB DDR 11-18-2020.PDF
3. November 18, 2020 - Public Comment: DDR 358 Zion Park Blvd
Documents:
PUBLIC COMMENT DDR_D. MCDONALD_REDACTED.PDF PUBLIC COMMENT DDR_S. PLAISIER_REDACTED.PDF PUBLIC COMMENT ZONE CHANGE-DDR_B. WESTON_REDACTED.PDF PUBLIC COMMENT ZONE CHANGE-DDR_M. STULTS_REDACTED.PDF
118 Lion Blvd ◦ PO Box 187 ◦ Springdale, UT 84767 ◦ (435) 772-3434
PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE AND AGENDA THE SPRINGDALE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL HOLD A REGULAR MEETING ON WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 2020. THE MEETING WILL BEGIN AT 5:00 PM.
This Commission meeting will not have an anchor location and will be conducted entirely via electronic means. Commission members will connect remotely. The meeting will be available to the public for live viewing/listening and includes public hearings whereby public comments can be made electronically. If you do not have access to the internet, you can join the audio via telephone.
Attending Clerk: Katy Brown
Approval of the agenda General discussion and announcements
A. Action Items 1. Public Hearing - Zone Change: Request to change 5.5 acres on the north side of Lion Blvd (parcel S-137-A) from Valley Residential (VR) to Village Commercial (VC) – East VH Zion LLC, Justin Mabey
2. Public Hearing - Design/Development Review for Transient Lodging Building at 358 Zion Park Blvd – Luke Wilson
B. Consent Agenda 1. Minutes from October 21st and November 4th
C. Adjourn **Persons interested in accessing the meeting electronically can login using the following link:
This notice is provided as a courtesy to the community and is not the official notice for https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87862149098?pwd=K25 this meeting/hearing. This notice is not required by town ordinance or policy. Failure of SampOc3A2WTgzbjF5RDUrTm5hZz09 the Town to provide this notice or failure of a property owner, resident, or other interested party to receive this notice does not constitute a violation of the Town’s Meeting ID: 878 6214 9098 noticing requirements or policies. If you have questions regarding any of the agenda Passcode: n7LVa9 items, or other community development comments, please contact Community Development staff at 435-772-3434 or tdansie@springdale.utah.gov. One-Tap Mobile::
+13462487799,,87862149098#,,,,,,0#,,055813# US NOTICE: In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals needing special accommodations or assistance during this meeting should contact Town Clerk (Houston) Darci Carlson (435.772.3434) at least 24 hours before the meeting. Telephone: Packet materials for agenda items can be found on the Town website at: +1 346 248 7799 .https://www.springdaletown.com/AgendaCenter/Planning-Commission-7 Meeting ID: 878 6214 9098 Passcode: 055813
Memorandum To: Planning Commission From: Thomas Dansie, Town Planner Date: November 12, 2020 Re: November 18, 2020 Planning Commission Meeting Zone Change: VR to VC on Parcel S-137-A (5.5 acres on the north side of Lion Blvd)
Executive Summary East Zion VH, LLC, represented by Justin Mabey, has requested a zone change from Valley Residential (VR) to Village Commercial (VC) on 5.5 acres north of Lion Boulevard (parcel S-137-A). The requested rezone would allow the development of 52 transient lodging units, eight residential units, and two commercial buildings.
The property is designated “Mixed Use” and “Transition Residential” on the Future Land Use Map.
Mr. Maybe applied for a similar zone change in 2019. That zone change request was withdrawn after the Planning Commission hearing on the application.
The Commission should evaluate the request based on the criteria in section 10-3-2(A) of the Town Code. The Commission should make specific findings detailing why or why not the proposed zone change meets those criteria.
The Commission may wish to use the following sample language in making a recommendation to the Town Council on the application:
The Planning Commission recommends approval/denial of the proposed zone change from VR to VC on parcel S-137-A. This motion is based on the following findings:
[LIST FINDINGS]
Applicable Ordinances The Commission may wish to review the following ordinances and General Plan sections when analyzing the application:
1- Section 10-3-2: Amendments 2- Chapter 10-9B: Valley Residential Zone 3- Chapter 10-11B: Village Commercial Zone 4- General Plan Objective 3.2.1 5- General Plan Future Land Use Map
Background Property Overview The property is generally located north of Lion Blvd, immediately east of the Town Hall / ballfield and west of the Zion Adventure Company building. The property measures approximately 5.5 acres in area. The property is currently zoned Valley Residential (VR).
A portion of the subject property is currently used as a paid public parking area. This use occupies approximately 1.67 acres. This parking use is operating under a conditional use permit. The remainder of the property is vacant. The property has frontage on and gains access from Lion Boulevard, a dedicated public street. An informal access to the Stone Mountain condominiums runs through the property.
Black’s Canyon Wash runs along the northern border of the property. The flood hazard area associated with Black’s Canyon Wash covers a significant part of the property. A number of mature Juniper trees are dispersed throughout the property.
The Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designates most of the property as “Mixed Use.” A small portion of the back of the property is designated as “Transition Residential.”
The General Plan describes Mixed-Use areas as follows: These are areas of mixed residential and commercial uses. The mixing of uses should help promote the town’s village atmosphere and small-town feel. Higher density residential uses (including multifamily uses) are appropriate in this area, as well as small-scale commercial development. Both residential and commercial uses may be accompanied by incidental and limited agricultural uses. The combination of residential and commercial units in a single building or development is particularly encouraged. Moderate-income and employee housing is encouraged. While allowing higher density residential and commercial uses, this area should still seek to preserve open space where appropriate. Doing so will help promote the town’s small town feel and rural village atmosphere.
The General Plan describes Transition Residential areas as follows: This area features primarily residential uses on smaller lots. The area is a transition between the low- density conservation or agricultural areas and the more intensely developed Commercial Core and Mixed- Use areas. These areas should continue to be primarily residential uses on smaller lots. Pocket neighborhoods and multi-family housing can be appropriate in this area. The use of the Moderate-Income Housing Development overlay zone can be used to provide moderate-income and employee housing. Limited agricultural uses which do not create a nuisance on surrounding properties may be appropriate.
Section 10-3-2(B) of the Town Code clarifies that the Future Land Use Map does not guarantee approval or denial of any zone change request. It merely provides a guide to assist the Planning Commission and Town Council in determining appropriate future uses of a property. The Town is able to approve or deny zone change requests regardless of compliance with the Future Land Use Map based on factors such as the timing, impact, or scale of the development proposed with the zone change.
Proposal Overview The applicant is requesting the zone change to allow the development of a mixed use commercial and affordable housing project. The proposed project contains 52 transient lodging units, eight affordable housing units, and approximately 7,656 square feet of commercial area in two separate buildings.
The applicant has provided detailed concept plans to demonstrate the project can be developed on the property while complying with zoning and land use standards. For example, no development is proposed in the flood hazard area. The proposed buildings can be developed within the building height limits. The proposed development meets the setback requirements from Lion Boulevard. Proposed outdoor lighting is compliant with Town standards. The applicant has worked with an architect to design buildings that are consistent with the Town code design guidelines for style and materials.
Previous Zone Change Requests There have been two previous zone change requests on this property in the last 10 years.
In 2010 a zone change to the VC zone was approved. That zone change would have allowed a mix of hotel units, residential units, and commercial space similar to the current proposal. However, the total number of units was less than the current proposal (29 lodging units and 11 housing units). That proposal also included 40 public parking spaces that would be available to the general public. A group of residents challenged the Town’s approval based on an irregularity with the public notice for the Town Council hearing. The zone change was overturned based on this challenge.
In 2019 Mr. Mabey presented a zone change for the subject property, as well as additional property surrounding the Stone Mountain condominium complex. That zone change would have put the property in the VC-MIHD (Moderate Income Housing Development) zone. That zone change would have allowed transient lodging, affordable housing, and commercial space, all at a greater density and intensity than the current proposal (106 transient lodging units, 36 affordable housing units, and 9,500 square feet of commercial space). The Planning Commission recommended denial of the application. Mr. Mabey withdrew the application after the Planning Commission’s recommendation1.
Staff Analysis According to section 10-3-2(A) of the Town Code, it is the policy of the Town not to make zone changes, except in three specific instances: 1) to promote more fully the objectives and purposes of the land use ordinance and general plan, 2) to correct manifest errors, or 3) to accommodate substantial changes in conditions. Thus, at least one of these three criteria must be met for the Commission to recommend favorably on the applicant’s request.
Applicant’s Justification for Zone Change The applicant’s submittal states the proposed zone change will both promote the objectives and purposes of the General Plan and accommodate substantial changes in the Town. The applicant states that the purpose of the proposed project is to provide more affordable housing options in the Town. According to the applicant, by providing more affordable housing options the project will promote the affordable housing priorities and goals in the General Plan and will also respond to the substantial change in housing affordability in the Town.
The applicant’s submittal contains a detailed analysis of how the affordable housing component of the project could benefit the Town. The Commission should reference the applicant’s submittal for information regarding how the applicant believes providing affordable housing as a component of the proposed project will benefit the Town and thus justify a zone change.
1 Section 10-3-2(L) requires the applicant to wait at least one year after a zone change request is denied, or is withdrawn after the Planning Commission hearing, before filing a new application for the same or similar zone change. The Planning Commission hearing on the 2019 zone change application was on August 14, 2019. The application was withdrawn shortly after. Thus, the applicant has satisfied the one-year waiting period on a new zone change application. Additional General Plan Direction The applicant’s submittal states that the proposed zone change will promote the goals and objectives of the General Plan by providing additional affordable housing in the community. The application specifically references Objectives 5.2.1 and 5.2.3 of the Plan, both of which encourage affordable housing provided by the private market. By providing eight affordable housing units the applicant suggests the project will help the Town accomplish its affordable housing goals.
Staff notes the General Plan contains other objectives and strategies that may be useful in evaluating this rezone request. Some of these are listed below. Staff encourages the Commission to review these strategies, as well as others in Chapters 2, 3, and 5 of the General Plan.
Strategy 3.1.1.b. “Evaluate all requests of rezoning, planned development overlay projects, development agreements and other similar development proposals based on the need to maintain a sustainable level of development.”
Objective 3.2.1. “To the greatest extent possible, avoid rezoning properties from residential to commercial.”
These strategies suggest the town should be cautious in approving zone changes, particularly those that change residential zoning to commercial. The Town should be cautious in approving zone changes that increase the amount of potential development in Springdale to an unsustainable level. The Commission should consider whether or not the applicant’s proposal is compatible with these General Plan directives.
Also, since a significant portion of the proposed development is new lodging, the Commission should determine if the lodging development allowed by the proposed zone change is consistent with the General Plan vision for new lodging development (see GP Objective 3.1.3). The General Plan encourages the Town to provide “attractive, memorable, and unique lodging that complements the visitor’s experience in Zion Canyon and Zion National Park.” The General Plan encourages “boutique hotels, bed and breakfasts, and other similar lodging establishments that help promote the village atmosphere and small-town scale.” The applicant has provided detailed plans showing the proposed lodging development. The Commission should review these plans and determine if the style and scale of the proposed development will promote Springdale’s unique village atmosphere.
Additional Information The Commission may wish to consider the following additional information to help frame the discussion on the applicant’s proposal.
● As part of the 2019 application, the applicant indicated a willingness to conduct a Traffic Impact Study for the proposed development if the zone change is approved. Staff notes the traffic from the project could be significant, especially given increases in general traffic in Springdale over the past year. In the absence of a Traffic Impact Study, the Commission can use examples of other development in Springdale to gauge the traffic impact of the proposed development. The Commission may wish to consider if Lion Boulevard and especially the Lion Boulevard / SR-9 intersection is sufficient to accommodate the amount of traffic the proposal could generate. ● The applicant has included a letter from the Stone Mountain Condominium HOA that indicates the homeowners in the condominiums have reviewed the proposed plans, and some of the homeowners are supportive of the request. As of the date of this report staff has not received any other public comment.
Summary The Commission should consider whether or not the proposed zone change will promote the purposes and objectives of the General Plan, specifically those dealing with affordable housing, future lodging development, and village scale. The Commission should also consider whether or not the proposed zone change accommodates substantial changes of conditions in the Town, specifically related to affordable housing. The Commission may also consider other factors listed in 10-3-2(B) of the Town code such as timing, impact, or scape of the proposed development in determining if the requested rezone should be approved.
The Commission should make specific findings about the merits of the requested zone change on which to base a recommendation to the Town Council. The Commission can use the following questions to help inform the findings:
- Is the location of the property suitable for a mixed-use lodging/retail/affordable housing development? - Is the scale of the development consistent with the Town’s village scale? - What are the likely impacts of the proposed development on traffic? Is the surrounding transportation network capable of handling these impacts? - What are the likely impacts of the proposed development on adjacent and nearby properties (noise, lighting, visual impact, etc.)? Will these impacts significantly impact the village atmosphere of the area? - Will the proposed development help the Town achieve affordable housing goals identified in the General Plan? Specifically, is the provision of eight affordable housing units a significant enough benefit to the Town to warrant a zone change that will allow the development of 52 additional transient lodging units? - Does the zone change request meet one of the three criteria listed in section 10-3-2(A) of the Town Code? (The three criteria are: promotes General Plan, corrects manifest errors, accommodates substantial changes in conditions.)
Based on these findings, the Commission should make a motion to recommend either approval or denial of the requested zone change.
Watchman Center
Index
Application for Zone Change PDF Including: a. Watchman Center Master Plan b. Justification for Zone Change c. Watchman center Building Sample d. Legal Description e. Official Land Use Map f. Materials Board g. Letter of Support from Stone Mountain Condo Association
SITE BOUNDARY 19.27 ACRES
WATCHMAN CENTER MASTER PLAN SPRINGDALE, UT
PROJECT BOUNDARY 242,119 SF (5.56 ACRES) IMPERVIOUS AREA = 96,325 SF (39.8%) PERVIOUS PAVING = 5,845 SF (MUST SUPPORT FIRE DEPT. VEHICLE TRAFFIC)
COMMERCIAL BUILDING C-1 (2 STORY) 2,988 SF FOOTPRINT BUILDING C-2 (2 STORY) 4,668 SF FOOTPRINT
HOTEL
BUILDING H-1 (2 STORY) 3,999 SF FOOTPRINT 10 Q/Q 0 Q/Q SUITE 2 K EDGE OF FOOTHILLS BUILDING H-2 (2 STORY) 3,999 SF FOOTPRINT 10 Q/Q 0 Q/Q SUITE 2 K TOPOGRAPHY CHANGES BUILDING H-3 (2 STORY) 2,261 SF FOOTPRINT 2 Q/Q 2 Q/Q SUITE 0 K BUILDING H-4 (2 STORY) 2,261 SF FOOTPRINT 4 Q/Q 2 Q/Q SUITE 0 K BUILDING H-5 (2 STORY) 2,444 SF FOOTPRINT 0 Q/Q 6 Q/Q SUITE 0 K BUILDING H-6 (2 STORY) 2,261 SF FOOTPRINT 4 Q/Q 2 Q/Q SUITE 0 K 50.00' BUILDING H-7 (2 STORY) 2,268 SF FOOTPRINT 4 Q/Q 2 Q/Q SUITE 0 K BUILDING H-9 (1 STORY) 7,321 SF FOOTPRINT (NO GUESTROOMS) TOTAL 34 Q/Q 14 Q/Q SUITE 4 K 52 GUEST ROOMS
**AREA CALCULATIONS OF HOTEL BUILDINGS WITH COVERED CONNECTING WALKWAYS DO NOT INCLUDE AREA OF WALKWAYS
APARTMENTS BUILDING A-1 2,537 SF FOOTPRINT (8 STUDIO APARTMENTS)
PARKING PROVIDED 100.00' HOTEL 56 STALLS (INCL. 2 STALLS ATOP POROUS PAVING) COMMERCIAL/APARTMENTS 80 STALLS ZONE: FOOTHILL RESIDENTIAL 100.00' ALL AREA CALCULATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE EXISTING HILL
10 STALLS EXISTING WASH HATCHED INDICATES AREA STONE MOUNTAIN DR.
OF PERVIOUS PAVING 8 STALLS 10 STALLS
26' FIRE LANE
10 STALLS ZONE: 10 STALLS LINE OF FLOOD ZONE PUBLIC USE
8 STALLS
H-1 H-3 H-2
H-4 EXT'G ROAD
H-5 GARDENS LINE OF PROJECT BOUNDARY LINE OF PROJECT BOUNDARY
30.00' H-6 8 STALLS NORTH LANDSCAPING C-2 H-9 GARDENS 10 STALLS HOTEL SITE H-7 0 25' 50' 100' 242,119 SF OUTDOOR POOL 9 STALLS SCALE: 1'-0" = 50'-0" & HOT TUB AREA 18 STALLS 6 STALLS 5.56 ACRES 2 STALLS 26' FIRE LANE 100.00' ZONE: ZONE: 18 STALLS A-1 9 STALLS C-1 VILLAGE COMMERCIAL
30.00' VALLEY RESIDENTIAL LANDSCAPING
LION BLVD. ZONE: VILLAGE COMMERCIAL
WATCHMAN CENTER - SPRINGDALE, UT MASTER PLAN v29 AE2018.137 03 NOV 2020 Watchman Center
Zone Amendment Justification
Accommodates Substantial Change in Conditions:
The Future Land Use Map identifies this property as mixed use. Mixed use anticipates commercial activity. Past use of this property is consistent with commercial activity. Currently there is a paid parking lot located on the southeast corner. This parking lot currently has 135 parking spaces. With the Town of Springdale directing visitors to park on Lion Boulevard the conditions of this area of town have changed drastically. Lion Boulevard is no longer a good location for the development of residential housing.
Village scale is also a priority for the Town of Springdale. This project will attempt, whenever possible, to reduce impacts. Buildings heights will be lowered to be below 28 feet. Buildings will be designed incorporating materials such as rusted steel and sandstone giving the project the feel of design elements used by Zion National Park.
We acknowledge that there is a desire by the town to avoid zone changes. However, there is an application process for zone changes. That means that from time to time it is appropriate to make changes to zoning to accommodate a substantial change in conditions. The General Plan’s future land use map identifies this property as mixed use. A mixture of commercial and housing. Currently the property is being operated as a commercial parking lot. In the past the town approved an application for zone change to village commercial on this property. It was overturned due to a notice error. It is our belief that our proposed development of a small hotel with some commercial space and eight apartments is a better use for this property and accommodates the substantial change in conditions to this area in Springdale.
The Town of Springdale has undergone dramatic changes in housing over the past ten years. With the growth in visitation to Zion National Park the town has felt an impact on housing available to either purchase or rent. Ten years ago an individual working in Springdale could realistically locate housing. That has changed.
Affordable housing does not just mean low income housing. It is much more wide reaching than that. Affordable means affordable to all residents. The point certainly can be made that the majority of employees in the Town of Springdale cannot afford housing here. These individuals may earn a fair wage; however, there simply are not sufficient housing options available.
There has never been a greater need for rental housing in the Town of Springdale! The individuals we ask to manage and work in our businesses cannot find affordable housing options in Springdale. The majority of our town staff, managers of our businesses, and employees who support Springdale are living in Virgin, LaVerkin, and Hurricane. More dramatically are those who have resorted to purchasing campers and living on BLM lands. The State of Utah mandates that cities and towns have a plan for affordable housing. It is not just good enough that the Town of Springdale has as a priority on the first page of the General Plan affordable housing. We need to take action to provide enough affordable housing to have an impact. We are losing options for affordable housing. The proposed Homewood Suites project would provide 8 apartments. Eight apartments will not satisfy all of the needs for housing in Springdale, not even close. It is a step in the right direction.
What does affordability mean when it comes to housing? Unitedstateszipcodes.org states that in order to determine if housing meets the standard of affordability you take the median home price in your community divided by the median income. An appropriate number for affordability is 3. Studies have shown that the two most expensive places to purchase a home are Springdale at number one, and Rockville at number two. Reports have sited that the median income for Springdale is 61,471 and that the median home price is $551,900. If you divide Springdale’s median home price by Springdale’s median income you get a factor of 9, which according to unitedstateszipcodes.org is severely unaffordable. Housing prices are not going down in Springdale! The only avenue at this point to provide affordable housing is through a rental pool of apartments.
Promotes More Fully the Objectives and Purposes of the Zoning Code and General Plan:
The Town’s General Plan establishes the vision and future growth and development in the Town. One of the listed priorities for the general plan is that “The Town desires to promote diversity in the housing options available, especially for low and moderate income families.” The creation of 8 apartments will add to the town’s housing diversity.
Chaper 5 of the General Plan talks about housing. It states its’ goal is “To assure that housing in the Town is sufficient in number and type to serve adequately the needs of its permanent and seasonal populations.” It also states, “The Town also desires to maintain a diverse housing stock that meets the housing needs of a population with varied income levels.” This clearly is not the case today.
In part Objective 5.2.1. encourages affordable mixed-use (commercial/residential) construction/reconstruction. The main goal to our Ordinance for affordable housing should be in achieving and preserving an appropriate mix of affordable housing to meet the Town’s housing needs. The Town desires to maintain a diverse population of various income levels. This income diversity is a key component in maintaining a village atmosphere. Village atmosphere is different than village scale. Village scale refers to building sizes, etc. Village atmosphere talks about the mix of individuals living in our community. There is clearly a directive to make certain that the town has a mixture of residents with varying incomes. This can only be accomplished if there is also a mix of housing that is available to all income levels.
Objective 5.2.3 Encourage private development of affordable housing throughout Springdale, focusing on needs of local residents and the employees of local businesses. The 2003 Affordable Housing Ordinance seeks to provide affordable housing throughout town. The employees of the local businesses should be the primary beneficiaries of such housing. The Town should review applicable ordinances to ensure that the employees of local businesses have opportunities to secure suitable housing and that any barriers to affordable employee housing are eliminated.
Objective 5.2.5 Promote lower cost housing in the private market. Housing currently available through the private market in Springdale is mostly high end single family homes. This type of housing is unaffordable to most of the people who work in town. By encouraging more modest house sizes, more multi-family housing, and smaller lots, the town can promote lower housing costs in the private market. These strategies should be used judiciously in areas carefully analyzed and approved by the Planning Commission and Town Council.
Together with the vision of the Future Land Use Map and the substantial change in conditions to this location in Springdale, we feel it is justified to issue a zone change for this parcel. It is consistent with the current commercial use of the property as a paid parking lot.
PREFUNCTION MEETING
OUTDOOR PATIO WOMEN MEN STORAGE
BUSINESS CTR.
BREAKFAST LOBBY VESTIBULE
REGISTRATION BUFFET
12 FOOD PREP 3 MANAGER ROOF BEARING EL.12'-0"
ELECT. MAIN LEVEL EL.0'-0" TYPICAL BUILDING SECTION
H10 MECHANICAL NORTH
NORTH 0 4' 8' 16' OVERALL SITE - KEY PLAN WATCHMANHOMEWOOD CENTER SUITES -- BUILDINGBUILDING H10H9 SPRINGDALE, UT H10 H10 11/4/2020 Account View
Account 0104615
Location Owner Value Account Number 0104615 Name EAST VH ZION LLC Market (2020) $495,200 Parcel Number S-137-A 1001 CYPRESS CREEK RD STE 203 Taxable $495,200 Tax District 10 - Springdale Town CEDAR PARK, TX 78613 Tax Area: 10 Tax Rate: 0.009363 Acres 5.53 Type Actual Assessed Acres Situs 0, 0 Non Legal S: 28 T: 41S R: 10W BEG N 190.34 FT N FM Primary $495,200 $495,200 5.530 W1/4 COR SEC 28 T41S R10W TH N 359.66 FT Land ALG SEC/L; TH S 63*53' E 974.8 FT; TH S 37*50' E 192 FT; TH S ALG SEC/L 685.95 FT; TH NWLY 126.33FT ALG ARC OF 460 FT RAD CUR; TH N 53*20' W 109.02 FT; TH NWLY 91.92 FT ALG ARCOF 400 FT RAD CUR; TH N 66*30' W 48.4 FT TO POB. LESS: LAND IN AMPHITHEATER RD Parent Accounts Parent Parcels Child Accounts Child Parcels Sibling Accounts Sibling Parcels Transfers Entry Number Recording Date 00354788 09/29/1989 04:31:00 PM B: 536 P: 646 00370291 08/27/1990 03:31:00 PM B: 571 P: 509 00507129 08/11/1995 03:01:00 PM B: 927 P: 625 00986310 11/21/2005 08:29:00 AM B: 1816 P: 184 20070058730 12/13/2007 04:07:43 PM 20180036499 09/06/2018 09:51:42 AM 20180036543 09/06/2018 12:30:20 PM 20180040686 10/08/2018 11:17:29 AM 20190046478 11/08/2019 08:14:13 AM 20190046479 11/08/2019 08:14:13 AM "Tax" Images Tax Year Taxes GIS 2020 $4,636.56 2019 $4,275.06
eweb.washco.utah.gov:8080/recorder/taxweb/account.jsp?accountNum=0104615&doc= 1/2 11/4/2020 Account View
eweb.washco.utah.gov:8080/recorder/taxweb/account.jsp?accountNum=0104615&doc= 2/2 GENERAL PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP
Redhawk
Legend
s GeneralPlan g n ri p Designation S n yo n Agriculture a C Agriculture Residential Conservation Conservation Residential
Transition Residential Kinesava Mixed Use Commercial Core Civic Federal Lands Virgin_River
Anasazi Plateau
This area may be used for a Town Welcome/Information Center and parking area F
East VH Zion, LLC 1001 Cypress Creek Road #203 Cedar Park, Texas 78613
August 19, 2020
Mr. Justin Mabey Manager, East VH Zion, LLC 1001 Cypress Creek Road #203 Cedar Park, Texas 78613
Dear Mr. Mabey
The current dialogue over the status, rights and privileges of the East VH Zion, LLC development surrounding Stone Mountain continues. The trustees and some homeowners, endorse the action being taken by East VH Zion, LLC to resolve density, project location and other concerns as presented to us on August 10, 2020.
We are fortunate and appreciate East VH Zion, LLC’s sensitivity to scaling back the project and being sensitive to our concerns regarding the impact of this project.
We are hopeful that we will be able to obtain mutually beneficial improvements to our properties.
Regards,
Greg McDonald President Stone Mountain Owners Association (SMOA) PO Box 954, Springdale, UT 84767 435-817-7202 [email protected]
Memorandum To: Planning Commission
From: Thomas Dansie, Director of Community Development Date: November 13, 2020 Re: November 18, 2020 Planning Commission Meeting Design / Development Review – Commercial Transient Lodging Development, 358 Zion Park Boulevard
Executive Summary Luke Wilson has applied for a DDR for a two-unit transient lodging building on the hillside above the paid parking area at 358 Zion Park Boulevard. The property is currently developed with a paid parking area and a small commercial building which houses a coffee shop and a vacation rental.
The Commission has expressed concern about slope stability and geologic hazards during previous reviews of development on this and surrounding properties. Given the location of the proposed development, those same concerns are warranted in the subject case.
The site is constrained by steep slopes (in excess of 30% slope) on three sides.
Given its location on top of a hill above the parking area, the development will be highly visible from SR- 9.
There are unresolved issues with lighting, landscape, and geotechnical testing the Commission should address with the applicant.
Applicable Ordinances The Commission should review the following code chapters or sections: 1. Chapter 10-11B: Village Commercial Zone 2. Chapter 10-16: Architectural Standards and Design Guidelines
Development Standard Analysis Standard Requirement Proposal Comments Lot Area The minimum lot size is The lot measures 2.1 In compliance. 0.5 acres. acres. Setbacks Front setbacks must be The proposed In compliance. 30 feet, side setbacks development meets all 10 feet, and rear setbacks from property setbacks 20 feet. 20 lines. There is a private feet required from a lane running adjacent private lane (see 10-25- to the proposed 10(D)). development site. The site plan shows the building located 20 feet
1
from the edge of the private lane. Building Size Maximum allowed The proposed building In compliance. building size is 5,000 measures just under square feet. 1,000 square feet. Building Height Maximum building The building measures In compliance. height is 26 feet. 22 feet in height. The applicant has included cross sections showing the building in compliance with the 26 foot virtual plane. Lighting Outdoor lighting must The applicant has The applicant should be down directed and shown the location of provide additional shielded. Outdoor outdoor lighting on the details on the light lighting is only allowed plan, and included fixture proposed. The to illuminate the details on the color applicant should also entrances of buildings, temperature and provide information on outdoor gathering required 2” recess for the total amount of areas, and walkways. the light source. lighting on the Maximum lumens per However, the applicant property (existing + acre is 30,000. has not supplied a proposed). sample light fixture. The applicant has also not supplied information on the total amount of lighting (in lumens) on the property, including the amount of lighting at the existing commercial building. Landscaping Must retain 60% of the The applicant has The applicant should lot as natural open provided a landscape provide a revised and space or landscape, plan showing the total more detailed with at least 30% in amount of landscape landscape plan landscape area. and natural open space showing details for in compliance with landscape area requirements. (number and type of However, there are no vegetation), and details for the areas documenting all areas shown in landscape claimed as natural (number and type of open space meet the trees, shrubs, etc.). requirements in the Also, some of the area ordinance for natural shown in natural open open space. space will not qualify as natural open space
2
(but could qualify as landscape area).
Colors and Materials Colors must conform to The applicant has In compliance. the color palette provided details on regulations. Building colors and materials material must be demonstrating compatible with the compliance with Town surrounding standards. environment as per section 10-16-4. Parking See section 10-23-4 The proposed two The Commission should Parking spaces transient lodging units discuss the location of required. will require four the customer parking parking spaces (one for with the applicant. The each unit plus two Commission may wish employee spaces). The to have the applicant proposed site plan provide a revised site does not identify any plan showing the specific parking spaces finalized location of the for the transient customer parking lodging. The applicant spaces next to the has indicated there is lodging building. room on the building site for two customer parking spaces between the private lane and the structure. The applicant has provided a sketch site plan that conceptually shows where that parking could be located. The employee spaces will be located in the paid parking area on the property. This would require two of the paid parking spaces in the parking lot to be dedicated for employees of the transient lodging business.
3
Other Issues Slopes and Landslide The proposed building is placed on a small mound of blue clay at the toe of the Springdale landslide. The slopes on three sides of the building site are steeper than 30% in grade. In previous reviews for development on this property the Commission has expressed concern regarding developing near the landslide, slope stability, and soil conditions. Those same concerns are warranted in this case. The applicant has had a geotechnical test completed for the building site. Staff has not seen a copy of the results of this test, or the engineer’s recommendations. With previous development on this and nearby properties the Town has requested a third party review of the applicant’s geotechnical testing results and recommendations. The Commission could request a similar third party review of the proposed development. The main consideration of this review is to determine whether or not the proposed development will comply with section 10-11B-12(A):
Natural Hazards: Construction of permanent structures shall not be permitted, erected, established or performed in such a manner as to place real or personal property and/or individuals at unreasonable risk of harm or injury from natural, geographic or topographic hazards such as landslides, floods or excessive soil erosion. In addition to compliance with the provisions of the Building Code governing standards to meet the maximum foreseeable risk of such hazards, persons developing, improving, managing or owning such property shall have the obligation to bear the burden of so developing and/or improving the property in such a manner that the property and/or general public are safeguarded from unreasonable risk of harm or injury from such natural hazards.
The applicant has designed the structure such that there will be no disturbance to the existing 30% slopes surrounding the building site. However, the Commission may wish to emphasize the need to prevent all disturbance on and around the steep slopes.
Grading Without a Permit The applicant leveled the proposed building site earlier this year. This grading and leveling work was done without a grading permit or grading review. The applicant was issued a civil grading citation and was required to obtain a grading permit for the work performed. Part of the process for obtaining a remedial grading permit is presenting the grading that has already occurred with the present application.
Visibility From SR9 Given the location of the proposed building on top of a hill, the development will be highly visible from SR9. The VC zone does not contain special development standards for highly visual lots (as does the FR zone). However, the Commission may wish to discuss ways the applicant can reduce the visual impact the development will have. For example, the Commission could encourage the applicant to take care in the placement and design of interior lighting.
Conditional Use Permit Transient lodging is a conditional use in the VC zone. The applicant has been issued a conditional use permit to operate one vacation rental unit above the coffee shop near the paid parking area. The applicant will need to obtain additional conditional use approval for the two newly proposed transient lodging units.
4
Sample Motion Language The Commission may wish to use the following sample motion language in making a motion on this project:
The Planning Commission Approves/Denies the proposed Design/Development Review for the two-unit transient lodging building at 358 Zion Park Boulevard. The motion is based on the following findings:
[LIST FINDINGS]
If making a motion of approval, staff recommends the following conditions of approval:
1- The applicant must provide additional details on the proposed outdoor lighting, including: fixture design, and total amount of lumens from all lighting (existing and proposed) on the property. The total amount of outdoor lighting may not exceed 30,000 lumens per developed acre. The Town will not issue a building permit for the project until these lighting details are provided. 2- No development or disturbance (including incidental disturbance during construction) is allowed on the 30% slopes located around the behind. The applicant must install construction fencing preventing access and disturbance on the 30% slopes. The Town will not issue a building permit until the fencing is in place. The fencing must remain in place and undisturbed for the duration of the construction project. 3- The applicant must provide a revised landscape plan showing additional detail regarding the landscape and natural open space areas, including the number and types of vegetation proposed and the qualities of the natural open space areas. The Town will not issue a building permit for the project until these landscape details have been provided. 4- The applicant must provide the results and recommendations of the geotechnical testing for the site. The Town will hire a third party independent reviewer to provide a review and response to the geotechnical testing. The applicant will be required to implement the recommendations of the third party reviewer. 5- The applicant must provide a revised site plan showing the finalized location of customer parking near the proposed building, and must dedicate two of the spaces in the paid parking area for employees of the transient lodging business.
5
From: Dianne McDonald < > Date: November 15, 2020 at 3:01:15 PM MST To: Greg McDonald < > Subject: DDR comments for 358 Zion Park Blvd
To: Members of Springdale Town Council From: Dianne McDonald Subject: Concerns regarding DDR for 358 Zion Park Blvd
1. Ingress-Egress. We want to be assured that Stone Mountain RD (a privately owned road) is not used for construction traffic or employees working on the project during construction, or used by guests after construction.
2. Erosion: what methods will be used to mitigate erosion of the blue clay on the building site? What actions will be taken so the blue clay is contained on the subject property?
3. Drainage: How will drainage be controlled, especially if the road is paved? What methods will be used to keep drainage from the site from going onto Stone Mountain RD and the property of Stone Mountain Owners Association (SMOA)?
4. View: This is a highly visible lot, both from SR-9 and SMOA property. What steps will be taken to mitigate the visibility?
5. Trespassing: The SMOA Board has not given anyone associated with the road construction (or this project) to enter the property of SMOA. We do not want the owner(s) to use the hydrant on our property or string the fire hose across our property for dust control.
Thank you Dianne Mc Donald Sent from my iPad 11/17/2020 Town of Springdale Mail - Re: Comments on Proposed Transient Lodging Building at 358 Zion Park Blvd
Katy Brown
Re: Comments on Proposed Transient Lodging Building at 358 Zion Park Blvd 1 message
Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 1:29 PM On Tue, Nov 17, 2020, 1:23 PM Stan Plaisier >
wrote:
Springdale Planning Commission and Tom Dansie:
The proposed location for a two-unit transient lodging building should not be approved for the following reasons:
1. The proposed building would be located upon unstable clay soils that exhibit significant shrink/swell properties and are highly erosive. This area has been identified by the Utah Geologic Survey for geologic hazards including slope instability.
2. This location, near the top of Balanced Rock Road, is highly visible both from SR-9, and will actually interfere with the view that residents of the Stone Mountain Condo Building B units currently enjoy and appreciate. Our unit in particular has a great view of Bridge Mountain that will be partially blocked if this 22 foot high building is allowed to be built.
3. It will be very difficult for this building to comply with the Town’s Dark Sky Ordinance, as the building is significantly above the surrounding facilities and roads.
One other comment is that the developer has significantly damaged Balanced Rock Road while bringing heavy equipment and materials up to this, and adjacent, project sites. This road is the only official entrance to the Stone Mountain Condos.
Sincerely,
Stan Plaisier
Springdale, UT
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=55923841fa&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f%3A1683640812481296102%7Cmsg-f%3A16836408124812… 1/1 17 November 2020
Springdale, UT 84767
Springdale Planning Commission 118 Lion Boulevard Springdale, Utah 84767
Dear Planning Commission,
We are writing to express our concerns about two proposed zoning changes that would permanently effect Springdale and our local neighbors. Both, in our opinion, are negative proposals. We understand the commission meets tomorrow (11/18/2020) to consider these proposals.
The first is the change in zoning of the property adjacent to Zion Blvd (near the city center, Library, & parks). It is currently zoned residential. The developer proposes changing to commercial. The only person who benefits from this change is the developer, who does not live there. The property is exceptional. Because of this the original seller demanded a high price. The developer obviously felt he/they could pay that price and make a profit by changing the zone to commercial which would allow business development. Businesses would dramatically change the area. We have lived here for ten years. We see the dramatic growth of Zion. We also see the daily crowding created by visitors trying to experience the park…long lines of cars trying to enter daily; long lines of visitors waiting to board buses. Zion is already “maxed-out”. Will more development in Springdale add to the experience of any who visit? Will the added congestion in one of the last “quiet” areas benefit long-time local residents and city dwellers who utilize the library, tennis courts, & park as a place to “escape”? The developer obviously entered this area with eyes “wide-open”. I am certain that those eyes, from day one, saw a zone change he/they could implement. Why should all loyal residents pay a huge price in quality of life just to accommodate a developer? In our view, we should not.
The second is the proposed transient lodging above the new parking lot below Balanced Rock Road. The parking lot has worked well. The lodging will not! It would be on land that obviously is unstable, as the slide-ruined homes just above them attest. Pipes protrude into space along that ridge…the remains of past slides. Deep crevasses cleave the terrain. The developer proceeded to build a road and make improvements before approaching the commission for approval…possibly thinking if work had already begun, how could you refuse? Esthetically, it diminishes the whole area. Enough is enough! When will clear, rational thought prevail? I suspect the commission is composed of clear thinkers who love Springdale, Zion, and our quality of life. Let’s do our best to preserve our heritage!
Thank you,
Brad & Linda Weston