Last Thursday the City Council voted to change the land use on this parcel from low density to high density and change the zoning to townhomes with one buffer row of single-family homes on 5,000 sq.ft. lots along the north side of the property next to the Haven development.
Going from low to high density sounds like a huge leap. But letās put it in perspective. The Haven development directly north is medium density. It sits on land that was originally low density. Red Mountain Vista Townhomes next door is high density, but that land was originally low density. So, all the fiddling with changes to the land use plan over many years has made low density impractical for this site.
I did not vote for this change. I recommended no change until the City revises our Land Use Plan for the entire city and before getting a lot of public input. But I would have supported a change to medium density, like the Haven.
I donāt think the Councilās decision went far enough to protect the Haven. But it is important to note that it was a better decision than we often get. Thatās because the Council provided some protection for the Haven by requiring a ābufferā of single-family homes next to it.
By comparison, when Red Mountain Vista Townhomes was approved by the Council, all the adjoining land uses were either low or medium density. But high-density townhomes were approved for the entire site without any buffer of single-family to protect the adjoining properties.
I believe it is important to create a buffer whenever higher density is approved next to lower density. The City Council did that. I just donāt think it was enough of a buffer. I cited a couple of real-life examples to show my opinion of where āsmallā buffers are okay and where ālargerā buffers are more appropriate. But it is subjective and a bit philosophical. So, Iāll work on my presentation skills to hopefully do a better job in the future.
I would appreciate positive suggestions and examples of good solutions to problems like this. Although they didnāt do as much as I wanted, the City Council was sensitive to the adjoining properties, so donāt beat them up. Just help me with more information about how to explain my ideas better.
Please share your comments and tell me about other Ivins issues I have not addressed in recent posts. CONTACT ME
Recent āDevelopmentā posts
- Having a Voice in the Future of IvinsPDF šI was going to call this article āWhat Mojave Village Can Teach Us About Working Together to Protect Our Community,ā but that’s a bit much for a title! In my September āMonthly Ivins Updateā email to residents, I asked residents to email me with their thoughts about Mojave Village. More than 200 took the…
- Mojave Village: A Big Proposal Moving QuicklyPDF šIvins is considering a significant new development called Mojave Village, approximately 64 acres near Guy Lane and Fitness Way. The proposal includes 369 units: 160 Resort Commercial townhomes that could be used as short-term rentals, nearly 200 smaller-lot single-family homes, and estate lots of an acre or more. That’s a lot to consider. At…
- Mojave Village: Your Questions, Concerns & My ResponsesPDF šSince I posted information about the proposed Mojave Village development, I’ve received more than 100 emails and a lot of social media comments. Some are strongly opposed. Some ask good questions. Some raise concerns I share. Some reflect understandable misunderstandings about what is actually being proposed, which is one reason I think providing more…
- A New Plan for 64 Acres in Ivins: Mojave VillagePDF šThere are two important public hearings this week regarding Mojave Village, a proposed development of approximately 64 acres near Guy Lane and Fitness Way. The proposal would change the Land Use and Zoning Maps to allow a mix of housing types and Resort Commercial development. The proposed plan includes: 160 Resort Commercial townhomes that…
- SITLA Responses to Resident ConcernsPDF šI have received a number of emails from residents opposed to the annexation of the SITLA land just off Hwy 91 next to the Indigo Trails neighborhood and the proposed āAnasazi Commonsā attainable housing development (previously called Anasazi Ridge). After reviewing all of the emails Iāve received so far, I found 37 different concerns…