HomeMy Public PortalAboutPKT-CC-2011-12-13CITY OF MOAB
ember 13, 201f
PRE -COUNCIL WORKSHOP
6:30 PM
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
7:00 PM
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
(217 East Center Street)
City of Moab
217 East Center Street
Moab, Utah 84532
Main Number (435) 259-5121
Fax Number (435) 259-4135
www.moabcity.org
City of Moab - Regular Council Meeting
City Council Chambers: 217 East Center Street
Tuesday, December 13, 2011 at 7:00 p.m.
4111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
6:30 p.m. PRE -COUNCIL WORKSHOP
7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
SECTION 1: APPROVAL OF MINUTES
None
SECTION 2: CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
SECTION 3: DEPARTMENTAL UPDATES
3-1 Community Development Department
3-2 Engineering Department
3-3 Planning Department
3-4 Police Department
3-5 Public Works Department
SECTION 4: PRESENTATIONS
4-1 Presentation Regarding the Trails Master Plan by Sandy Freethey, Trail Mix
Committee Chair
4-2 Presentation of the Mayor's Student Citizenship of the Month Award for
December 2011 for Helen M. Knight School
SECTION 5: PUBLIC HEARING (Approximately 7:30 PM)
5-1 Proposed Full -Service Restaurant Liquor License for Michelle and Karl Kelley,
d.b.a. Desert Bistro Located at 36 South 100 West. The Proposed License
Location is within a 600 foot Proximity of the Public Pathway
5-2 Proposed Ordinance #2012-01— An Ordinance of the City of Moab Amending
the Official City of Moab Zoning Map for the Purposes of Approving an
Application to Rezone Portions of the Red Rock Partners Property Located at
61 North 100 West from C-2 and R-4 to C-3
5-3 Solicitation of Potential Projects for Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) Small Cities Program for Program Year 2012
SECTION 6: CONSENT AGENDA
6-1 Council Appointment of the Mayor Pro -Tenn
6-2 Council Designation of a Councilmember Responsible for Approving Bills
6-3 Confirmation of a Mayoral Appointment to the Grand County Solid Waste
District Board for a Term Ending December 31, 2013
6-4 Confirmation of a Mayoral Appointment to the Moab City Planning
Commission for a Term Ending December 31, 2016
6-5 Approval of 2012 Moab Golf Club Rates
6-6 Approval of the 2012 Regular City Council Meeting Schedule
6-7 Approval of the 2012 Moab City Holiday Schedule
SECTION 7: NEW BUSINESS
7-1 Approval of a Moved -on Structure Permit for Mark Zink to Conduct a Product
Display Located at 311 South Main Street on April 3, 2012
7-2 Approval of the Second Amendment to the Mulberry Grove Subdivision
Improvements Agreement
7-3 Request to Send Proposed Resolution #01-2012 — A Resolution Amending the
Fiscal Year 2011-2012 Annual Budget to Public Hearing
7-4 Approval of a Plat Amendment for West Center Street Properties
7-5 Approval Proposed Resolution #23-2011— A Resolution Adopting the Water
Conservation Plan Update 2011 for the City of Moab
7-6 Approval of Traffic Sign Retroreflectivity Maintenance Policies and
Procedures
7-7 Approval of an Extension Agreement by and between Moab City, Grand
County Water Conservancy District and the Grand County Cemetery District
for Use of the Cemetery Well
7-8 Approval of Proposed Resolution #24-2011— A Resolution Approving an
Amendment to the Grand County Non -Motorized Trails Master Plan
(GCNTMP) as an Amendment to the Moab City General Plan
7-9 Approval of Proposed Resolution #25-2011— A Resolution of the Governing
Body of the City of Moab Authorizing Delinquent Terminated Utility Accounts
to be Written off of the Accounting System
SECTION 8: READING OF CORRESPONDENCE
SECTION 9: ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
SECTION 10: REPORT ON CITY/COUNTY COOPERATION
SECTION 11: MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS
SECTION 12: APPROVAL OF BILLS AGAINST THE CITY OF MOAB
SECTION 13: ADJOURNMENT
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals needing special accommodations during this meeting
should notify the Recorder's Office at 217 East Center Street, Moab, Utah 84532; or phone (435) 259-5121 at least three
(3) working days prior to the meeting. Check our website for updates at: www.moabcity.org
CITY OF MOAB
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
CORRESPONDENCE
December 9, 2011
Memo To: Honorable Mayor and Members of Council
From: Rebecca W. Andrus, City Engineer
Subject: US 191 Bicycle Pathway Surfacing Considerations — Asphalt vs. Concrete
As we have progressed through the construction of the US 191 project, several key changes have occurred that
offer a new opportunity. The bicycle path from 500 West to the Transit Hub was originally designed to be
asphalt primarily because of installation cost. When UDOT bid the project, it was nearly $200,000 above the
budget cost. Since then, we have eliminated the boardwalk and replaced it with a standard trail section. The
rail fence was also taken out of the project to be done separately as a City/County joint project since the
contractor cost after months of negotiation only got down to $113.50 per foot. The cost for the fencing is
anticipated to fall within the match that the City and County have already obligated to the project. With these
changes, there is currently a surplus in the project of approximately $126,000 that would be returned to UDOT
if unused. Change orders and various Value Engineering cost proposals may alter this number somewhat.
Earlier in the project, the City asked UDOT to get a price from the contractor for switching the path from
asphalt to concrete. The pricing came in at over $116,000 more than asphalt; see the cost proposal from WW
Clyde. It did not make sense to change surfacing materials at that time because the additional cost would have
been entirely borne by the City. However, with the surplus in the project that UDOT will match 80%/20%, the
City cost for switching from asphalt to concrete could be as low as $24,000 if the entire project remains within
budget.
I have attached several pictures that were provided to me by Trail Mix showing some of the issues that they
are having with asphalt paths. The County has determined that the anticipated regular maintenance cost of an
asphalt path is $3,000 per mile per year (County email attached). I have also included pictures of the Mill Creek
Parkway, which was put in using concrete over 15 years ago. It remains in great condition with no regular
maintenance. Using a conservative number for the useful life of a concrete path at 25 years, this would put the
maintenance savings at $75,000 per mile. The 500 W to Transit Hub pathway section that will be put in with
the UDOT project is approximately one mile. Therefore, if the additional cost for concrete is $24,000, there will
be a net savings of over $50,000 for the life of the project. It is anticipated that concrete will last longer than
this, which would increase the benefits of switching. Additionally, asphalt would require full depth reclamation
within that time period, which could cost $80,000 in today's dollars.
It would be prudent to budget for the possibility of utilizing concrete instead of asphalt for the path. I propose
using the storm drainage fund to pay for some of the over $100,000 in drainage infrastructure that will be put
in as part of this project and setting aside $30,000 for use in changing to a concrete path. The additional
money is to be used only if the project exceeds the budgeted amount when the change order is applied. These
budgetary changes would be included in the mid -year budget opening that will be up for approval in January.
Sincerely,
Rebecca W. Andrus, PE
Moab City Engineer
3-2
W.W. Clyde & Co.
P.O. Sox 350 Springville, Utah 84663
(801) 802-6803 / fax (801) 802-6830
Equal Opportunity Employer
11114-044
October 31, 2011
Russell Tangren
Resident Engineer
Utah department of Transportation
P.O. Box 1138
Moab, Utah 84532
Re: F-0191(86)126
US 191; MP 126 to MP 129.8
Concrete Trail Option Pricing
Dear Russ:
In response to your request for changing the Trail S surfacing from asphalt to concrete we
offer the following proposal:
527 CY of UTBC @ $33.001 CY = $17,391,00
527 CY of Concrete @ $355,00/ CY = $187,085.00
Total = $204,476.00
Additionally the duration of this activity would change from five working days to twenty
two working days.
Sincere
J4---------
Steve Swis er
Project Manager
MIN
American Road 3 Transportation
9ui]dprS AsSOciation
Pictures of one -year -old asphalt pavement that is already showing signs of significant cracking.
Trail Mix has had to apply Crack Seal to try to mitigate the damage before it becomes more
severe. The glove and coin in the picture on the left show the thickness of the cracks.
These pictures depict asphalt that has been in place for three
years. Beyond the cracking, weed growth within the asphalt can
be a significant issue that leads to further decay of the asphalt.
This asphalt is 6-7 years old and is
showing signs of failure. Immediate
patching is necessary at this point,
but its effects are limited and full
reconstruction is not far in the
future. Without regular
maintenance, asphalt deteriorates
rapidly.
Concrete pavement utilized onthe Mill Creek Parkway isover
1S-yean-o|dand isstill ingreat shape. Regular maintenance has
not been required.
Rebecca Andrus
From: Freethey <sngmoab@preciscom.net>
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2011 8:27 PM
To: rebecca@moabcity.org; Olsen, David
Subject: Fwd: paved pathway / asphalt maintenance
Attachments: Asphalt Maintenance.xls
Rebecca and David
Here are messages and attachment about a pavement maintenance worksheet schedule that Geoff
Freethey and Krissie Killoy have created. The message mentions $3,000 per mile, per year as an
average which is a number provided by Bill Jackson with the County Road Dept.
Sandy
Original Message
Subject:paved pathway / asphalt maintenance
Date:Wed, 2 Nov 2011 21:54:49 -0600
From:kkilloy <kkilloy@,grand.utah.gov>
To:<gfreeth@preciscom.net>, "'David Olsen"' <david@moabcity.org>, "'Freethey"'
<sngmoab@preciscom.net>, "Chris Baird" <cbaird@grand.utah.gov>, "'Kim Schappert"'
<kschappe@mac.com>
Thanks Geoff for creating a budget worksheet. I added a tab (see attached) to get a rough idea for asphalt maintenance
costs.
A couple of notes:
• From the information I gathered, the 4 year alternating maintenance plan seems to be an "average".. I have
heard a range of suggestions from two years to seven years depending on conditions and the treatment(s)
proposed.
• I am not sure how accurate the per square yard estimate is for fog seal. I have two calls out to double check
this.
• For ease of administration and reducing mobilization costs we will want to group trail segments into a two to
three year rotating schedule
• When it comes time to complete seal coating we may want to discuss quantities applied (rather than square feet
or yards) with the contractor
It appears that allocating $3,000 per square mile of paved path is adequate based on current costs. This gives us a
starting point for budgeting purposes.
The next step is to draft a RFP for the previously identified 2012 projects (Goose Island, Gemini, and front of Arches
segments). I will start a draft and send it out to the group for review. It would be great if once budgets are complete we
could solicit bids (i.e. get crack sealing done before April).
Charlie Skews is in town tomorrow so I will run these numbers by him as well.
Thanks,
Krissie
1
3-2
CITY OF MOAB
PROPOSED FULL -SERVICE RESTAURANT LIQUOR LICENSE
PROXIMITY PUBLIC HEARING
The City of Moab will hold a Public Hearing on Tuesday, December 13, 2011 at
approximately 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Moab City Offices at 217
East Center Street, Moab, Utah.
The purpose of this hearing is to solicit public input on a proposed Full -Service
Restaurant Liquor License for Michelle and Karl Kelley, d.b.a. Desert Bistro
Located at 36 South 100 West. The proposed license location is within a 600
foot proximity of the Public Pathway. The City Council will solicit public input
regarding granting a variance to the proximity distance restrictions for a Full -
Service Restaurant Liquor License.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals needing
special accommodations during this meeting should notify the Recorder's Office
at 217 East Center Street, Moab, Utah 84532; or phone (435) 259-5121 at least
three (3) working days prior to the meeting.
/s/ Rachel E. Stenta
City Recorder
Published in the Times Independent, December 1 and 8, 2012.
R:\Notices\2011\proximity ph.docx
5-1
"FULL -SERVICE RESTAURANT LIQUOR LICENSE"
LOCAL CONSENT
Date:
Attn: DABC Licensing & Compliance Section
, [ ] City [ ] Town [ ] County
hereby grants its consent to the issuance of a full -service restaurant liquor license to:
Business Name:
Applicant / Business Owner: KtCL-{v_7., ! [GAL V-e-U.-L(
Location Address: -3& SOvM (Do
Pursuant to the provisions of Utah Code 32A-4, Part 1, this license allows for the storage, sale and
consumption of liquor on the premises.
(>4 Check if applicable
LOCAL CONSENT FOR PROXIMITY VARIANCE
In accordance with Utah Code 32A-4-101(4), the local
authority also grants consent to a variance regarding the
proximity of this establishment relative to a public or
private school, church, public library, public playground,
or park.
fubt,1e_ 1-16nor.,3 & .E(24 , feu t
Authorized Signature
Print Name / Title
This is a suggested form. A city, town, or county's own form is acceptable.
Local consent may be faxed to the DABC at 801-977-6889 or mailed to:
Department of Alcoholic beverage Control
PO Box 30408
Salt Lake City, UT 84130-0408
Effective May 12, 2009 (v.8.16.10) page 7 of 44
UDABC
P. O. BOX 30408
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84103-0408
RE: Liquor License for Desert Bistro
36 South 100 West
Moab, Utah 84532
To Whom It May Concern:
We are opposed to the granting of a liquor license to Desert Bistro at the above address.
The property abuts our own property on their West property line, and we have found that
the liquor license and the serving of liquor causes a huge amount of rowdyness and noise.
The rowdyness and noise disturb the peace of all of the residents who live in the same
neighborhood. We have had to put up with all of that for years from the RIO, which is
next door to the Desert Bistro. The adding of one more liquor license on 100 West will
double the noise and disturb the peace of the neighbors even more.
We also feel that the serving of liquor that close to the Moab Park System, will cause a
problem for people wanting to use the Parkway Path because of the rowdyness and noise.
We ask that you deny the variance and deny the liquor license.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
7
e . �- ande)-edit—
oyoak
175 West Center Street
Moab, UT 84532
cc: Moab City Planning Commission
Moab City Council
editor@moabtimes.com
Classified -Legal Notice
Please publish the public hearing notice below in the legal notices section of as soon as possible.
Send billing and proof of publication to the attention of
Charlotte Evans
Utah Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control
P.O. Box 30408
Salt Lake City, UT 84130-0408.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me or Charlotte at 977-6800.
Thank you very much.
S incerely,
Keith Zuspan
Licensing and Compliance Division
Utah Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control
Legal Notice
Pursuant to sections 32B-1-202 Utah code annotated, a public hearing will be held on Friday, November 18,
2011, at 4:30 p.m., at the Desert Bistro, 36 South 100 West, Moab, Utah to gather information regarding
whether a variance should be granted to the Desert Bistro to receive a liquor license located at 36 South 100
West.
The proposed Desert Bistro restaurant is located within the 600 foot proximity restriction of the Alcoholic
Beverage Control Act with regard to the Friends of the Parkway pathway (Moab Park System) located on 100
South.
Public input is welcome. Written comments/input may be sent to: UDABC, PO Box 30408, Salt Lake City, UT
84103-0408
Dated this 2nd day of November 2011
Utah Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control
Michael Navarre, Chief of Police
MOAB CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT
217 East Center Street, Suite #130
Moab, Utah 84532
(435) 259-8938
FAX (435) 259-8915
Date: 11/10/2011
MCPD-MEMO-11-11-01
To: Moab City Counci
From: Navarre l/,r
Re: Desert Bistro (alcohol license)
The D.A.B.0 has determined that this establishment is within the 600' proximity restriction with regards
to the Mil!creek Parkway, located on 100 W 100 So. Therefore a public hearing will be held by the State.
We concur with the D.A.B.C. on the proximity issue. The establishment is within the 600' proximity
restriction of the Parkway. This license should be forwarded to Moab City public hearing.
Measurements are attached.
Thanks
em
Desert Bistro
Liquor License
0 20 40
N
80
120
160
Feet
1 inch = 60 feet
CITY OF MOAB
PUBLIC HEARING
PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2o12-oi
The City of Moab will hold a Public Hearing on Tuesday, December 13, 2011 at
approximately 7:3o p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Moab City Offices at 217 East
Center Street, Moab, Utah.
The purpose of this hearing is to solicit public input on Proposed Ordinance #2012-01 -
An Ordinance of the City of Moab Amending the Official City of Moab Zoning Map for
the Purposes of Approving an Application to Rezone Portions of the Red Rock
Partners Property Located at 61 North too West from C-2 and R-4 to C-3.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals needing special
accommodations during this meeting should notify the Recorder's Office at 217 East
Center Street, Moab, Utah 84532; or phone (435) 259-5121 at least three (3) working
days prior to the meeting.
/s/ Rachel E. Stenta
City Recorder/Assistant City Manager
Published in the Times Independent, December 1 and 8, 2011.
R:\Notices\2011\ph ord 2012-01.docx
5-2
ORDINANCE #2012-01
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MOAB AMENDING THE OFFICIAL CITY
OF MOAB ZONING MAP FOR THE PURPOSES OF APPROVING AN
APPLICATION TO REZONE PORTIONS OF THE RED ROCK PARTNERS
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 61 NORTH 100 WEST FROM C-2 AND R-4 TO C-3
WHEREAS, the Governing Body of the City of Moab and the Moab City Planning
Commission desire to make zone amendments to promote the health, safety, morals,
convenience, order, prosperity, and general welfare of the present and future inhabitants
of the City;
WHEREAS, Michael H. Bynum, Manager, Red Rock Partners, LLC, 755 North Main
Street, Moab, Utah, owner of record of an approximate 5.64-acre tract of land located at
approximately 61 North 100 West, Moab, Utah, has applied to change the zoning from C-
2 and R-4 to C-3; and,
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission ("Commission") of the City of Moab held a
public hearing on March 10, 2011, concerning the amendment of the City of Moab
Official Zone Map to reflect a zoning change for said property located at the above
described location; and,
WHEREAS, the Commission in a split 3-2 vote favorably recommended the zoning
change to the Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDINAINED by the City of Moab that effective upon the
signing of this Ordinance, the City of Moab Official Zoning Map with its amended
boundary lines and zoning districts is declared to be an official record of the City and
shall be included as part of Title 17 of the Moab Municipal Zoning Ordinances and shall
reflect a zone change from C-2 and R-4 to C-3 for the above described property.
Passed and adopted by action of the Governing Body of the City of Moab in open session
this -th day of , 2012.
City of Moab
Mayor David L. Sakrison
Attest:
Rachel E. Stenta
City Recorder
Ordinance #2012-01 Page 1 of 1
5-2
City of Moab
Planning and Zoning Department
Correspondence
October 20, 2011
Memo To: Honorable Mayor and Members of Council
From: City Staff
Subject: Adoption of Ordinance 2011-10, an Ordinance Amending the Official
Zoning Map for the Purpose of Approving an Application to Rezone
Portions of Property Owned by Red Rock Partners and Located at 61
North 100 West
Background
The City has received a request from Michael H. Bynum, Manager for Red Rock Partners, LLC
to review the application for the rezoning of 61 North 100 West. The property is split zoned with
C-3, R-4 and C-2. The applicant is asking for a C-3 Zone to extend to all parts of the property.
The attached letter is asking Council to place the application on the agenda for December 13,
2011.
This application was first reviewed by the Planning Commission at their meeting of February 24,
2011 but was tabled for further review. Subsequently, the Commission held a vote on March 10,
2011, and in a 4-0 vote, favorably recommended the zone change to Council.
On March 22, Council reviewed the application and elected to not hold a public hearing and
voted 1-4 to not approve the request to rezone the property.
On April 26, 2011, Councilmember Bailey moved to reconsider the proposal to rezone the
property and in a 4-1 vote, the action carried. Immediately, the item was tabled in a 5-0 vote
with no set date to bring the application from the table for further review and discussion.
Process
Based on the request from Mr. Bynum, the Mayor will have to entertain a motion and vote to
take the application from the table and then establish December 13, 2011 as the date of the
public hearing.
The attached background information was submitted to the Planning Commission as well as
Council for review prior to the meetings listed above.
p:\planning department \2011\correspondence \pI-II-233 cc red rock rezoning.docx
5-2
RED ROCK PARTNERS, LLC
40 N. 100 West
Moab, UT 84532
(435) 260-1388
October 12, 2011
Hand — Delivered
Ms. Donna Metzler
City Manager
217 E Center Street
Moab, Utah 84532
RE: Red Rock Partners Zone Application
Dear Ms. Metzler:
As Manager of Red Rock Partners, I am writing to request that our application for re-
zone be placed on the December 13, 2011 Council Agenda for a public hearing. Thank
you for your attention to this matter.
Kind R� •�..� /
Michael H. Bynum
Manager, Red Rock Partners, LLC
5-2
44 UtahStateUniversity
MOAB EDUCATION CENTER
December 6, 2011
City Council Members
City of Moab
217 East Center Street
Moab, UT 84532
Dear Members of the Moab City Council,
I would like to voice my support for the proposal to rezone the property at 61 North and 100 West to
C-3 to support the future development of a hotel and conference center. A conference center in Moab
would be consistent with efforts at USU Moab to increase capacity within the community to host
educational conferences and events that would substantially enrich our community. The central
location of the property is ideal for this use and would provide numerous collateral benefits: move some
traffic and events off of Main Street; accommodate the many groups that wish to hold training and
educational events in the Moab area; expand the visitor season; and create economic activity that
would benefit many local businesses throughout the year.
Thank you for giving full consideration to this proposal.
Sincerely,
Steven R. Hawks, EdD, MBA
Associate Dean and Executive Director
Utah State University Moab
125 W 200 S
Moab, UT 84532
steve.hawks@usu.edu
435-259-7432
City of Moab
Planning and Zoning Department
Inter -office Correspondence
14 it 043
March 15, 2011
Memo To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Moab Council
From: City Staff
Subject: Review and Approval of an Application to Rezone Portions of
the Red Rocks Partners Property Located at 61 North 100 West From C-
2 and R-4 to C-3 and Approval of Ordinance #2011-10 Amending the
Official City of Moab Zoning map
Background
The Planning Commission held a public hearing to review this application on February 24, 2011.
The Commission voted in a split vote to favorably recommend the rezone to Council. If
approved, the rezoning will create consistent zoning across the entire parcel. The property is
currently zoned predominantly R-4 with a small amount as C-2. The portion of the property that
fronts on 1st West Street is currently C-3. The application has been submitted in an effort to
change the C-2 and R-4 portions to C-3.
Please refer to the attached PC memos PL-11-037, PL-11-041, and particularly, memo PL-11-
032, dated February 19, 2011, for background information regarding the application.
Discussion
The Planning Commission requested additional information for their meeting on March 10 and
were provided with:
o History of the zoning for the area,
A discussion about the advantages of redevelopment, and
o A survey of the existing development of 1s` West and Williams Way.
Also, a comparison was provided as to the types of uses allowed in the three zones in Planning
memo, PL-11-037, and a visual survey of the types of uses on First West as well as adjacent
properties on nearby Williams Way was presented by staff.
Page 50 of 92
G
Page 2 of 3
The zoning history was first classified as C-2 in 1954. The entire west side of the city was
zoned commercially at the time and labeled "Central Commercial Zone". Today, the
Central Commercial Zone is given a "C-3" designation. Between 1954 and 1974 there is
little evidence as to what occurred in the area but the surviving zoning map indicates that
during the twenty year span many of the zones we now have were created and applied to
various parcels. During this time, the original C-2 was divided into R-4 and R-3 with large
portions of the property as C-3. This historic map also follows zone change updates until
1982. Maps from 1992,1993, and 1998 show no changes in the zoning in the immediate
area. Then in 2009, Council approved the zone change of the Bazil-Todd property from
C-3 to C-2 so they could construct an office/home and provide their dwelling on the
ground floor.
The referenced zoning maps will be available for Council review.
Aspects of rezoning and redevelopment include those listed below. It should be considered that
this action goes beyond development of just this property and that approval of the ordinance
can be considered as a Downtown redevelopment that will provide depth off of Main Street and
strengthen our commercial core.
➢ Redevelopment is one of the most effective ways to reverse deterioration and breathe
new life into distressed areas, breaking down barriers and drawing new investments by
private enterprises.
➢ Redevelopment is meant to attract and create jobs, revitalize the business climate,
rehabilitate the housing stock and initiate active participation by citizens in the area.
➢ Incompatible or undesirable conditions are considered blight, and renovating these areas
is the major focus of redevelopment; Blight directly contributes to disproportionately high
crime rates, and dangerous or illegal activities.
➢ New police stations, renovated library branches and street paving are some of the
notable results of these types of improvements;
➢ Redevelopment attracts new services and businesses to the area, increasing the
economic health of the City as well as providing local residents with new and viable job
opportunities;
➢ Redevelopment offers existing business owners opportunities to upgrade their store
through fagade improvements, enhancing their chances to attract and maintain
customers and therefore succeed in their business efforts,
➢ Redevelopment enhances the existing streetscape and landscaping of public
throughways in these areas;
➢ Redevelopment monitors vacant properties and maintains strict Code Enforcement
efforts, including graffiti removal;
• Redevelopment is an investment in neighborhoods that helps in resident retention by
developing open space areas, parks and community resource facilities that unite many
diverse neighborhoods and accentuates positive aspects to be shared in all cultures.
Process
The process for a Zoning Map amendment is similar to a text amendment of the development
code in that it is Council's discretion to hold or not hold a public hearing. The Code allows
Page 51 of 92
Page 3 of 3
Council to adopt text amendments as well as Zoning Map amendments in Chapter 17.04.100,
Action by City Council. Paragraph "A", without a public hearing;
"A. The city council may authorize any zoning map amendment or text amendment
by ordinance adopted at a public meeting, which shall be held following receipt of the
planning commission recommendation."
The code goes on to state, "In its discretion, the council may elect to receive testimony or
evidence from the applicant, city staff, and the public prior to taking final action on the
ordinance."
If a public hearing is conducted, then the necessary notices and advertising must be
completed.
Alternatives
1) Council can decide to hold a public hearing and establish a date;
2) Council can decide to not hold a public hearing and approve Ordinance #2011-02 as
recommended by the Planning Commission;
3) Council can approve Ordinance #2011-02 with any changes necessary to address
concerns;
4) Council can vote to not approve the ordinance and state the reasons for denial;
5) Council can table the ordinance in order to satisfy needs for additional information.
pAplanning department VOINcorrespondence \p1-II-041 red rock memo.docz
Page 52 of 92
5-2
ORDINANCE #2011-10
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MOAB AMENDING THE OFFICIAL CITY
OF MOAB ZONING MAP FOR THE PURPOSES OF APPROVING AN
APPLICATION TO REZONE PORTIONS OF THE RED ROCK PARTNERS
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 61 NORTH 100 WEST FROM C-2 AND R-4 TO C-3
WHEREAS, the Governing Body of the City of Moab and the Moab City Planning
Commission desire to make zone amendments to promote the health, safety, morals,
convenience, order, prosperity, and general welfare of the present and future inhabitants
of the City;
WHEREAS, Randy Day, of Red Rock Partners, LLC, 755 North Main Street, Moab,
Utah, representing the owner of record of an approximate 5.64-acre tract of land located
at approximately 61 North 100 West, Moab, Utah, has applied to change the zoning from
C-2 and R-4 to C-3; and,
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission ("Commission") of the City of Moab held a
public hearing on March 10, 2011, concerning the amendment of the City of Moab
Official Zone Map to reflect a zoning change for said property located at the above
described location; and,
WHEREAS, the Commission in a split 3-2 vote favorably recommended the zoning
change to the Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDINAINED by the City of Moab that effective upon the
signing of this Ordinance, the City of Moab Official Zoning Map with its amended
boundary lines and zoning districts is declared to be an official record of the City and
shall be included as part of Title 17 of the Moab Municipal Zoning Ordinances and shall
reflect a zone change from C-2 and R-4 to C-3 for the above described property.
Passed and adopted by action of the Governing Body of the City of Moab in open session
this _`h day of , 2011.
City of Moab
Mayor David L. Sakrison
Attest:
Rachel Ellison
City Recorder
Ordinance #2011-10 Page 1 of 1
Page 53 of 92
5-2
STY 04,
MOAB
Memo To:
From:
Subject:
Background
City of Moab
Planning and Zoning Department
Inter -office Correspondence
February 19, 2011
Members of the Moab Planning Commission
City Staff
Public Hearing to Approve an Application to Rezone Property as
Submitted by Tom Stevens Representing Red Rock Partners
Pl 11037
Tom Stevens, acting on behalf of Red Rock Partners, has applied for a rezone of property
located at 61 North 100 West (northwest corner of the intersection of Williams Way and 100
West). The property is currently zoned predominantly R-4 with a small amount as C-2. The
portion of the property that fronts on 1st West Street is currently C-3. The application has been
submitted in an effort to change the C-2 and R-4 portions to C-3 for a resort development.
The affected property is approximately 5.13 acres in size.
The residents of the existing mobile home park were given the required nine month notification,
possibly in 2007-08, to vacate the property.
Discussion
This application will erase a split of one of the properties by the zoning boundary between R-4
and C-2 and C-3. This is similar to a recently approved rezoning of property and will remove the
confusion created by this situation. Contemporary zoning generally follows property lines and
centerlines of street rights -of -way and the applicant has provided a plat showing this concept.
As provided in a previous memo to the Planning Commission, the objectives and characteristics
of the zones should be evaluated in reaching a decision.
The objectives for the C-3 zone are contained in Chapter 17.24.010 of the code. It states,
"The C-3 central commercial zone has been established as a district in which the
primary use of the land is for business purposes. The area covered by this zone is now
and it is intended that it shall continue to be the dominant shopping and financial center
of the city and surrounding territory. For this reason the zone has been located in the
central part of the city where the street pattern makes the business buildings readily
accessible to all parts of the city and surrounding region and where business and
Page 54 of 92
Page 2 of 6
shopping activities can be carried on with maximum convenience. The C-3 zone is
characterized by wide, clean, well -lighted streets, ample pedestrian ways and vehicular
parking lots for the convenience and safety of the public. Attractive, inviting and well -
maintained shops, stores, offices and other buildings are also characteristic of this zone.
Representative of the uses in this zone are banks, hotels, office buildings, theaters, and
a wide variety of retail outlets. In order to accomplish the objectives and purposes of this
title and to promote the characteristics of this zone, the regulations set out in this chapter
shall apply in the C-3 zone."
Proposed residential uses cannot be located on the ground floor. A conceptual plan has not
been received at this time but the code requires that residential uses in the C-3 not occupy
possible ground floor commercial spaces. The exception is if the housing units are intended for
affordable housing.
The objectives of the current zoning are also interesting. In Chapter 17.51.010, the R-4 zone is
described as providing,
"the most appropriate locations for mobile home parks and mobile home subdivisions
along with conventional dwellings. The zone is characterized by open fields interspersed
by well -maintained mobile home parks, mobile home subdivisions, and other types of
dwellings."
The R-4 zoning in this area does not mirror the images conjured up by the description in the
code but it does allude to "...other types of dwellings" that may be an appropriate match to the
surrounding commercial development.
Chapter 17.21.010 describes the C-2, commercial -residential, zone as an area that would
"facilitate the development of attractive areas within the city that allow the mixing of compatible
commercial and residential uses; facilitate the orderly expansion of commercial uses out from
the central commercial district; and, be characterized by attractive and well -maintained
commercial and residential buildings set back from public streets and surrounded by
landscaped yards."
It is logical that this area would become an extension of the central commercial district (C-3
Zone). The proximity of the property within one block of Main Street is a natural expansion and
approval would be in conformance with the provisions of the General Plan to expand this
commercial area. It will attract visitors and provide lodging within walking distance of the night
life and other activities on Main Street.
Rezoning of older properties for redevelopment can enhance the neighborhood and provide an
increase in utilization of underdeveloped spaces, buildings and utilities. These underused areas
are a significant asset that the City can offer for redevelopment projects. The potential for
additional residential development, improved neighborhood environments, and providing
additional jobs are all economic benefits.
Page 55 of 92
Page 3 of 6
Code Chapter 17.04.040, Zoning Map Amendments, contains criteria for the Planning
Commission and Council to apply to requests to rezone:
Review of Criteria
Chapter 17.04.050 states, "For the purpose of establishing and maintaining sound, stable and
desirable development within the City of Moab, zoning map amendments are to be discouraged.
Zoning map amendments shall only be approved if the applicant establishes that one or more of
the following standards apply to the subject real property:
1. The land to be zoned was zoned in error and, as presently zoned, is inconsistent with
the policies and goals of the City's General Plan.
It can be argued that this area was zoned in error and was merely applied because of the type
of development that was in existence at the time of adoption of these sections of the code. It is
necessary for central commercial areas to have surrounding transition or "supporr zones that
provide complimentary and accessory types of businesses and services for various retail
establishments. This type of arrangement provides proximity shopping on a pedestrian scale .
and creates a compact walk able design in compliance with Smart Growth.
Rezoning of this property is also in keeping with the policies and goals of the General Plan.
Rezoning will•
• "...provide for adequate amounts of appropriate commercial land in the future and to
ensure the attractiveness, natural beauty, existing character and environmental stability
of these areas;
• Encourage the development and vitality of a central commercial district compatible with
small-town living;
• Will fulfill the implementation of the "in -filling and redevelopment policy of the plan";
• Encourage clustering of commercial enterprises;
• Satisfy the Plan by permitting expansion of commercial uses into or within residential
areas... if such development maintains the residential desirability of the affected
neighborhoods and the "character" of the structure and signs and `fits in" with other
existing structures;
• Encourage variety in new commercial developments and businesses;
• Allows the central commercial zone to expand when additional commercial
capacity is needed and when such development is compatible with historical
structures and character of the community;
• Encourage upgrade in the appearance of commercial areas and ensure that
building design enhances existing town.scale and character.
2. The area for which a map amendment is requested has changed or is changing to
such a degree that it is in the public interest to encourage a redevelopment of the area.
Page 56 of 92
Page 4 of 6
The area has become a busy economic area with commercial development in the guise of a
subdivision of `twin homes" on Williams Way, additional residential development and the
proposal for a new hospital a short distance from this property.
3. The proposed map amendment is necessary in order to provide land for a use which
was not anticipated at the time of the adoption of the City's General Plan, and that such
change will be consistent with the policies and goals of the Plan. Special consideration
shall be given to existing conditions on and around the area in question, including the
changing nature of the area, land uses, densities, and the height and scale of both
existing and proposed structures.
Certainly, a destination resort was not anticipated just one block off of Main Street in 2002, but
the economic value of property has risen greatly in the past hand full of years. As noted above
granting the rezone will be in keeping with the goals, objectives, and policies for implementation
of the General Plan.
Map Amendment Approval Criteria.
According to Chapter 17.04.060, the Planning Commission and City Council shall consider the
following criteria in reviewing a proposed map amendment:
1. Was the existing zone for the property adopted in error?
See #1 above.
2. Has there been a change of character in the area including, but not limited to:
the installation of public facilities or new utilities; other approved zone changes;
new growth trends; deterioration of existing development; or the need for
development transitions?
Please see above for a portion of the answer for this criteria. Existing structures are
deteriorating. Many of the commercial buildings saw their banner years a long time ago and are
in need of repair and constant maintenance. New growth trends have been shaped by the
recreation and housing needs of a second home industry because of the opportunities in the
Spanish Valley and surrounding areas and National Parks. Zone changes to commercial
districts have been granted by Council in recent history and this action has caused a `peninsula"
of R-4 zone between commercial zones to be created.
3. Is there a need for the proposed zoning within the area or community?
This proposed rezoning will satisfy the General Plan through expansion of the central
commercial district and provide redevelopment of these older properties.
4. Is the proposed zoning classification compatible with the surrounding area or
uses; will there be adverse impacts; and/or can any adverse impacts be
mitigated?
Page 57 of 92
Page S of 6
The zoning is compatible with the surrounding zones and is adjacent with the C-3 Zone.
Surrounding uses include a single-family home that will probably see some impact and the other
prominent use is a commercial mobile home park.
5. Will benefits be derived by the community or area by granting the proposed
zoning?
From the standpoint of economic development, the community should greatly benefit from the
rezoning and the proposed development for the property. The neighborhood will be improved
through redevelopment and it should act as encouragement for other surrounding property
owners to review their properties for improvement.
6. Are adequate facilities available to serve development for the type and scope
of development suggested by the proposed zoning classification? If utilities are
not available, can they be reasonably extended?
Adequate facilities exist but some upgrade of services may be required at the developer's
expense.
7. Does the application conform with the provisions of the Moab General Plan,
the Land Use Code, and applicable agreements with affected governmental
entities?
The application meets all applicable standards.
Decision to rezone must be based on the General Plan as well as the Land Use Code. The Plan
states, "All ordinance changes, rezoning, or improvement programs should be in conformance
with the expressed policies and maps of the General Plan." It also goes
on to say "...that all new zone changes [must] conform with the General Plan" and that they be
done in a manner "necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the community and
work to preserve the natural environment and character of a small-town community."
A rezone makes sense when viewed in the light of the types of uses on the surrounding
properties. It also makes sense as a logical extension of the C-3 Zone and agrees with the
goals of the General Plan. It may be in the best interests of the City of Moab for the Planning
Commission to consider adjacent properties in this annexation
The rezoning is logical for the area because:
• A single tract would no longer be split by two zones
• It is a natural extension of the C-3 zone
• It meets the criteria of the General Plan
The development of the property will fall under additional scrutiny because of the possible
impacts to traffic and parking that may be associated with this type of development.
These issues will be addressed through review of a commercial site plan application that
will be the next step for the applicant if successful in the rezoning of the property.
Page 58 of 92
Page 6 of 6
Alternatives
1) The Commission can approve the application to rezone as submitted;
2) The Commission can vote to not approve the proposed rezoning and state their reasons;
3) The Commission may table the application for additional comment and review.
pAplanning department \2011\correspondence \pI-II-032 red reck rezone.docx
Page 59 of 92
City of Moab
Planning and Zoning Department
Inter -office Correspondence
March 7, 2011
Memo To: Members of the Moab Planning Commission
From: City Staff
Subject: Additional Information to Approve an Application to Rezone
Property as Submitted by Red Rock Partners
Discussion
This application will erase a split of a tract approximately 5 acres in size that is divided between
R-4 and C-2 and C-3 Zones. Contemporary zoning practices generally follow property lines and
centerlines of street rights -of -way.
The Zoning Declaration in Code Chapter 17.04.050 should be kept in mind while evaluating this
application:
1. The land to be zoned was zoned in error and, as presently zoned, is inconsistent with
the policies and goals of the City's General Plan.
2. The area for which a map amendment is requested has changed or is changing to
such a degree that it is in the public interest to encourage a redevelopment of the area.
3. The proposed map amendment is necessary in order to provide land for a use which
was not anticipated at the time of the adoption of the City's General Plan, and that such
change will be consistent with the policies and goals of the Plan. Special consideration
shall be given to existing conditions on and around the area in question, including the
changing nature of the area, land uses, densities, and the height and scale of both
existing and proposed structures.
In addition, the Map Amendment Approval Criteria are found in Chapter 17.04.060, and the
Planning Commission and City Council must consider the following in reviewing a proposed
map amendment:
1. Was the existing zone for the property adopted in error?
2. Has there been a change of character in the area including, but not limited to:
the installation of public facilities or new utilities; other approved zone changes;
new growth trends; deterioration of existing development; or the need for
development transitions?
3. Is there a need for the proposed zoning within the area or community?
4. Is the proposed zoning classification compatible with the surrounding area or
uses; will there be adverse impacts; and/or can any adverse impacts be
mitigated?
Page 60 of 92
r
Page 2 of B
5. Will benefits be derived by the community or area by granting the proposed
zoning?
6. Are adequate facilities available to serve development for the type and scope
of development suggested by the proposed zoning classification? If utilities are
not available, can they be reasonably extended?
7. Does the application conform with the provisions of the Moab General Plan,
the Land Use Code, and applicable agreements with affected governmental
entities?
A decision to rezone must be based on the General Plan as well as the Land Use Code. The
Plan states, "All ordinance changes, rezoning, or improvement programs should be in
conformance with the expressed policies and maps of the General Plan." It also goes
on to say "...that all new zone changes [must] conform with the General Plan" and that they be
done in a manner "necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the community and
work to preserve the natural environment and character of a small-town community." ,
A rezone is a logical expansion of the C-3 when reviewing the types of uses on the surrounding
properties and agrees with the goals of the General Plan.
The Vision for Moab (pp 5-6) has several goals to follow when planning for the future:
1. Promote the presence of a vital downtown as the center of commercial activities and
employment.
2. Utilize compact development patterns that make the most efficient use of public facilities
and services, protect open space and minimize urban sprawl.
3. Maintain a rural/small town character that saves and complements its historic structures
and neighborhoods.
4. Create walk -able neighborhoods, free of high-speed traffic hazard.
5. Locate schools, parks, trails and other public facilities within walking/biking distance of
homes.
6. Reduce the effects of summer heat by providing or requiring shade in parking lots,
shopping areas, parks and other public areas and neighborhoods; discourage removal of
historic trees; and reduce coverage requirements for asphalt.
7. Separate and buffer conflicting land uses, especially where commercial abuts residential.
8. Encourage a diverse mix of year-round jobs that offer competitive salaries and
meaningful work to keep Moab families employed in Moab.
9. Preserve Moab's surrounding landscapes and other natural resources to enhance the
quality of life for community residents and in order to continue to attract people to the
area who contribute to economic stability.
10. Develop a community and resort destination that is designed for people where walking
and biking are the comerstone of the transportation system.
11. Protect the stillness and visual integrity of Moab's enveloping desert landscape.
12. Protect and preserve open space, agricultural lands, riparian areas, ridgelines, mesas
and wetlands.
13. Improve quality of living through support for affordable housing.
The rezoning is logical for the area because:
• A single tract would no longer be split by two zones
• It is a natural extension of the C-3 zone
• It meets the goal of the General Plan
Future development of the property will fall under additional scrutiny because of the
possible impacts to traffic and parking that may be associated with this type of
development. These issues will be addressed through review of a commercial site plan
).
Page 61 of 92
C
5-2
Pane 3 of i3
application that will be the next step for the applicant if successful in the rezoning of the
property.
This application will erase a split of one of the properties by the zoning boundary between R-4
and C-2 and C-3. If approved, the rezoning of the property will remove the administrative
confusion created by this situation. Contemporary zoning generally follows property lines and
centerlines of street rights -of -way and the applicant proposal has provided a plat showing this
concept.
An evaluation of the objectives and characteristics of the zones may be helpful in reaching a
decision.
The objectives for the C-3 zone are contained in Chapter 17.24.010 of the code and states,
`The C-3 central commercial zone has been established as a district in which the
primary use of the land is for business purposes. The area covered by this zone is now
and it is intended that it shall continue to be the dominant shopping and financial center
of the city and surrounding territory. For this reason the zone has been located in the
central part of the city where the street pattern makes the business buildings readily
accessible to all parts of the city and surrounding region and where business and
shopping activities can be carried on with maximum convenience. The C-3 zone is
characterized by wide, clean, well -lighted streets, ample pedestrian ways and vehicular
parking lots for the convenience and safety of the public. Attractive, inviting and well -
maintained shops, stores, offices and other buildings are also characteristic of this zone.
Representative of the uses in this zone are banks, hotels, office buildings, theaters, and
a wide variety of retail outlets. in order to accomplish the objectives and purposes of this
title and to promote the characteristics of this zone, the regulations set out in this chapter
shall apply in the C-3 zone."
Generally, proposed residential uses cannot be located on the ground floor in the C-3. A
conceptual plan has not been received at this time but the code requires that residential uses in
the C-3 not occupy possible ground floor commercial spaces. The lone exception is if the
housing units are intended for affordable housing stock.
The objectives of the current zoning are also interesting. In Chapter 17.51.010, the R-4 zone is
described as providing,
"the most appropriate locations for mobile home parks and mobile home subdivisions
along with conventional dwellings. The zone is characterized by open fields interspersed
by well -maintained mobile home parks, mobile home subdivisions, and other types of
dwellings."
The R-4 zoning in this area does not mirror the images conjured up by the description in the
code but it does allude to "...other types of dwellings", that may be a match to the surrounding
commercial development.
Chapter 17.21.010 describes the C-2, commercial -residential, zone as an area that would
"facilitate the development of attractive areas within the city that allow the mixing of compatible
commercial and residential uses; facilitate the orderly expansion of commercial uses out from
the central commercial district; and, be characterized by attractive and well -maintained
commercial and residential buildings set back from public streets and surrounded by
landscaped yards."
Page 62 of 92
L
Pooe 4 of B
A comparison of the uses in each zone follows.
R-4
C-2
C-3
A. One -family dwellings and
accessory buildings
B. Planned unit developments
subject to the requirements
and conditions set forth in
Chapter 17.66 of this title
1. Retail, convenience and
wholesale establishments less
than three thousand square
feet (wholesale establishments
with stock on premises but
excluding establishment
whose principal activity is that
of a storage warehouse
2.Office buildings, clinics and
utility buildings excluding
service yards and drive
through services
1. Retail establishments and
service enterprises
2.Office buildings, clinics,
utility buildings
C. Fences, walls, and
hedges which do not exceed
seven feet in height provided
that no fence, wall or hedge
shall exceed four feet in height
within the required front or
side yard that fronts on a street
3. Assembly of appliances
from previously prepared parts
(contained within a building)
3. Assembly of appliances
from previously prepared parts
D. Customary household pets,
including but not limited to
cats, dogs, and canaries; but
not including the breeding of
dogs and cats for sale
4. Eating establishments less
than two thousand square feet
excluding drive-ins or drive
through services
4. Auto body and fender
shops, auto painting
E. Public schools, public
libraries, public parks,
playgrounds, recreation
buildings and churches but not
temporary revival tents or
buildings
5. Service enterprises
5. Beer parlors and alcohol
dispensing establishments
F. Agriculture
6.One-family and two-family
dwellings, apartment houses
and court apartments
6. Electrical appliance shops
(wholesale)
G. Temporary buildings and
yards for the storage of
materials and equipment
incidental to the construction
of dwellings and other
permitted uses; provided,
however, that a permit for
such temporary building shall
not be effective for more than
one year
7. Fraternity organization
Lodges
7. Engraving and printing
establishments
H. Home occupations
8. Funeral le ablisbtnents,
8. Fraternity buildings, clubs,
Pane 5 of 8
mortuaries and churches
lodges
I. Two-family dwellings
9. Gymnasium or physiculture
establishments
9. Funeral establishments,
mortuaries, wedding chapels
J. Child day care centers and
foster family care homes
10. Home occupations
10. Garages and used car lots
L. Court apartments
11. Lodging
establishments (under ten
units)
11. Gymnasium or
physiculture establishments
M. Boarding and rooming
houses
12. Parking lots (commercial)
12. Home occupations
N. Clubs and lodges
(nonprofit)
13. Schools, hospitals, public
buildings and public parks
13. Hospitals
O. Mobile home parks and
mobile home subdivisions
14. Signs
14. Pawnshops
P. Publicly owned athletic
fields and schools
15. Rest homes and day care
centers
15. Motels, cafes, food drive -
ins, offices
Q. Boys' schools and
correctional institutions
16. Green houses and
nurseries
16. Parking lots (commercial)
R. Pasturing of animals
17. Pet shops, veterinary
clinics, art and craft shops,
taxidermy shops, electrical
appliance shops (wholesales),
plumbing shops, carpentry
shops, hardware stores,
electrical retail stores, river
running companies, bakeries,
stone and monument sales
establishments, engraving and
printing establishments and
secondhand stores.
17. Revival tents (temporary)
S. Plant nurseries
18. Service stations
T. Radio and television towers
19. Schools and other public
buildings
20. Secondhand stores
21. Accessory signs and
Billboards
22. Utility buildings and
public buildings
Page 64 of 92 t
Page S of 8,
23. Stone and monument sales
establishments
_
24. Taxidermy shops
_
25. Tire recapping (all
activities inside of a building)
26. Wholesale establishments
with stock on premises but
excluding establishments
whose principal activity is that
of a storage warehouse
27. Trucking companies
subject to city council
approval
28. Dwellings and
apartment
houses are not
permitted,
except that
dwellings
above the
ground floor
shall be
permitted;
30. Ground floor
dwellings only when the
owner of the property is a
legally constituted housing
authority as recognized by the
State of Utah, Grand County,
or the City of Moab, or
alternatively, the owner of the
property is a legally
recognized nonprofit land trust
operating under a signed
property management contract
with a legally constituted
housing authority as
recognized by the State of
Utah, Grand County, or
Moab City
Page 65 of 92
Pane 7 of B
It is logical that this area would become an extension of the central commercial district (C-3
Zone) because a portion is already designated as such. The proximity of the property within one
block of Main Street is a natural expansion and approval would be in conformance with the
provisions of the General Plan to expand the commercial area. It will attract visitors and provide
lodging within walking distance of the night life and other activities on Main Street and provide
an anchor for the development of 100 West as well as for Main Street businesses.
Rezoning of older properties for redevelopment can enhance neighborhoods and provide an
increase in utilization of underdeveloped spaces, buildings and utilities. These underused areas
are a significant asset that the City can offer for redevelopment projects. The potential for
additional residential development, improved neighborhood environments, and providing
additional jobs are additional benefits.
Possible general benefits of redevelopment on underutilized properties include:
• redevelopment of areas that currently attract anti -social behavior
• provision of new units to respond to local housing needs
• improved housing mixes
• Improved mix use for a more walk able community
• provision of key worker accommodation
• increased demand and support for local services
• provide surveillance of currently unsupervised areas
• generate funds for wider physical improvements through unit sales
• More efficient use of existing utilities
In the broad picture,
• All proposals should consider potential long term impacts — for example, would development
have a detrimental impact on vehicular access to potential future development on an
adjacent area? OR would there be great benefit to the community derived from the
redevelopment?
• Need to review the areas immediately around a site — adjacent areas may detract from new
development and become future "problem" areas. Redevelopment can in many situations
help foster redevelopment of adjacent properties.
• The viability of a proposed use of property needs to be considered when it is replacing older
development that is limited in the number of units provided and that is part of the existing
built fabric that is nearing the end of its useful life.
• Proposals should be evaluated with an assessment of the condition of surrounding
development including housing stock and other structures so that they can be incorporated
into comprehensive redevelopment projects in the longer term if possible.
Past changes in zoning from R-4 to C-2 on nearby and adjacent properties have allowed for
development that would not have occurred if R-4 designation was left in place. This trend and
the ensuing development of townhomes and the construction of the hospital, medical office
building, and extended care facility are major changes in the area that will have great impacts in
the future.
While commercial expansion to the east has been thwarted by a handful of residents in the
area, the area along First West has already been rezoned to create an environment for
Page 66 of 92
Paae 8 of B,
commercial expansion. A survey of First West clearly shows the preponderance of commercial
development. It is expected that
p:\planning department VOIRcorrespondence\pI-II-037 redevelopment of red rock part information.docz
Page 67 of 92
ciSY OF
a�
MO.AB
City of Moab
Planning and Zoning Department
Inter -office Correspondence
March 7, 2011
Memo To: Members of the Moab Planning Commission
From: City Staff
Subject: Approval of Resolution #06-2011 Recommending Approval of an
Application to Rezone Portions of the Red Rocks Partners Property
Located at 61 North 100 West From C-2 and R-4 to C-3
Background
The Planning Commission held a public hearing to review this application on February 24, 2011.
If approved, the rezoning will create consistent zoning across the entire parcel. The property is
currently zoned predominantly R-4 with a small amount as C-2. The portion of the property that
fronts on 1s1 West Street is currently C-3. The application has been submitted in an effort to
change the C-2 and R-4 portions to C-3.
The affected property is approximately 5.13 acres in size.
Discussion
The attached Planning Resolution is drafted in the affirmative and the motion should reflect this
approach. The vote then will be to uphold the motion to recommend that Council approve the
change or it can be voted down indicating an unfavorable recommendation to Council.
Alternatives
1) The Commission can approve Resolution #06-2011 as written;
2) The Commission can vote to not approve Resolution 06-2011 and state their reasons;
3) The Commission may table the application for additional comment and review.
p'.[perm ng department \2011\correspondence \pi•II-041 red rock memo docx
Page 68 of 92
CITY OF MOAB
PLANNING RESOLUTION 406-2011
A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE CHANGE IN ZONING OF A PORTION OF
PROPERTY OWNED BY RED ROCK PARTNERS FROM C-2 AND R-4 TO C-3 AND AMENDING THE
CITY OF MOAB OFFICIAL ZONING MAP
WHEREAS, Tom Stevens, (Applicant) of the Stevens Group, Inc., with offices at 0155 Maroon
Mesa Road, Carbondale, Colorado 81623, acting on behalf of the owner of record (Owner) Red Rock
Partners, 755 North main Street, Moab, Utah 84532, has applied for a rezone of property located at 61
North 100 West and consisting of 5.13 acres, more or less; and
WHEREAS, said property is currently zoned predominantly R-4 with a minor amount as C-2 and
a portion of the same parcel adjacent to First West Street is zoned C-3; and
WHEREAS, the application has been submitted by the Applicant in an effort to change the C-2
and R-4 portions to C-3 to provide consistent zoning across the parcel; and
WHEREAS, Applicant has submitted to the Planning Commission ("the Commission") said
application for a zone change to make the parcel of land all one zone rather than create a split multiple
zoning on said property; and
WHEREAS, the Commission reviewed the application in duly advertised public hearing held on
February 24, 2011, to review said application regarding the proposed zone change; and
WHEREAS, the Commission reviewed the character and objectives of the three zones and the
contiguity of the R-3 Zone to the subject property to determine the appropriateness of the application; and
WHEREAS, the Commission also reviewed the Use Regulations for the C-2, R-4, and C-3 zones
to determine the impacts that may affect adjacent properties through approval of the request; and
WHEREAS, having evaluated the concems of the public, the Commission concluded that the
concerns were valid but pertained to the further development of surrounding properties rather than the
rezoning and development of the specific property; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant or future property Owner(s) will be required to provide the City with a
development plan that will address issues that may be identified to provide a safe environment for
residents of the neighborhood; and
WHEREAS, the Commission adopted Resolution No. 06-2011, on March 10, 2011 citing the
change in the character of nearby properties and development on those properties with the decrease of
residential uses and an increase in commercial uses; and
WHEREAS, having considered public comment, Staff recommendations, and discussion of the
pertinent aspects of the proposed development, the Moab Planning Commission by the adoption of
Resolution #06-2011, does hereby find that:
1) The property was not zoned in error but was zoned using inaccurate methods to
distinguish the extent of various commercial areas in the city;
2) The rezoning is a logical expansion of the C-3 Zone and is in compliance with the 2002
City of Moab General Plan;
Page 69 of 92
CITY OF MOAB
Planning Resolution #06-2011 2
3) There have been changes of character in the area including, but not limited to: the
installation of public facilities or new utilities; other approved zone changes; new growth trends;
deterioration of existing development; and a need for development transitions;
4) The proposed zoning classification is compatible with the surrounding area and uses;
5) Adverse impacts can be mitigated;
6) Benefits will be derived by the community or area by granting the proposed zoning.
Additional commercial development will be generated on other properties along First West Street;
7) Adequate facilities are available to the property or can be reasonably extended for the
future development;
WHEREAS, the Moab Planning Commission, has determined that the rezoning of this property is
in the best interests of the City, and that the applicable provisions of the Moab Municipal Code
and the intent of the Moab General Plan can be met
NOW, THEREFORE, THE MOAB PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MOAB, UTAH
favorably recommends the application to rezone a portion of the Red Rock Partners property from R-4
a d to C-3 to Moab City Council
ornto
r
p:\planning department \2011\pe resolutions46.2011 red rk rezone.doex
Page 70 of 92
C
tu!peus Iwo Aq 6upoz 6unspce pue !awed 's6u!pfinq 6u9s!xa mous dew
ebueqo euoz pesodoid to Bait( Buyvtows den - v pcflyx3
izi5Oh
TS= 461°
igt13
,010 ErAV
owe
V02;.
VW. =VP
6u!qojeq qwn papuep lueo!iddy
Aq peupp Avec ad eipu3
'pa! u! peumno Do PI .1,-)d
peuozeH eq pasodom Ban/
G 1 North, 100 West
Application for Rezoning
Owner/Applicant:
Red Rock Partners
do Randy Day
755 North Main
Moab, Utah 84532
(435) 259-7488
randydayAcitlink.net
Submitted By:
The Stevens Group, Inc.
Tom Stevens
0155 Maroon Mesa Road
Carbondale, Colorado 81623
(970) 963-3307 office
(970) 3 19-0699 cell
tstevens Astevensgroupinc. com
www.stevensgroupinc.com
Page 72 of 92
I
I. INTRODUCTION
Red Rock Partners, LLC. (Owners) are the current owners of the 7.22 acre parcel of
land bordered by 100 West, Williams Way and Walnut Lane. This parcel is currently
zoned R 4, C-2 and C-3. The Owners seek to rezone those portions of the subject
property currently zoned R 4 and C-2 to C-3 zoning consistent with the C-3 zoning of
the front (east) portion of the site, to allow the future development of a hoteVresort
with associated commercial uses.
I7.24.0/0 Olvectives and characteristics.
The C-3 central commecmal zone has been established as a distnct in which the primary
use of the land is for business purposes. The area covered by this zone is now and it is intended
that it shall continue to be the dominant shopping and financial center of the city and
surrounding territory. For this reason the zone has been located in the central part of the city
where the street pattern makes the business buildings readily accessible to all parts of the city
and surrounding region and where busmess and shopping activities can be corned on with
maximum convenience. The C-3 zone is characterized by wide, dean, well -lighted streets, ample
pedestnan ways and vehicular parking lots for the convemence and safety of the public.
Attractive, inviting and well -maintained shops, stores, offices and other buildings are also
characteristic of this zone.
Representative of the uses in this zone are banks, hotels, office buildings, theaters, and
a wide variety of retail outlets. In order to accomplish the objectives and purposes of this title
and to promote the charactenstics of this zone, the regulations set out m this chapter shall
apply in the C-3 zone.
The proposal of a hoteVresort/spa with associated commercial space precisely fits the
purpose and the intent of the C-3 zone district. This parcel of land, located just one
block off Main Street and in the central part of the city lends itself well to this type of
development by keeping hotel and commercial uses in the central core and within easy,
convenient distance from existing commercial core activities.
Page 73 of 92
11. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The subject parcel has been assigned an address of 61 North, 100 West, Moab, Utah
84532.
The 7.22 +/- acre parcel of land is currently zoned R 4 for the west two thirds of the
property, C-3 for the east one third of the property with a small area of C-2 at the
southern portion of the site. The site is surrounded by C-3 to the east, as well as to
the north and south of the eastern most third of the parcel, C-2 to the south and west
and R 4 to the north.
Its current use within the R 4 zoned area is a trader court with 45 traders. The parcel is
within City limits- and is serviced by City utilities, roads and support services such as
police, fire etc.
Access is provided to the site by 100 West, Williams Way and Walnut Lane.
The attached site survey shows an area to the southern portion that was the product of
a quit claim from Shields to the City of Moab for a 100 foot wide strip of land in 1 96 1 .
In 1988, the city quited back to Shields certain portions of that 196 I conveyance.
The area not conveyed back is represented on the site survey.
There are structures along the east property line, along 100 West
The parcel is essentially flat, falling from east to west from 4015 feet at its highest
point to 4002 at its lowest. Although the site has approximately 13 feet of fall, spread
over the length of the site gives the perception of being nearly flat.
All existing structures, paved roads, fences, improvements and easements including a
20 foot wide irrigation easement which runs along the southern boundary, turning north
through the site have been represented on the site survey. Traders and utilities to
those traders have not been included in the site survey.
Notice has already been given to residents of the trailer court pursuant to State
mandated requirements, that the court will be closed and residents will be required to
find alternative housing. Closure of the court has not been scheduled, and It 15 the
intent of the Owner to allow residents to stay in the court as long as possible. It
should be noted, closure of the court is not dependent on approval of this rezoning
application. However, the Owner understands that alternative, replacement housing is
important to the redevelopment of this parcel and plans to offer alternative, replacement
housing which will be addressed within this application. This trailer court has provided
Page 74 of 92
Moab with valuable affordable housing inventory. However, the conditions of trailers
within this trailer court are poor. Few, if any, trailers would pass simple life safety
inspections.
III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The Owners propose to redevelop the existing property into a luxury hoteVresort/spa
with associated commercial uses. This development program 15 not intended to
compete with existing lodging accommodations within Moab but instead offer a type of
lodging new to Moab.
All development will be in accordance with the C-3 zone district and its dimensional
requirements for setback, height, lot coverage, parking etc.
All roads and utilities necessary to redevelop the property exist to the property
boundary meaning no extension of any city infrastructure will be required.
An integral component of the redevelopment of this parcel is the closing of the existing
trailer court located on site, the removal of the trailers and the development of
replacement housing for the existing trader court residents. The Applicant also owns
land at Mill Creek and Highway 19 I . This property is currently under city review for
annexation and subsequent development into affordable housing, market rate housing and
commercial space.
The 2009 Grand County and City of Moab HOU5/NG STUDY and AFFORDABLE
HOUSING PLAN identified a strong need for low income to mid professional housing
options. The existing trader court has provided a low income housing option for several
years. However, this housing option is no longer viable due to the condition of the
trailer court. Redevelopment is clearly needed. A community must be able to take a
step back, take an objective look at the affordable housing being provided and answer
one simple question, are we proud of this? Much work will need to be done to offer
replacement housing. While the Owner intends to offer new, highly efficient, well
designed replacement housing at the alternate site, it is not expected that all current
residents will take advantage of this option. What is important is that the option is
available. Also this option must be designed so it is financially accessible to the current
trader court residents. Two components weigh strongly in financial accessibility, initial
purchase or rental rate, and monthly cost of operation. It is the Applicants goal to
affect the development of new units that are both affordable in initial acquisition as well
as energy efficient units that minimize the cost of monthly operation.
Page 75 of 92
IV. REPLACEMENT HOUSING
As previously stated, the site contains 45 trailer homes. These trailers will be removed
from the site and alternative housing will be offered as replacement housing. At this
time the Owner is processing the 22 acre Mill Creek Drive/Highway 19 I property that
is in its ownership through the City for annexation and development review. The
development program for this parcel calls for the development of deed restricted
affordable housing in compliance with the goals of the 2009 Grand County and City of
Moab HOUSING STUDYand AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN. 45 of these units will be
reserved as replacement housing for the trailer court residents. These two parcels are
unrelated and the development review of each parcel 15 unrelated, and as such each
parcel will be reviewed as a stand-alone land use application. The reality though is that
both parcels are inter -related. While the Owners have the legal ability to remove all
trailers from the court at this time, and pursue re -development of that parcel, it is not
their desire to leave the existing residents with no housing option. That is the tie for
these two parcels. Re -development of the 100 WestNValnut Lane parcel must address
replacement housing for the existing residents, not from a legal standpoint, but from a
community standpoint. For that reason, the Owners are developing both parcels in
conjunction.
It cannot be clear at this time how many of the trailer court residents will take advantage
of replacement housing. What Is clear is that each family living in the trailer court can
significantly increase their quality of life by leaving their existing trailer and relocating to
a newly constructed, energy efficient, well designed, safe unit.
The units proposed at Mill Creek/Highway 19 I range from studio to three bedroom
units. There will be units to rent and units offered for purchase. Units will run the range
of pricing beginning with low income up to the mid professional category. The residents
of the trailer court will be given first choice of units, allowing them to pick a unit that
best suits their size and economic needs.
Timing is obviously a sensitive 155ue when developing two independent parcels under
such a scenario. It will take a concerted effort by the Owner, as well as cooperation
from the City to result in a seamless transition from approvals, development and
occupancy of these units without having a gap in time leaving existing residents without
housing while waiting for the completion of the new replacement housing. The Owner will
make every effort to do their part to not close the trailer court and remove trailers until
the replacement units have been constructed.
Page 76 of 92
V. COMPLIANCE WITH 2O02 GENERAL PLAN
The General Plan is a very comprehensive document that guides the growth of all
aspects of Moab. There are, however, certain components of the Plan that directly
guide the subject parcel and this application for rezoning. A few of these key
components have been addressed below.
The General Plan states "The implementation stage of the City of Moab General Plan w4l1
come as rezoning, development and annexation requests are made..." This application
seeks rezoning of the subject parcel which means the City now has the opportunity to
implement the plan relative to this parcel. Within the General Plan, several sections exist
that relate directly to this parcel of land and the development plans associated with the
rezoning request.
SECTION I , ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
The goal of the economic development language is "to encourage development
.that increases the City tax base, reduces unemployment , creates higher wages and/or
improves the standard of hving and quality of life withm the City's capability to prowde
services and the stated policies related to growth."
The existing residential use on the majority of the subject parcel generates no tax
revenue for the City. Also it is arguably one of the City's larger consumers of City
resources, specifically police. By replacing this existing use with lodging and
commercial, the City will expand its tax base considerably while potentially reducing the
consumption of City resources. The existing parcel, in its residential use, generates no
employment while upon redevelopment into lodging and commercial, jobs will be created
ranging from service to upper management. This creation of jobs, especially the higher
wage jobs has a clear benefit to the City.
Currently, the majority of lodging and commercial uses are confined to Main
Street/Highway 19 I . In the particular vicinity of the subject parcel, businesses have
attempted to locate on 100 West with little success. There has been no commercial
draw to get people away from Main Street. With the addition of an upper end
hoteVresort/spa and commercial uses on the subject parcel, surrounding commercial
parcels will have the economic "anchor" they have needed to survive, thus improving the
economic climate well beyond to the specific parcel boundaries of the subject property.
The General Plan goes on to state that the City should "consider carefully adjusting
zoning rules as they relate to economic development." It further states that the City
should "encourage existing businesses and industries to expand." The requested
rezone of the subject parcel will expand the lodging industry and has the potential to
become a significant economic development for Moab. The lodging industry currently
operates at near capacity during "on season" with rooms often times being completely
Page 77 of 92
gr,05.
5-2
booked. Additional capacity allows additional visitors and additional economic impact on
all supporting businesses. Rather than compete with the existing lodging industry
however, the plan for the subject parcel is to develop a higher level of guest experience
with an upper end hoteVspa and commercial. This allows for the contemplated
development plans of the subject parcel to expand the lodging industry and thus the
economic development of the community without directly competing with the existing
lodging industry.
One of the policies of the General Plan, Section I, Economic Development, is to
"encourage, initiate and support City beautification and cleanup efforts." The existing
trailer court, and the subject parcel as a whole, represent some of the least visually
appealing areas within Moab. The redevelopment of this parcel will have a positive
impact on the overall beautification of Moab. Additionally the General Plan calls for the
City to "develop streetscape plans for Center Street from /00 West to 300 East."
The subject parcel serves as a terminus to Center Street and can bring the streetscape
onto 100 West.
SECTION 2, GROWTH AND URBANIZATION
The goal specified within this section is "to encourage the orderly growth and
development of Moab within the Oty's ability to provide services. Emphasis should be
on balancing land use: Guiding growth to locations that are .safe and sensible for the
City to service, while maintaining the character of the town and the beauty of its
surrounding landscapes."
Within the original planning for the City of Moab, this parcel was seen as appropriate for
commercial development and as such was zoned commercial. However, only that portion
of the parcel along 100 West was zoned to commercial as the balance of the parcel was
an existing trailer court and had to be zoned accordingly. Without the trailer court, it is
likely that the parcel would have been zoned commercial from the beginning. Having
commercial and lodging one block off Main Street just makes good planning sense.
Unless it has been determined that the commercial core shall be confined to Main Street
only, those parcels off Main Street, but still within walking distance to Main Street,
would certainly be considered part of the commercial core. The subject parcel
represents an opportunity for the City to expand viable commercial uses along Center
Street, 100 North and 100 South and along 100 West with the rezoning of this parcel.
Services already exist to the subject parcel meaning no extension of service is required,
again marking this parcel a prime location for development. The development review
process will require impact assessment reports which will identify any and all fiscal,
environmental, public facilities and services that will be impacted and require that the
developer pay for these impacts. This includes fees for such services as water and
sewer, and could in the future include fees for storm drains, roads, street lighting, parks
and recreation according to the General Plan.
Page 78 of 92
4-41
5-2
The General Plan goes on to state that the City should "encourage vanety on new
commercial development and businesses" and "allow the central business zone to
expand when additional commercial capacity is needed and when such development is
compatible loth historic structures and character of the community."
SECTION 5, HOUSING
Section 5 of the General Plan addresses housing. The goal of this section states "to
follow a housing strategy that meets the needs of the current residents, anticipates
growth on housing needs, promotes a cohesive, small town environment, supports a high
quality of hfe, and addresses the problems of affordable housing."
In 2009 the City of Moab, in conjunction with Grand County, produced the Grand
County and City of Moab Housing Study and Affordable Housing Plan. This plan looked
at current housing inventory and compared that to current housing demand and
projected housing demand into the future. The demand projected for the year 2012
was 224 units of rental and 388 units of sale housing. Given this need for housing it
would be irresponsible to submit development plans to the City that resulted in a
decrease in existing affordable housing inventory.
Clearly one of the most pivotal issues with the subject parcel is the existing trailer
court. While this court has provided much needed affordable housing for Moab in past
years it has outlived its design life. Not only are the trailers inefficient from an energy
consumption standpoint due to when they were built and their condition but few, if any,
units would pass a simple code safety inspection. An eye sore, a disproportionate
consumer of City resources (police) and poor living conditions are all elements that are
precisely contrary to the goals of the General Plan.
Red Rock Partners seeks to provide affordable housing not just as replacement for the
existing trailer court but additional homes for the community at large within the
proposed development located at Mill Creek Drive and Highway 19 I . While this is
being processed under a completely different land use application, it should be
considered a viable source of replacement housing for the trader court. It is very
important that the City be aware that Red Rock Partners has completed the State
required step of notification to close the trader court. At this point, a simple thirty day
notification is all that is required to force closure of the court. Obvnously Red Rock
Partners has not given this notification to any of the trailer court residents and has no
plans to do so until replacement housing is available. This is why the Mill Creek Drive
property is going through the development review process. It is currently in the
annexation process and will be followed by the development review process as outlined
in the City of Moab Municipal Code.
Page 79 of 92
410
The net result of these two separate applications being reviewed is that, if approved,
the residents of the trailer court will be provided new, energy efficient, quality,
affordable housing, and the existing trader court will be redeveloped into a unique
property that not only provides significant tax revenue to the City but acts as a major
source of economic fuel for the Moab community, providing jobs from service to high
paying management, all while providing guests to the Moab area a unique lodging
experience.
VI. REVIEW CRITERIA
I. The name, address, and telephone number of the applicant;
Red Rock Partners, LLC.
Randy Day
755 North Main Street
Moab, Utah 84532
(435) 259-7488 (office)
(435) 260- 1388 (cell)
2. A description of the requested change or amendment and a description of the property to be
affected by such request by a metes and bounds legal description;
The Applicant requests a rezone of the subject property from its current
underlying zone districts of R-4, C-2 and C-3 to entirely C-3. A legal description of
the property has been provided herein on the Site Survey attached herein.
3. A title certificate or report from a licensed title company or attorney listing the name of the
property owner(s) and all liens, easements, judgments, and encumbrances of record that affect
the title to the subject property;
A Title Certificate has been provided herein (Exhibit C).
4. A statement from the county treasurer showing payment in full of all real property taxes due
on such parcel;
Statement from the county treasurer showing taxes have been paid in full has
been included herein (Exhibit A).
Page 80 of 92
S. A boundary survey of the land area to be rezoned, which shall include a depiction of existing
zoning district boundaries, real property boundaries, existing structures, and public roads
existing within three hundred feet in all directions of the subject property boundary;
An Improvement Survey dated 5-23-2008 prepared by Keogh Land Surveying
has been included herein (Exhibit D) depicting property boundaries, existing structures,
roads and the zone district boundaries.
6. A list of surrounding property owners and their legal mailing addresses for all properties
within three hundred feet of the exterior boundary of the parcel proposed for a zoning map
amendment;
A list of surrounding property owners has been included herein (Exhibit 5).
7. A statement by the applicant explaining the rationale for the zoning request relative to the
standards imposed by this chapter;
Zoning for the subject parcel contemplated commercial, C-3 zoning on the front
portion of the site while R 4 had to be assigned to the rear portion of the site due to
the existing trailer court. This trailer court will be removed which represents a
substantial change in conditions from when the property was zoned initially. Due to its
adjacent proximity to commercially zoned property, the existence of a portion of the
subject parcel zoned C-3 and the need within the community for commercial space and
lodging, this site lends itself ideally to commercial use.
8. A filing fee in accordance with the fee schedule adopted by resolution of the city council; and
This will be paid at the time of submission of this application.
9. A narrative or concept plan describing why this property is suited for the intended purposes
and stating what development and/or construction is planned
See Section III Proposed Development above.
Page 81 of 92
,Z-Av, 1
17.04.060 Map amendment approval criteria.
The planning commission and city council shall consider the following criteria in
reviewing a proposed map amendment:
A. Was the existing zone for the property adopted in error?
The existing zoning was not adopted in error. However the existing zoning was adopted to
accommodate a use that is changing. The site zoning is split between C-3 and R 4. The C-
3 portion of the site was clearly intended to bring commercial use to the site. The R 4 zone
was required to accommodate the existing use of the trader court. The trailer court is be
closed allowing this use to convert to C-3, consistent with the front portion of the site.
B. Has there been a change of character in the area including, but not limited to: the
installation of public facilities or new utilities; other approved zone changes; new growth trends;
deterioration of existing development; or the need for development transitions?
As previously stated, the deteriorated trailer court will be shut down upon completion of
replacement housing allowing for the entire site to become C-3 rather than just the portion of
the site that was not utilized for trailer court
C. Is there a need for the proposed zoning within the area or community?
The community is clearly in need of additional, quality retail space as well as a full service
hotel spa. This currently does not exist in Moab. Although during "on season" all lodging 15 full
within the Moab downtown and surrounding area, it is not the intent of the Applicant to compete
with the existing lodging inventory. Instead the development plan calls for a full service
hoteVspa with associated retail commercial space.
D. Is the proposed zoning classification compatible with the surrounding area or uses; will
there be adverse impacts; and/or can any adverse impacts be mitigated?
Page 82 of 92
At this time this property was zoned, the City felt it was an appropriate location for
commercial and as such they zoned the property not being used for a trailer court as C-3. The
result is that the front one third of the property 15 currently zoned C-3 while the rear two thirds
of the property was zoned R-4 to cover the existing trailer court. The site meets the cntena
for C-3 zoning in that it is part of the existing commercial core, the streets are wide, clean and
well lit. There are ample pedestnan ways and vehicular parking.
There should be no negative impacts to the community since the roads, utilities, pedestrian ways
etc. are currently in place
E. ill benefits be derived by the community or area by granting the proposed zoning?
There are two significant benefits to the community to this rezone plan. First is the
closure of the trailer court and development of replacement housing. This court is in very poor
condition, is not safe for residents in that few, if any, of the trailers would pass simple code
safety inspections. Additionally this court requires a severely disproportionate amount of City
police resources. This site is in desperate need of redevelopment.
The second benefit to the community will be the additional lodging and commercial space. Not
only does this add a new dimension to Moab by developing a type of lodging and commeroal
shop that does not exist but will also be a significant source of tax revenue for the City.
F. Are adequate facilities available to serve development for the type and scope of
development suggested by the proposed zoning classification? If utilities are not available, can
they be reasonably extended?
All required facilities are to the property line. No extensions will be required.
G. Does the application conform with the provisions of the Moab general plan. the Land Use
Code, and applicable agreements with affected governmental entities?
The Applicant does believe this proposal conforms to the applicable provisions.
Page 83 of 92
17.04.070 Text amendment approval criteria.
It is the burden of the applicant to provide "good cause" to support a proposed text
amendment For the purpose of establishing and maintaining sound, stable and desirable
development within the city of Moab, amendments to the Land Use Code are committed to the
sound discretion of the city council based upon the following nonexclusive list of criteria:
A. Is the proposed use substantially similar to other authorized uses permitted within the
subject zoning district?
Yes. A5 previously stated in this application, the City deemed this site appropriate for
commercial C-3 zoning and executed that zoning on the front portion of the site. This
application seeks to now rezone the rear portion of the site previously used as a trailer court to
C-3, consistent with the existing zoning on the front portion of the site and a large portion of
the surrounding area. Additionally, the C-2 zone district surrounds the site to the south and
west with the C-3 zone district sounding the eastern most third of the site on the north,. east
and south sides.
B. Is the proposed use a relatively new use type or development concept that was not
anticipated at the time of the adoption of the city's general plan?
Yes and no. The lodging and commercial aspect of the redevelopment of this site is not a new
use or development concept. The type of commercial and the type of lodging are new, at least
to Moab and may not have been contemplated at the time of adoption of the General Plan. The
proposed use however, does fit precisely within the C-3 zone district allowed uses, making it
consistent with the views of the general plan and the drafting of the C-3 zone district.
C. /s the amendment consistent with the policies and goals of the general plan?
See Section V., Compliance with 2002 General Plan above.
D. Will the amendment create significant adverse impacts upon neighboring properties within
or adjacent to the zoning districts which would be affected by the change?
The site is bordered by commercial zoning completely on three sides and a portion of
the forth with residential zoning across Walnut Lane to the north. As such, this does not
represent the introduction of zoning inconsistent with surrounding uses. The redevelopment of
Page 84 of 92
this parcel will not require the extension of city utilities or road system. Based on this the
Applicant does not believe that this proposal represents any adverse impact to the community.
E. Is it in the public interest to approve the proposed amendment?
It is clearly in the public interest to approve this request for zoning text amendment. The
proposed redevelopment of the subject parcel pursuant to the text amendment will close and
remove the trader court once replacement housing has been completed. This, in and of itself,
should be adequate benefit to the community to support this application. The redevelopment of
the site into a hoteVresort/spa with associated commercial will significantly benefit the community
by adding jobs, adding tax revenue, while adding an element to Moab lodging currently missing.
F. Is the amendment likely to lead to a positive redevelopment of a specific area or zone?
As previously stated this amendment will lead to the positive redevelopment of the
subject site, 7 plus acres, within the downtown core.
G. Will the amendment provide a variety of options for residents in terns of economic
development, affordable housing, or other benefits?
The redevelopment of this subject parcel pursuant to the text amendment will provide
significant economic stimulus to the community. The construction of a hoteVresort/spa with
associated commercial space will require several years of planning, design and construction
infusing tens of millions of dollars onto the community. Once complete this development will
employee a sizable staff. The operation of this facility will provide significant tax revenue for the
City, on a site that currently provides no economic benefit to the city or the community at large.
The affordable housing benefit to this proposal has been discussed in Section IV above.
H. Is the amendment appropriate considering the existing conditions in the zoning district, the
established relationships between zoning districts, existing land uses and densities, and the
scale of both existing and proposed development?
Although the hoteVresort/spa and associated commercial space has not been designed
at this time, it is the intent of the applicant to comply with the dimensional requirements of the
C-3 zone district. Since this zone district surrounds the subject parcel on one site completely
and two sides partially, with the C-2 commercial zone surrounding the parcel on the south and
west sides, this proposed text amendment does not introduce a use inconsistent with
surrounding uses. For this reason the relationship between the redevelopment of this subject
parcel and surrounding parcels will be positive and consistent with the town vision when ongmally
zoned.
Page 85 of 92
From a land use standpoint, the governing rationale is to keep commercial and lodging activity
confined to the central core. This proposal conforms with that rationale. The boundary
definition of the commercial core could be questioned but that too has been defined by current
zoning. This subject parcel is surrounded by C-3 and C-2 commercial zoning. It appears that
the only reason a portion of this subject parcel was ongmally zoned R-4 was to accommodate
the existing trader court. This trader court will be closed.
From a building scale perspective, the surrounding buildings are two storey, pitched roof
construction but have the ability under current zoning to increase to the zoning limits, the same
zoning limits that govern this parcel tf zoned completely to C-3. Timing then becomes a
consideration. Since the adjacent surrounding parcels as well as the front third of this subject
parcel can be redeveloped at any time to the commercial zoning Wilts, the argument simply does
not exist that this parcel will be out of scale with the surrounding property and uses.
Page 86 of 92
ReR ��yvy�� ep7,
P rn,AS [ vJ'���\
c�iriA1FG `U{ �;•
P',,11, 00 la *,;ems,
etal
;
- �. f�mtwirTsormi
Vt�:'f err 1
' 0,1zT41.0,1igir1.511j5fiNit'''
1Y 5 %j. rt ti�► ":11
�fSda97 4f��°ri,w
.%f.l% sip„ .. �t--,iC,n.,,,z �l�l
rAVA'P �rali., ;aia, ;r1.'•T,',� ,, 72
[�r-j , Y, G'CIlti�q
re
e:3:::4
7 . y: 1
I
1
1
J A J J
„u
ryrr/rirrrrrrrrrfrrrirrrr��
It I 'rx
--
c sit i
t
I1
Vt
b %IN
tk:S
Ail A
�t, .�_,a � _-___ _
1
z
e
Page 87 of 92
i
v
if
x
4
3
q
V
0
•
aZ�
gok.
<�g
w
A
mx
6
1r.g1 'i
it ¢.1
did g.
a ,F��A'
`11
a
ggR
1 it ril!i
b fix 54.
h aapril3
lig
1.fa ill
r IX
C
t�
Q
l �3XJS J,S3A1 001
r
�g
CITY OF MOAB
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
PUBLIC HEARING
Moab City will hold a public hearing to consider potential projects for which funding
may be applied under the CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) Small Cities
Program for Program Year 2012. Suggestions for potential projects will be solicited
both verbally and in writing, from all interested parties. The expected amount of
CDBG funds for this Program Year will be discussed along with the range of projects
eligible under this program and a review of previously funded projects. The hearing
will begin at 7:3o P.M. on December i3, zoil and will be held at Moab City Hall, 217
East Center Street. Further information can be obtained by contacting David Olsen at
259-5129.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals needing special
accommodations (including auxiliary communicative aides and services) during the
hearing should notify the City Recorder at least 3 days prior to the hearing to be
attended.
/s/ Rachel E. Stenta
City Recorder/Assistant City Manager
Published in the Times Independent, December i and 8, zoii.
5-3
Memo
To: Moab Governing Body B Public
from: David Olsen
Dote: December 7. 2011
Re: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Public Nearing
Information explaining Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) eligible applicants, the three national objectives
of the CDBG program and federal compliance requirements is
attached. CDBG projects the City has administered include
providing infrastructure for the Cinema Court Project, reroofing
and replacing HVAC units at the Virginian Apartments, replacing
the the existing 10" diameter water transmission line connecting
city wells on golf course property to city spring by Pack Creek,
Center Street Ballpark Bleachers, Fencing and Lighting Projects,
installing the East Center Street Median and sidewalks, the
Moonstone Gallery mini park, improving the Virginian
Apartments, tuck pointing mortar and landscaping Star Hall,
building Sun Court, developing the Mill Creek Flood Control and
Parkway Project, buying property for the Seekhaven Family
Crisis Shelter, providing financial assistance for the Grand
County Housing Authority Affordable Housing Project, installing
Rotary Park playground equipment and paths, installing the 400
East tree medians and paying for surveying and City digital
mapping.
The Southeastern Utah Association of Governments
(SUAOG) approves projects on a competitive basis. Grand, San
Juan, Emery and Carbon Counties compete for funds. There is
no cap on this year's requests, so the community with the
highest priority project could possibly take all the funds. High
priority projects include low to moderate income housing, food
banks, water projects and sewer projects. No activity will
displace low to moderate income individuals.
Possible Projects to Confide::
At this time, no written request has been submitted.
co
FCCBH
FOUR CORNERS
COMMUNITY BEHAVIORAL
H EALTH
9 December 11
Moab City
Attn: Dave Olsen, Project Manager
217 E. Center Street
Moab, UT 84532
RE: CDBG funding
Dear City Council Members,
As per the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) guide, Four Corners
Community Behavioral Health, Inc. (FCCBH) is asking the City of Moab to apply for
funding on behalf of our non-profit agency. FCCBH intends to build 12 housing units on
the current Willows property located at 48 N Shields Lane. The Willows Expansion
Project meets the CDBG guidelines for the 12% District Allocation set aside for housing
specific projects. The monies will be used to fund architect design, site fees, and
construction costs. The outcome will be 6 permanent and 6 transitional housing units for
very low income disabled persons. We have been advised by the City Planning office
that the property has 6,000 square feet available for additional housing. This plan would
utilize about 3,000 square feet. We would be able to add more units in the future, if
needed, to maximize the space.
Four Corners LC built the Ridgeview Apartments, a 6 apartment complex that opened
October 1, 1994. There are 4 one bedroom and 2 two bedroom units. Interact has
managed these apartments for the last 10 years. During that time there have been
virtually no vacancies and usually a lengthy waiting list. The proposed apartments will
serve individuals with very low income (below the 50% level) who are disabled by severe
and persistent mental illness. Some also have dual diagnoses including chronic substance
abuse or chronic physical illness. These disabilities can lead to long-term or episodic
homelessness as those affected cycle repeatedly through the streets, shelters, housing,
jails or hospitals. The apartments will be targeted for adults who have no other housing
options. Four Corners will provide intensive case management services, outreach,
independent living skills, health related services, and encourage a substance -free home
environment to ensure a more stable and productive life. In addition, Four Corners will be
seeking rent subsidy through the Housing Authority in the form of Project Based
vouchers. Tenants will be responsible for 30% of their income and the voucher would
cover the remaining balance up to the fair market rent.
Administration Plaza
P.O. Box 867; 105 W 100 N
Price, UT 84501
Telephone (435) 637-7200
FAX l4.151 617_7177
Moab Office
198 East Center St.
Moab, UT 84532
Telephone (435) 259-6131
FAX 14.15\ 750_51AQ
Castle Dale Office
P.O. Box 387; 45 E 100 S
Castle Dale, UT 84513
Telephone (435) 381-2432
FAX ld151 1 R 1 _7 5d7
Price Office
P.O. Box 867; 575 E 1 ^"
Price, UT 84501
Telephone (435) 637-:
FAX MAS\ A17_0141
A large majority of our chronically homeless population, unable to work consistently,
receives Disability and/or Supplemental Security Income. Those not receiving disability
typically live on General Assistance, less than half of disability income. All these
individuals fall into the extremely low-income category, below 50 percent of median
income. Persons with mental illness are often eliminated from consideration for
subsidized housing due to poor credit, poor rental history, and/or a criminal history
related to their mental illnesses. This is a significant gap in housing services.
Our Local Homeless Coordinating Committee, now the Moab Area Housing Coalition,
lends its support to this project.
Thank you for taking the time to review this project. Affordable housing is a scarce
commodity in our community. Currently, there is no Transtional Housing and 1 bedroom
apartments are difficult to find. Twelve units help bridge the gap for this very needy
population. Please contact me if additional information is needed.
Sincerely,
Sharon Relph RN, MSN
Director, Interact
FCCBH, Inc.
435-259-7340
5-3
CHAPTER III. NATIONAL OBJECTIVES, ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES AND
INDIVIDUAL FEDERAL COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS
A. ELIGIBLE GRANT APPLICANTS
Consistent with federal law, eligible applicants for the State
CDBG program are:
♦ Incorporated cities and towns with
populations of less than 50,000 excluding
those in Davis, Salt Lake, and Utah
Counties;
♦ All of Utah's counties except Davis, Salt
Lake and Utah Counties; and, unique to
Utah, are the:
♦ Units of local governments recognized by the Secretary of HUD that include
six of the seven associations of government, excluding the Wasatch Front
Regional Council.
By federal law the state may only fund the applicants listed above. For convenience and mutual
benefit, combinations of the above may enter into a subcontractor's agreement where one
applicant is regarded as a primary beneficiary acting as the grantee entity for both applicants.
Other users of CDBG funds such as non-profit and for -profit corporations, councils of
government, housing authorities, and special service districts must apply through and enter into
subcontractor agreements with an eligible applicant who also derives a primary benefit. These
entities must be incorporated in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. The state
encourages units of general local government to cooperate with each other as well as other
entities to engage in eligible activities.
1. Sponsorship of a Non -eligible Recipient — Eligible grantees who agree to sponsor a
non -eligible sub -recipient must realize that such an agreement carries serious legal
implications and responsibilities. Careful consideration and a full understanding of the
sponsored must be considered before entered into an agreement. The sponsoring entity
and the state will sign the prepared contract, and as such is legally bound to comply with
all pertinent laws and regulations, as is their sub -recipient.
The responsibility for "who does what" in such an arrangement will depend on each
entity, the project or activity, and the degree of comfort that the sponsor has with the sub -
recipient. However, the OMB circular appropriate for the type of organization ultimately
using the funds determines compliance with fiscal requirements. The state is only
responsible to ensure compliance by the sponsoring entity, which means that the
sponsoring entity should either make sure they are comfortable with the accounting
procedures used by the sub -recipient or should do a periodic review of the budget and
1
expenditures of that entity while the CDBG grant is in process. The state maintains
contact with sub -recipients during the course of the project through phone, written and in -
person site visits. These technical assistance efforts are the state's way of assisting the
sponsoring entity with some of its oversight needs. However, sponsors should realize
that final compliance by the sub -recipient ultimately lies with them.
Sponsorship responsibilities include holding the public hearings, the signing of the
application and contracts, compliance with all civil rights requirements including
compliance with handicap accessibility laws, and a certain amount of environmental
oversight. Compliance with any labor related laws is usually reviewed at the sub -
recipient level, but the sponsor may request involvement to ensure that any local or
jurisdictional requirements related to procurement and construction activity are
understood and will be followed by the sub -recipient. If the sponsor has retained any
administrative costs for a CDBG contract the sponsor's financial records will also be
reviewed. Sponsorship also requires assistance with the completion of the final
monitoring and the close out packet at the end of the project. The sponsor will be
monitored at the end of the 'project in addition to the sub -recipient to ensure this
compliance.
2. Public Service — Public service providers, traditionally non-profit organizations, are
allowed to apply for CDBG funds for capital improvements and maior equipment
purchases. Examples are delivery trucks, furnishings, fixtures, computer equipment,
construction, and remodeling and facility expansion. State policy prohibits the use of
CDBG funds for operating and maintenance expenses. This includes paying
administrative costs, salaries, etc. State CDBG funds may not be used in entitlement areas
(See Chapter 1, page 2). No more than 15 percent of the state's. yearly allocation of funds
may be expended for public service activities.
B. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS
Each applicant must identify and meet only ONE of the three national objectives listed below
even though the project might be able to qualify under other national objectives.
1. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE #1- LOW AND MODERATE INCOME BENEFIT
"The projected use of funds has been developed so as to give maximum feasible priority
to activities which will benefit low/moderate income (LMI) families..."
LMI. (Low/Moderate Income) families are defined as those families whose income does
not exceed 80 percent of the county median income for 2009 or 80 percent of the median
income of the entire non -metropolitan area of the state of Utah, whichever is higher. See
Appendix C for delineation of 80 percent of county median income by family size. In
order to meet this national objective the applicant must demonstrate a benefit to low and
moderate income in one of the following ways:
2
a. Economic Development: The activity must:
(1) Be carried out in a neighborhood where a substantial number (51
percent) of LMI persons reside; or
(2) Employ persons, a majority of whom are LMI; or
(3) Make training available to LMI persons to help them qualify for higher
skilled employment; or
(4) Engage in advertising and recruitment efforts targeted to LMI persons.
Documentation necessary to meet LMI benefit: Determine which of the
four E.D. activities the project will address. The grantee must determine
the best method by which to substantiate this determination and provide
appropriate documentation. Possible methods include:
♦ Identification of the specific neighborhood and an income survey of the
project's intended beneficiaries;
♦ Income certifications obtained from individuals hired;
♦ Documentation of the type of training to be provided;
♦ Documentation of recruitment efforts of LMI persons.
b. Site Specific activities: At least 51 percent of the direct beneficiaries of the
proposed project must consist of families whose TOTAL FAMILY INCOME
does not exceed 80 percent of the county median income for the current program
year as demonstrated by the income figures provided in Appendix C, or at least 51
percent of the beneficiaries of the proposed project consist of families whose
TOTAL FAMILY INCOME does not exceed 80 percent of the median income
for the entire non -metropolitan area of the State of Utah. Please contact state staff
for statewide median income figure.
When either of the methods below is used the "project area" must first be
specifically determined and identified before the survey is performed.
♦ If a site specific project. will provide direct benefit to the entire
community the applicant may use the 2000 census data shown as
Appendix D rather than preparing an original survey. The applicant will
be required to demonstrate how the project benefits the entire community.
All relevant census data to verify this information must be included in the
application.
♦ If the site -specific project will directly benefit only a portion of the
community an original survey of the defined project area must be done to
determine LMI population in that specific area. If a survey is to be
3
performed, the survey must be conducted following the state approved
methodology found in Appendix E. This method must be used if the
survey is to be accepted. The burden of proof is on the applicant to carry
out the survey in an acceptable manner. This survey will be accepted for
the current year's application and for two (2) consecutive application
cycles, if the subsequent applications are for a project whose boundaries
and/or beneficiaries are identical to those in the original survey. If the
survey shows that 60 percent or more of the beneficiaries are LMI then the
survey may be good for five (5) consecutive years if the beneficiaries
remain the same.
c. City or countywide activities: At least 51 percent of the direct beneficiaries
of the proposed project must consist of families whose TOTAL FAMILY
INCOME does not exceed 80 percent of the county median income for the
current program year as demonstrated by the income figures provided in
Appendix C.
♦ If an applicant's jurisdiction has been identified in Appendix D, (pre -
approved LMI community — 2000 Census) a copy must be attached and
included with the application.
♦ Applicants may perform a new community survey to determine if their
community is 51 % LMI by following the instructions in Appendix E.
d. Limited Clientele activities: This activity is defined as one that provides
benefits to a specific group of persons rather than everyone in an area. At least
51 % of the persons served must be LMI. To qualify under this category, a
Limited Clientele activity must meet one of the following tests.
♦ Benefit is specifically limited to a group generally presumed to be
51 percent or more LMI, unless there is evidence to the contrary.
Examples of such controversial indicators may be the lifestyle of
the community or the known income figures in the area in which
the group resides, the construction of a facility that would not
ordinarily be utilized by LMI or whose use may be cost prohibitive
for LMI, etc. The state is responsible for ensuring that adequate
documentation is obtained where there is the possibility of such
evidence to the contrary. (See list of groups below)
♦ Abused Children
♦ Battered Spouses
♦ Migrant Farm Workers
♦ Elderly Persons (Defined by HUD as age 62 or over)
♦ Illiterate Adults
♦ Homeless Persons
f& P e r s o n s l i v i n g w i t h A I D S
f& S e v e r e l y D i s a b l e d A d u l t s u s e w h e e l c h a i r o r s p e c i a l a i d f o r a t l e a s t 6
m o n t h s , u n a b l e t o p e r f o r m f u n c t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s i n c l u d i n g s e e i n g , h e a r i n g , o r
w a l k i n g , a r e "