The Planning Commission on Aug. 26, 2021 lasted about two hours. You can now join the PC meetings via ZOOM. This could be helpful if a citizen wished to comment on any proposed ordinances or to be heard in the Citizens To Be Heard portion of the meeting. The ZOOM link is provided in each meeting packet. The meeting can be viewed on YouTube at https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Rv1kTe5m5J8
The Planning Commission meeting packet including agenda and additional information can be found here https://moabcity.org/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_08262021-1072?html=true
This report follows the agenda item numbers in the PC packet.
3.1 Public Hearing (continued) – Proposed Planning Resolution 06-2021 A Resolution Approving the Creekside Townhomes, a Nine Unit Townhome Site Plan and Preliminary Plan.
- This public hearing is continued from the August 8, 2021 Planning Commission Meeting. This is a nine unit townhome development at 545 Kane Creek Blvd. The public hearing was closed. The Planning Commission unanimously passed Planning Resolution 06-2021 to approve the development. One issue was newly identified by the recent flooding. The portion of the property to be developed is above and adjacent to the flood zone and possibly subject to scouring during a flood. Building engineering plans will need to address this potential problem.
3.2 Public Hearing And Possible Recommendation To City Council On Ordinance 2021-16 An Ordinance Amending The Text Of The Moab Municipal Code (MMC) To Revise Section 17.70 Accessory Dwelling Units And Section 17.06.020 Definitions.
- The ordinance revision brings the Moab City Code into compliance with recent legislation from the Utah State legislature. After about 50 minutes of discussion the PC unanimously passed a positive recommendation to the City Council in support of the code revisions. The discussion considered issues like building heights, property line setbacks, number of ADUs permitted on lots, and the difference between Internal ADUs and External ADUs. No ADUs will be permitted for nightly or short term rentals. Problems with enforcing this requirement were also discussed.
3.3 Public Hearing And Action Item – Proposed Ordinance 2021-15, An Ordinance Approving A Zoning Map Amendment For Property Located At Parcel #01 -0001-0173, Approximately 398 Kane Creek Blvd, Moab UT 84532, Amending The Subject Zone From RA-1 Residential-Agricultural Zone To RA-1 And R-3 Multi-Household Residential Zone.
- This proposed rezone was rejected earlier by the Moab City Council. The developer revised the plan to address Council concerns. A two acre portion of the parcel will be left as two parcels of one acre to create a buffer between adjacent properties and the more dense development permitted in the R-3 Multi-Household Residential Zone. The revision also attempts to correct some access issues including a portion dedicated to a public trail, internal road layouts, and identification of the sewage system connection route. All properties in this area are on septic systems. A potential map of the development subdivision was presented although the developer noted that this is no longer being considered. Developers often present preliminary development scenarios even though that information is not relevant to deciding on a zoning change. If the zoning change is permitted the owner/developer can develop the property in any way that is permitted in the zone. The resolution narrowly passed the PC with a vote of 5:2. If the Planning Commission rejected the zoning change the owner or developer could still request the zoning change from the City Council.
4.1 Action Item – Consideration And Possible Approval Of Planning Resolution 07-2021, A Planning Resolution Approving An Amendment To The Approved Site Plan For The Moab Regional Hospital Located At 450 Williams Way, Moab UT 84532.
- There seemed to be no controversy over this proposal. The resolution included developing additional hospital property adjacent to and north of the current hospital. One part of this newly developed property will include a methadone clinic. The site plan also included additions to the current hospital that would enlarge the space available to the ER, the laboratory, and administrative area. There were some technical problems with the submitted site plan. The corrections, such as a mislabeled legal description of a corner location, were included in the resolution. The PC unanimously passed the resolution.