[0:00] It's 5:02 and we are at the Canyon

[0:02] Community Center

[0:03] for the May 20th meeting of the

[0:05] Springdale Planning Commission.

[0:08] Um, good evening and welcome to

[0:11] tonight's meeting. I'm Terry Kusky. I am

[0:13] the vice chair of the Springdale

[0:15] Planning Commission. The chairman is out

[0:17] this week.

[0:18] Um, so I'll be running the meetings.

[0:20] Um, from the town we have Tom Dansey

[0:23] and Al Connelly and April Red

[0:28] Sorry about that. April Redez, right?

[0:31] And um

[0:33] and Kendall Lusebrink.

[0:34] And on the diocese here, we have um Rich

[0:38] Swanson, Paul Zimmerman, um Matt Fink

[0:41] from the National Park Service,

[0:43] and myself, Terry Kusky.

[0:46] Um

[0:48] So,

[0:49] uh so I think we have a quorum and we're

[0:51] ready to go, right?

[0:53] Uh absent Oh, yeah. So, absent is uh Tom

[0:56] Kenniston,

[0:57] um Kosh Bhatti, um Melissa uh Laborn,

[1:01] and um

[1:03] Jennifer McCollum,

[1:04] who is the chairman.

[1:07] Um

[1:08] So, do we have a motion for approval of

[1:11] tonight's agenda?

[1:12] I move that we tonight's agenda. Second.

[1:15] Okay, motion by Rich, second by Paul.

[1:18] All in favor? Rich, I. Terry, I. Al, I.

[1:23] We are ready.

[1:25] Um, does the town have any general

[1:26] announcements?

[1:30] I have one and um yeah, one item in

[1:33] relation to action item A2.

[1:36] Uh we had proposed at the last meeting

[1:39] that

[1:40] we were going to cancel the June 3rd

[1:42] Planning Commission work meeting.

[1:44] Uh we're proposing not to cancel that

[1:47] Thursday. There's a design development

[1:49] review

[1:50] um

[1:51] that needs to be reviewed at that, so

[1:54] um

[1:56] Yeah, so that

[1:58] no longer needs to be an action item.

[2:02] Okay. So, the town will have a resources

[2:04] available for that meeting then?

[2:06] Yes.

[2:08] I know the on the play I already made

[2:09] plans.

[2:13] Sorry.

[2:15] Okay.

[2:17] Any other announcements?

[2:20] Okay.

[2:21] Um does anybody wish to

[2:23] declare any conflicts with today's uh

[2:25] agenda items?

[2:27] No?

[2:28] I don't see that. Okay. So, for

[2:31] tonight's agenda we have

[2:33] well, now one action item.

[2:35] Um which is the public hearing for a

[2:38] transient lodging overlay zone

[2:41] application.

[2:42] Um and then additionally there is a

[2:45] consent item to approve the meeting

[2:48] minutes from the March 4th meeting.

[2:51] Um

[2:52] so for the public meeting

[2:54] I'd like to just uh

[2:56] go over a little bit here. Um

[2:59] the some of the rules. The rules are on

[3:01] the back of the agenda if anybody wants

[3:04] to review them in detail.

[3:05] Um

[3:07] we there will be opportunities for the

[3:09] public to speak and ask questions during

[3:11] the public hearing. We will announce

[3:14] time.

[3:16] Um and

[3:18] anyone wishing to make a statement

[3:20] please come to the podium and speak into

[3:22] the microphone.

[3:24] Um we ask that all attendees register at

[3:27] the back table there so we can have an

[3:28] accurate representation of of who is

[3:31] here and who is speaking.

[3:33] Um

[3:35] the public comments are generally

[3:37] limited to 3 minutes per person. Um

[3:40] And so I think we're about ready.

[3:43] Um so the first item is a um

[3:46] public hearing for the transient overlay

[3:49] zone application at 975 Zion Park

[3:52] Boulevard.

[3:54] Um

[3:55] So, this is I believe Nile, this is your

[3:57] item. Do you have a presentation for us?

[3:59] Thank you.

[4:01] So, this item is for zone change and a

[4:04] public hearing hearing as you indicated.

[4:07] Um

[4:08] So, the applicant is Miss Mrs. Trista

[4:11] Rayner and she's applied for the

[4:12] transient lodging overlay zone to be

[4:15] applied to her property at 975

[4:18] Zion Park Boulevard.

[4:21] Uh the property is in the central

[4:22] commercial zone and so it's eligible

[4:25] um for the transient lodging overlay

[4:28] zone.

[4:29] Um

[4:31] The application window for the transient

[4:34] lodging over overlay zone

[4:36] uh comes every 2 years in even years

[4:40] during the month of March.

[4:42] So, we had the application window open

[4:45] recently during March 2026.

[4:48] The town received one application and

[4:50] this is um the application that you're

[4:53] reviewing this evening.

[4:56] Um

[4:57] The property

[4:59] just pull up an aerial view.

[5:02] Uh the property's currently developed

[5:04] with Mimi's Cafe at the front of the

[5:06] property. Uh there's a second restaurant

[5:09] building behind that which is vacant. Um

[5:12] there are also six town homes that are

[5:15] used as vacation rentals.

[5:17] Uh the proposal involves demolishing

[5:20] this restaurant building at the rear

[5:23] that's vacant at the moment

[5:25] and replacing it with a new building

[5:27] that would house four transient lodging

[5:30] units and two long-term rental units.

[5:33] Um the application includes draft plans

[5:37] of the proposed new building.

[5:40] So, the commission should review the

[5:43] application to determine whether or not

[5:45] it promotes the aims

[5:47] of the general plan and the purposes of

[5:50] the transient lodging overlay zone.

[5:53] The commission should then make

[5:55] recommendations to the town council to

[5:58] either approve or deny the application.

[6:01] I have a few just points to for your

[6:04] consideration

[6:06] before handing it over.

[6:07] Um

[6:09] the transient lodging overlay zone

[6:11] chapter of the code includes application

[6:14] standards and also review criteria.

[6:17] So, the application standards are more

[6:20] kind of quantifiable what makes a

[6:22] complete application.

[6:24] And then the the review criteria are

[6:27] more

[6:28] qualitative questions about, you know,

[6:31] does this

[6:32] proposal meet the vision of the general

[6:34] plan and supports the general plan's

[6:37] vision for transient lodging.

[6:41] Uh the applicants provided responses to

[6:43] those questions and they're in the staff

[6:46] report.

[6:48] Um secondly, uh the the overlay zone

[6:52] requires one long-term rental unit for

[6:54] every four lodging units.

[6:57] Um and so, you'll see that the applicant

[6:59] is provide is proposing

[7:02] four

[7:03] nightly rental units and two long-term

[7:06] rental units.

[7:07] So,

[7:08] because they're exceeding that by one

[7:12] unit, there's an extra

[7:14] long-term rental.

[7:16] Um

[7:18] their their application

[7:20] um

[7:21] requests that only one of those units be

[7:25] um

[7:26] tied to the restrictive covenant that

[7:29] both of the units would be long-term

[7:31] rental units.

[7:32] But, um

[7:34] the the chapter the code requires that

[7:37] the long-term rental unit that you use

[7:40] um

[7:42] or that that is implied in the trans

[7:44] geological overlay zone

[7:46] can't be tied to to the to the trans

[7:50] geological unit, so can't be used as a

[7:54] um

[7:55] property manager or that kind of thing.

[7:58] Um so they're requesting that the second

[8:00] unit because it's not actually required

[8:02] by the code would um

[8:05] would not have that restriction on it

[8:06] just in the event that they did want to

[8:08] have a property manager there.

[8:11] Um

[8:14] two public comments have been received.

[8:16] Uh one of them was included in the

[8:18] application pack and then the other one

[8:20] was forwarded

[8:22] uh this afternoon.

[8:24] Um

[8:25] and then

[8:27] finally the application pack includes

[8:29] drawings uh showing the proposed

[8:32] building.

[8:33] Uh however

[8:34] the eagle-eyed commissioners may have

[8:36] noticed that one of the elevations is

[8:38] missing and I apologize for that. Uh but

[8:41] just for your reference, this is the

[8:43] missing elevation.

[8:45] Um so it's it's in the same style as as

[8:48] the others, but um

[8:50] just wanted to bring that up because I I

[8:52] had admitted to include that in the

[8:53] pack.

[8:55] Um so I'd be happy to answer any

[8:57] questions. Obviously the applicant is

[8:59] here and she's ready to

[9:01] uh explain her proposal, too.

[9:06] Um would the applicant like to make a

[9:07] presentation?

[9:10] Hi, Trista Rayner.

[9:13] I'm the owner at 975 Zane Park

[9:15] Boulevard.

[9:17] Thank you for

[9:19] accepting my application and giving me a

[9:20] chance to talk to you tonight. Um

[9:23] we

[9:24] had a submission in 2024, the first year

[9:27] that you guys had the TLO overlay

[9:31] meetings. Um

[9:33] Anyway, we took all the input and

[9:36] feedback we got from the town meetings

[9:38] into this new design. So, we really

[9:40] listened on scale of building, style of

[9:43] building, making it more harmonious with

[9:46] the surroundings, and having more park

[9:48] architecture,

[9:50] and landscaping. Um

[9:52] so, I I hope we accomplished that, too.

[9:55] The suggestions that were made last

[9:56] time.

[9:57] Um forgive me for reading a a couple of

[10:01] these, but it'll be very hard for me to

[10:02] get through my thoughts without a couple

[10:04] of notes.

[10:05] >> [laughter]

[10:06] >> Um this building is currently vacant on

[10:08] the property, and for those of you who

[10:10] may not be familiar with our original

[10:12] application,

[10:13] um

[10:15] this building, although wonderful, was

[10:18] built with aerated recycled concrete,

[10:21] and um

[10:23] it does not lend itself to remodeling,

[10:26] or adding on, or changing. Like, if we

[10:28] even took a window out, we would have a

[10:30] problem with the building. So, although

[10:32] that was excellent for the building initially, it is not um

[10:37] able to be like remodeled into something

[10:39] differently, which is why it's been

[10:41] vacant for so long. Um so, we hope to

[10:44] rebuild the vacant building on the

[10:45] property, um like I said, more park-like

[10:47] architecture with rock, metal, and

[10:49] stucco.

[10:51] The design elements include

[10:53] replacing the large It's a modern

[10:55] building now with very large windows,

[10:58] massive windows. Um so, our new design

[11:00] elements include smaller residential

[11:02] windows,

[11:04] as well as um

[11:06] the added expense of building an

[11:07] internal

[11:09] breezeway, and internal walkways, which

[11:11] we hope will benefit benefit the night

[11:13] sky ordinance by not having these on the

[11:16] outside.

[11:18] The new building also has stepped-back

[11:20] walls. Um that internal breezeway in the

[11:24] center breaks up the front facade,

[11:27] and there's numerous patios and

[11:29] balconies um to create more open space,

[11:32] rather than a a very large box type

[11:34] building.

[11:35] Um

[11:37] for those of you aren't familiar with

[11:38] our property, it slopes significantly

[11:41] from SR-9 down to this property site.

[11:46] So, the new building pad is actually 8

[11:49] ft lower than Zion Park Park Boulevard

[11:52] and 5 ft lower than Mimi's Cafe um

[11:55] and 3 ft lower than the adjacent Canyon

[11:58] Offering's property.

[12:00] So, with this rebuild um we feel that

[12:02] the natural skyline and vistas will be

[12:04] unaffected um

[12:06] and the new building will blend in

[12:08] um more harmoniously with the

[12:10] surrounding properties and buildings.

[12:13] Um

[12:16] the redesign gave us a larger TLO

[12:18] residential unit, but it also gave us an

[12:20] opportunity to build a second much

[12:23] needed residential

[12:26] and on that being a long-term rental

[12:29] um

[12:30] potentially employee housing. We don't

[12:32] have an on-site manager now. I oversee

[12:35] everything personally,

[12:37] but in the future should the need arise,

[12:39] that gives us an opportunity maybe to

[12:41] have an on-site manager, which would be great.

[12:45] Um

[12:46] the two residential units

[12:48] make up 43%

[12:51] of the living space.

[12:53] Each residential unit is 916

[12:56] ft

[12:57] and will feel more like an owned space

[13:00] versus a rental.

[13:02] We intend to have upgraded amenities,

[13:04] private laundry facilities for each

[13:07] unit, patio and balcony spaces making it

[13:10] as residential as we can in the

[13:12] commercial zone for those for those

[13:14] residents.

[13:15] Um we've also taken extra efforts to

[13:18] build

[13:20] to do the rebuild design facing away

[13:23] from our most um adjacent neighbor,

[13:25] which is Laura Dody.

[13:27] Um so, the building faces Juniper Lane.

[13:31] You would enter through the center,

[13:33] through the breezeway, and then go into

[13:35] the internal um corridors.

[13:38] The backside will be first story and

[13:41] second story will be residential units.

[13:44] So, those will back against Laura Dody's

[13:46] property.

[13:48] And additionally, we put our utility and

[13:51] storage closets

[13:53] adjacent to her residential so that

[13:56] there would be

[13:57] minimal um impact for her. In fact,

[14:00] it'll be

[14:01] much better than the current zoned use

[14:04] for her, and she's very happy with that.

[14:07] If you haven't had a chance to look at

[14:08] her letter, her letter is excellent. If maybe I could even read it. Um she

[14:13] couldn't be here tonight, so.

[14:16] Um with our current lodging, just to

[14:18] give you some information about us, we

[14:20] don't we choose not to maximize our

[14:22] occupancy on the property um to lower

[14:25] the impact on our property and on town

[14:28] resources.

[14:29] Our guests love staying in the center of

[14:31] town. The biggest compliment we receive

[14:33] is that they feel like locals staying in

[14:35] the community and supporting our local

[14:37] businesses. That's a really unique

[14:40] opportunity to provide

[14:43] residential style rentals to both

[14:46] long-term residents and people visiting.

[14:49] Um

[14:50] It's pretty unique for the downtown

[14:52] area.

[14:53] Um most of our car uh guests do not

[14:56] utilize their cars during their stay,

[14:58] which is an added bonus. They even walk

[15:00] to the park, which I think it's too far

[15:02] to walk, but they do walk to the park. Um Our

[15:06] goal is to provide a variety of mixed

[15:08] uses on the property, so we built 18 um

[15:13] townhomes in the back, which were sold

[15:15] as residential townhomes. We have a

[15:17] residential overlay on the property.

[15:19] And half of those, I'm happy to say, are

[15:22] in turn re-rented out to local workers,

[15:25] which is awesome.

[15:27] Um

[15:28] we're trying to do village scale

[15:31] protecting um

[15:32] Springdale and avoiding the consumptive

[15:34] tourism by not building to ordinance

[15:37] maximums.

[15:39] This proposed building size is 38%

[15:42] smaller than X,

[15:44] which are two bedrooms. Those count for

[15:47] 12, I suppose, plus four.

[15:50] All of that um is 20% lower. The

[15:52] transient number of units is 20% lower

[15:54] than than the town ordinance as well.

[15:57] Um we have a unique opportunity to bring

[16:01] this mix into Springdale's commercial

[16:03] core.

[16:04] It's very important for workers to be

[16:06] able to live in town.

[16:08] We employ many people who commute from

[16:10] out of town, so we're excited to provide

[16:12] this opportunity of two residential

[16:15] units.

[16:16] Um

[16:17] bringing the residential and small-scale

[16:19] lodging also supports our local

[16:21] businesses, which is needed year-round.

[16:24] Um

[16:25] this also supports Springdale locals and

[16:27] workers by having businesses there.

[16:30] Our property is 1.18 acres and modest in

[16:34] scale when compared to other properties

[16:36] in central and village commercial.

[16:38] Um

[16:39] can we go back to the

[16:41] Mimi's overhead

[16:45] or aerial view?

[16:51] Great, thank you.

[16:53] So um

[16:55] the town homes that are in the back have

[16:58] a 1,000 square foot footprint each.

[17:01] Mimi's Cafe has a 2,000 the building

[17:04] Mimi's Cafe building has a 2,000 square

[17:06] foot

[17:07] footprint. And the rest the second

[17:10] restaurant building

[17:12] with the patios, I believe it's close to four 4,000, maybe 3,700.

[17:19] We're proposing that to be $2,600. So,

[17:21] it'll be or 2,600 2,600 square feet.

[17:24] It'll be a smaller footprint than what's

[17:26] currently currently there.

[17:28] We've done our best to try to maximize

[17:31] um

[17:32] the ability to remodel that building and

[17:35] it just isn't going to work. So,

[17:38] unfortunately um

[17:40] starting over is really the only the

[17:42] only way we can see that we can develop

[17:45] on the property

[17:46] um and not have a vacant building.

[17:49] um

[17:51] All of the plans will not affect any

[17:53] sewer water.

[17:55] Um most of the connections are just to

[18:00] the right of the building in the

[18:01] driveway, so further down

[18:04] to the right. Like next to Mimi or next

[18:07] to

[18:08] the vacant. Yeah, no. Well, anyway,

[18:12] >> [laughter]

[18:12] >> just to the right of the vacant

[18:14] building. Um along

[18:17] like where our trash dumpster is is

[18:20] where the Yeah, that's where all the

[18:21] sewer connections are. So, we don't

[18:23] foresee any closing of the road or

[18:26] impact to um infrastructure with this

[18:29] rebuild.

[18:30] Um

[18:32] The building

[18:34] already is in the central commercial

[18:36] zone and even comparing it to buildings

[18:39] in village commercial

[18:41] we have less

[18:43] density for transient lodging. Our

[18:46] buildings are also smaller scale when

[18:48] compared to you know, Soul Foods. I

[18:51] think their building is 12,000 square

[18:54] feet.

[18:55] Um the new Zion Guru building is I think

[18:59] 7,000 square feet in a 5,000 square foot

[19:02] footprint. All great buildings. I'm just

[19:04] pointing out like size differences. The

[19:07] building it's most similar in style to

[19:10] is probably Laura Dody's building built

[19:13] next door. Um

[19:15] in fact, if you added a second

[19:18] residential unit to Laura Dodi's

[19:20] property as it's being built under the

[19:22] TLO application, it would be very

[19:25] similar in size to what we're proposing.

[19:29] Uh let's see.

[19:33] Um

[19:33] >> [sighs]

[19:35] >> part of uh remodeling the the building

[19:38] would give us an opportunity we would

[19:40] like to have an opportunity to have a

[19:42] revised landscaping plan. There's a lot

[19:45] of hardscape on the property. Um we've proposed

[19:50] like a more formal bike

[19:52] stand station and maybe rest area

[19:56] with a drinking fountain possibly um and

[19:58] also um the possibility of electric

[20:02] charging stations if that's something

[20:03] desirable by the town. We think both

[20:06] would add to the walkability of that

[20:09] downtown area, give people a place to

[20:11] stop, maybe go have lunch while their

[20:13] car is charging, and support our local

[20:15] businesses.

[20:17] Um

[20:19] I think that's up that's it for me. I I

[20:21] look forward to hearing your feedback

[20:24] and um

[20:27] thank you for your time.

[20:32] Uh is there any questions for the

[20:33] applicant?

[20:35] You mentioned it's a it's a remodel. Uh

[20:38] you're not trying to stay in the same

[20:39] footprint with my impression. You're

[20:41] after remove the building and replace

[20:43] it.

[20:44] We're going to remove the building and

[20:45] replace it, but it has if you can see on

[20:48] the left and right, there's patio,

[20:50] restaurant patio spaces, and those would

[20:52] be reduced. So, it's essentially the

[20:55] same footprint, but it'll be it'll be

[20:57] smaller.

[20:58] Uh like we're we're trying to put the

[20:59] building exactly where it was to

[21:02] minimize impact, but um the footprint

[21:05] will be smaller overall than the

[21:06] restaurant's space with the patios.

[21:09] Does that Is that what you were asking?

[21:11] Yes. Okay.

[21:12] >> [laughter]

[21:12] >> Um

[21:14] So, uh

[21:16] I I see there were stairs in the back,

[21:17] and I believe there's an existing

[21:19] basement in the building. The intent is

[21:20] to retain the existing basement?

[21:22] >> Yes, it would be It wouldn't be

[21:24] cost-effective to try to

[21:27] fix that. So, with that, it'll just be

[21:28] used as additional storage, you know,

[21:30] maybe laundry facilities something down

[21:32] the line.

[21:33] Yeah. So, there's no plans for um for

[21:37] public or client access to that area?

[21:39] >> No. No, not at all. No, none.

[21:43] And um it looks like from the drawings

[21:46] you're planning the similar parking

[21:48] arrangements as the as your 2024

[21:52] request.

[21:53] Um yes. And

[21:55] there's there's two

[21:57] things about par- We We have, I think,

[21:59] 42 41 parking spots. We have

[22:03] more than sufficient parking for two

[22:05] restaurants or this proposal for

[22:07] transient lodging and the restaurant.

[22:10] Um

[22:11] but in 2022, the town took away street

[22:15] parking,

[22:16] and um

[22:18] our parking, I don't know how many of

[22:20] you A couple of you were at the 2024

[22:23] meeting.

[22:25] Taking away that street parking made it

[22:28] very hard for our disabled

[22:32] patrons. It also is not obvious where to

[22:35] park for Mimi's Cafe. So, what we're

[22:37] proposing, and it doesn't have to look

[22:39] like this. We I've been having

[22:41] discussions with the town about this

[22:43] could be smaller, this could be one-way

[22:45] traffic, a lot of

[22:47] we can make We definitely can have more

[22:49] landscaping and less less asphalt in

[22:52] this area, but what we're trying to do

[22:54] is move our handicap parking and a few

[22:57] spots closer to Mimi's Cafe, and then

[23:01] even though we're still the ratio of

[23:04] landscaping to building um

[23:07] is still within the ordinance, what we'd

[23:09] like to do is revisit what we have on

[23:11] the property as a whole and perhaps add

[23:14] more landscaping where parking is is not

[23:17] going to be utilized anymore in the back

[23:19] perhaps or along the side.

[23:22] So.

[23:25] Yes.

[23:26] Some of those will will come out when we

[23:28] do a design review.

[23:30] Yeah.

[23:32] So that'll be the same. Um

[23:35] And and this parking is not subject to

[23:38] us doing the transient lodging. We'd

[23:40] really like to do this for Mimi's

[23:41] regardless. We need to have parking

[23:43] closer to our building.

[23:45] Um

[23:46] we just have not moved forward with it

[23:48] because it seems like it could go in

[23:49] conjunction with this and not have two

[23:51] major remodels on the property.

[23:54] But um

[23:56] we do need to have that parking sooner

[23:58] or later closer to Mimi's.

[24:00] But that's a separate. We we have enough

[24:02] parking in the back to satisfy this this

[24:04] application.

[24:06] If that makes sense. Yes, but I I tend

[24:08] to agree that having parking closer to

[24:10] the restaurant would be useful. Yeah, my own father-in-law can't come to

[24:14] Mimi's unless I drive on the grass.

[24:17] >> [laughter]

[24:18] >> It's a long walk for my mother.

[24:19] >> It's a long walk and it's uphill.

[24:22] Both ways.

[24:24] So um

[24:26] so the hand drawings that that you've

[24:29] shown as your

[24:30] architectural conceptual architecture

[24:32] didn't have any dimensions on them, but

[24:34] you you've mentioned now you're planning

[24:37] about a 2,600 square foot footprint.

[24:40] >> Footprint, right. Um for the new

[24:42] building on top of the basement. Um Mhm.

[24:46] So uh

[24:47] first of all, I I

[24:48] actually back I'd I'd like to thank you

[24:50] for coming back and for your

[24:51] thoughtfulness, time you've spent on

[24:53] this. Um

[24:54] we do want our commercial properties to

[24:56] be successful

[24:58] and and really and match with

[25:00] the the goals of the general plan. So,

[25:03] um overall I think um this is a much

[25:05] better proposal and I'm I'm going to

[25:07] compliment you on on your efforts in

[25:09] coming back.

[25:10] Um

[25:12] one of the things I find very good about

[25:14] this proposal is sort of the the new

[25:17] design

[25:18] approach to the building itself. Um

[25:22] if we included as we make a

[25:25] recommendation to town council if we

[25:26] included a

[25:28] potential

[25:29] condition that the that the building

[25:32] follow the basic design you've presented

[25:35] here in terms of square footage and and

[25:37] that, uh do you feel that you're

[25:39] far enough along in your decision-making

[25:42] that you can stick

[25:44] to this basic design?

[25:46] Uh yes. Yeah, a lot of thought went into

[25:48] it, especially with putting the

[25:50] residential units in the back. Something

[25:52] um that I I forgot to mention is there

[25:54] one not be any common walls with this

[25:56] design with the interior interior

[25:59] corridor,

[26:00] um which is really great for the

[26:03] residential units as well as the uh

[26:05] transient guests. But, yes, a lot of

[26:07] thought has gone into it. The only thing

[26:09] that I talked ideas for rock and stucco,

[26:11] but um that was just as a general

[26:14] example that we would definitely come

[26:16] back with something

[26:19] you know, very similar to what we

[26:21] proposed today.

[26:26] Yeah, I I had a question. Um I know you

[26:28] were a little bit late in sending out

[26:30] the uh request for or the notices to

[26:32] your neighbors and that. Have you gotten

[26:34] any response back from We've gotten two.

[26:36] Um one was from a resident who lives in

[26:39] the town homes that we developed on the

[26:41] property.

[26:42] Um and that was in support of it. Um

[26:46] and then the second one was from Laura

[26:48] Dody. Okay. And um So, those are the two

[26:51] that I think

[26:51] >> comments, if if you don't mind, because

[26:54] you didn't get to see Laura Dody's

[26:56] letter.

[26:57] Um

[27:01] She has several points

[27:03] in support of

[27:05] Do you have her letter on the

[27:07] Yeah.

[27:08] I do. She has several points. Um

[27:11] but of significance is especially item

[27:14] number two, the location of the existing

[27:16] building doesn't lend itself to retail

[27:18] or restaurant commercial since it's not

[27:21] located directly on Highway 9. It lacks

[27:23] visibility

[27:25] and vehicular and pedestrian traffic.

[27:28] Lack of visibility is a death knell for

[27:31] these types of businesses. And

[27:34] um

[27:36] that's my thoughts exactly. We've tried

[27:38] three different restaurants there. Um

[27:41] And it's just very difficult to get,

[27:43] especially with without the parking in

[27:45] downtown Springdale.

[27:47] Um it's really hard to get people

[27:49] walking down something that looks like a

[27:51] residential street.

[27:56] Trista, just to let you know the

[27:57] commissioners have this letter there.

[27:59] >> Oh, okay. Perfect. Yeah.

[28:06] Seems very favorable to your cause. I'm

[28:09] sorry? I said it seems very favorable to

[28:11] your cause.

[28:13] Oh, yes.

[28:14] >> [laughter]

[28:16] >> Um

[28:20] There was one other thing I was going to

[28:21] bring up. Um

[28:24] Now, it's escaping me right now, but did

[28:26] you have any additional questions for

[28:28] me?

[28:30] I have one question, but it might be

[28:31] more for the city. First, I I do want to

[28:33] thank you for the effort you put into

[28:35] this. It really shows. Thank you very

[28:37] much.

[28:38] >> Appreciate it.

[28:39] Um and I fully understand

[28:41] your reasoning for only having the uh

[28:44] restrictive covenants on one long-term

[28:45] rental. Mhm. Which I have no problem

[28:48] with except I just got confused. The

[28:51] rule is

[28:53] for four transient lodging you need one.

[28:58] That Is that my understanding?

[28:59] >> That's correct, yeah.

[29:01] So, what happens to this extra

[29:05] long-term rental rental?

[29:07] Cuz it doesn't have a restrictive

[29:09] covenant, could it become a transient?

[29:11] No, so it would remain a long-term

[29:13] rental unit

[29:15] and it would just be exempt from

[29:18] the requirement that it couldn't be tied

[29:20] to employment

[29:23] on the property.

[29:25] So, the way the transient lodging

[29:28] overlay zone was drafted

[29:30] with this requirement for long-term

[29:32] housing one of the stipulations was that

[29:35] the long-term housing couldn't be tied

[29:39] specifically to

[29:42] the transient lodging units as far as

[29:44] like we're building one unit for an

[29:47] employee for the transient lodging

[29:48] business.

[29:50] So,

[29:51] both of the units would be long-term

[29:53] rentals available.

[29:55] It's just

[29:57] one of them would would be subject to

[29:59] this restriction of the code and then

[30:01] the other one that's over and above

[30:04] the minimum and therefore not required

[30:07] would be long-term rental, but it could

[30:09] be rented to you know, whoever they

[30:11] wanted.

[30:13] There's a I think the specific wording

[30:14] is that

[30:16] long-term housing units have must

[30:19] required by the section must be open to

[30:22] the public.

[30:23] And so, what you're wanting to do is

[30:25] have the second one be confined to not

[30:28] necessarily to the public, but Will not

[30:30] be not be restricted to that or limited

[30:32] to that. Could be open to the public,

[30:34] but that would be at your discretion.

[30:36] >> And you know, every meeting that I've

[30:38] ever listened to or have been a part of

[30:40] that talks about housing says there's a

[30:42] shortage, and we just saw this as an

[30:44] opportunity to provide another

[30:46] residential unit. Um

[30:49] like I said, we don't have a property

[30:51] manager, but if we did in the future,

[30:53] this would be an ideal location,

[30:55] obviously. If a housekeeper, for

[30:57] example, needed housing, we could offer

[31:00] that. If somebody from Mimi's Cafe

[31:02] needed it, there's a couple other

[31:04] restrictions with the TLO residents. Um

[31:08] it has to be

[31:09] no less than 90 days,

[31:12] which is interesting. I don't I don't

[31:14] foresee doing anything but 12-month

[31:16] leases, but if somebody was building a

[31:18] home in town and needed

[31:20] a house for 60 days, this gives me an

[31:22] opportunity to rent to somebody, like if

[31:25] I have a a space in between where I

[31:27] could rent seasonally to a ranger for 90

[31:30] days, I could do that. So, that just

[31:33] gives us a lot more flexibility, but we

[31:34] do intend to use it as a long-term

[31:36] rental.

[31:38] And maybe retail, maybe not employees,

[31:40] but

[31:42] And it does sound like you're sort of

[31:43] locked into a both of them being a

[31:45] long-term rental. Yeah.

[31:48] Which I appreciate, and

[31:49] the thought you gave in your reasoning

[31:52] is very

[31:53] sound, so thank you.

[31:58] Are there any questions from the public?

[32:01] No.

[32:02] Okay.

[32:03] Um

[32:05] I think we're ready. Uh

[32:07] motion to go into public hearing.

[32:11] I move that we go into open the public

[32:12] hearing. I'll second the motion.

[32:15] Uh motion by Paul, second by Rich. All

[32:18] in favor? Rich, I. Terry, I. Paul, I.

[32:22] Any comments from the public?

[32:25] No.

[32:26] I move that we close the public hearing.

[32:28] Okay. I'll second. Okay. Motion by Paul,

[32:32] second by Rich. All in favor? Rich, I.

[32:34] Terry, I. Paul, I.

[32:37] So, we can go into uh now it's

[32:39] commission deliberation.

[32:42] Um

[32:47] I guess I'll go ahead. Or do you want

[32:48] No, go for it. I'll just say um overall

[32:51] um I think this is a

[32:53] um

[32:53] a very good submission um

[32:56] and in general I I think it meets all of

[32:58] the

[32:59] goals that we have for the overlay zone,

[33:02] the transit

[33:03] >> Transit overlay zone.

[33:05] Um and um I

[33:08] I'm uh of a mind to go ahead and

[33:10] recommend approval, but I'd like to hear

[33:12] any other comments.

[33:14] I I would agree with all those comments.

[33:16] I I could see the thought. I think it's

[33:17] beneficial. It looks like the small

[33:20] town feel. Mhm. The building, you know,

[33:22] being smaller, shorter,

[33:25] down the hill.

[33:26] I think it's a it's a good design. It

[33:28] looks reasonable for what we're after,

[33:30] like you said. Mhm. I think it's

[33:32] beneficial not only for the, you know,

[33:34] extra lodging, but I I think it also

[33:37] helps the restaurant, Mimi's, which I

[33:39] think is great. Yep.

[33:41] Okay. Yep. I mean, I I agree. I'm I'm I

[33:43] think it it uh it all looks good. The

[33:45] only

[33:46] um

[33:49] the only negative or or or less than

[33:52] positive thing and but it's not a

[33:54] disqualifying in my mind is that, you

[33:56] know, we're going to lose some open lawn

[33:58] area that's kind of nice to look at in

[34:00] the center of town. So, you're going to

[34:02] have a parking lot there instead.

[34:06] Sure.

[34:08] Yes. You may Come up. Come up and make a

[34:09] comment. We will.

[34:11] Thank you for reminding me.

[34:14] Um

[34:15] it's really hard to visualize what that

[34:17] landscaping is going to look like. Um

[34:20] this is just a draft and in by no means

[34:22] our final proposal. We hope to make that

[34:25] parking lot smaller and maybe one-way

[34:28] traffic if you dot and the town will

[34:30] allow it. But what I wanted to point out

[34:32] is we have 145 ft of frontage

[34:37] in the along SR9 and that space there is

[34:42] 5,000 sq ft of landscaping.

[34:46] You don't see that when you see that big

[34:48] black asphalt parking, but that's 5,000

[34:52] sq ft of grass and landscaping and

[34:54] shielding.

[34:56] Um also that parking lot is 45 ft from

[35:00] SR9 and down slope. So

[35:05] I understand the concern and I'm not

[35:07] excited to tear up any grass. Um

[35:11] but anyway,

[35:13] a lot of thought will go into the design

[35:15] of that and make it

[35:18] accomplish what we need to with the

[35:20] parking, but also be conscious about

[35:22] what the town needs and and not taking

[35:24] away any more green space than we have

[35:26] to.

[35:27] I commend you for that. That's Thank

[35:29] you.

[35:32] Okay.

[35:34] Any other discussion?

[35:38] No.

[35:40] Can I have a motion? You have a motion.

[35:45] Do you want me to do it? Can I Can I do

[35:47] it as the chairman? I can do the motion,

[35:48] can't I? You can.

[35:50] Okay.

[35:51] >> something on there which I liked and

[35:52] that's why I'm letting you do it.

[35:53] >> You got to let me do it. Okay. All

[35:55] right.

[35:57] Um the planning case commission

[35:59] recommends approval of the application

[36:01] by Trista Rei- Reiner to apply for

[36:05] transient lodging overlay zone on her

[36:07] property S-MMIS-1

[36:12] 975 Zion Park Boulevard as discussed in

[36:15] the planning commission meeting

[36:17] dated May 20th, 2026. This is based on

[36:20] the following findings.

[36:23] The transient lodging overlay zone

[36:25] application furthers the land use and

[36:28] town appearance goals in the Springdale

[36:30] general plan, specifically sub goal G

[36:33] that new lodging facilities promote

[36:36] Spring the transient lodging overlay

[36:38] zone application meets the requirements

[36:41] of the Springdale land use ordinance

[36:43] titled 10 article F regarding transient

[36:46] lodging overlay zone requirements.

[36:50] We have a couple of conditions or

[36:51] actually I might have a third one here.

[36:54] Um first that the uh that the building

[36:56] footprint of the final design as

[36:58] submitted for design development review

[37:01] will be approximately 2600 square feet

[37:04] as reported.

[37:05] Um

[37:07] and this will

[37:08] with some small leeway like a 5% leeway

[37:11] or something for necessary changes.

[37:14] Um

[37:15] second condition is that the final

[37:17] design submitted for the design

[37:19] development review must include varying

[37:21] external wall panels and exterior design

[37:25] elements

[37:26] as shown in the drawings.

[37:28] Um

[37:30] and the third condition I would put in

[37:32] is that one of the two

[37:35] uh long-term

[37:37] uh rental units

[37:38] um must uh have the d- the required deed

[37:42] restriction and the other one does not

[37:44] require the deed restriction.

[37:46] Is there a second? I would second that.

[37:50] Motion by Terry, second by Paul.

[37:53] You cut in just before you.

[37:56] Um discussion on any

[37:58] discussion or thoughts or changes or

[38:01] No, you got all the points. Thank you.

[38:03] Well, okay. I think we're ready.

[38:06] Um so, all approved?

[38:09] Rich, I. Terry, I. Paul, I.

[38:12] Your application we have we will

[38:13] recommend approval to the town council.

[38:18] Thank you.

[38:20] All right, so the uh second action item,

[38:23] um

[38:23] I guess we are going to pass by that

[38:25] one. Do we Do we need to like officially

[38:27] vote to say we're not going to do this

[38:29] or

[38:32] No, I I don't think so.

[38:36] You don't need an official vote, but you

[38:38] may just want to for the record say

[38:40] we're we're not going to we had

[38:43] potentially considered canceling the

[38:44] June 3rd meeting.

[38:46] We're not going to consider that, so no

[38:47] action is necessary.

[38:48] >> Okay.

[38:49] Um so, for the second action item,

[38:53] we were going to consider canceling the

[38:55] June 3rd Planning Commission work

[38:57] meeting.

[38:58] We have decided not to cancel that

[39:00] meeting and the town staff has indicated

[39:03] they can be prepared for that meeting.

[39:06] Okay.

[39:08] With that, I move that we

[39:11] approve the consent agenda.

[39:13] Motion by Paul.

[39:15] Second. Second by Rich. All in favor?

[39:17] Rich, I. Terry, I. All, I.

[39:20] All right. We have approved the meeting

[39:22] minutes.

[39:23] Can we get a motion to adjourn?

[39:25] I'll move that we adjourn. I'll second.

[39:27] Motion by Paul, second by Rich. All in

[39:29] favor? Rich, I. Terry, I. All, I.

[39:33] Thank you, everyone.

[39:37] Good luck with your project. Yeah. Look

[39:40] forward to seeing more of it. Yeah.

05/20/2026 Planning Commission Regular Meeting

Transcript