Last week I asked two questions: (1) Should we continue regulating building color like we have been doing, and (2) Can the regulation be objective and free from misinterpretation? Today I will answer the second question, because that’s easier. Tomorrow I will post my answer to the first question along with my rationale.
Our current regulation for building colors is subjective. That has resulted in problems, which have been clearly expressed in emails from residents, Nextdoor comments, and the two public hearings the Planning Commission had over the past nine months discussing this issue. I believe Mike Haycock, head of the City’s Building Department, agreed this was a problem and he asked the Planning Commission for more objective measures.
I reviewed other ordinances and talked to city department heads in other “deserty” communities and met with the Community Development Department in Springdale to get a “walk through” of their approach to regulating building colors and communicating choices to developers and property owners.
These cities (Springdale, Sedona, Scottsdale) have objective, simple requirements for building colors. They all use “The Munsell Book of Color” to regulate colors. They told me they use this source because it gives them a predictable standard for colors. It is objective. It eliminates subjectivity.
I asked them why they regulate color and do not allow some current trendy colors, like white, super saturated, and very light colors. All said they want to reduce the visual impact of buildings using colors that emphasize muted earth tones blending with their natural desert environment.
None of the Cities allowed all the color choices on any page. They all had a minimum and maximum limit for the “value” of the color (how light or dark it is). That’s the vertical scale. They also had limits for the chroma, shown on the horizontal scale.
Springdale uses an “overlay” that blocks out high chroma and high value chips on any page. But all the chips are kept in the book so when someone comes in with their paint chip color, they can easily see if their chip falls within or outside the acceptable ranges.
I recommend the City buy The Munsell Book and get input from design professionals and residents on acceptable hues, chroma ranges, and value ranges. All three cities had similar ranges, but there were differences. That’s because although they are all “deserty” communities, the colors in their natural environments are visually different from each other. As is ours.
Please share your comments on this topic and tell me about other Ivins issues I have not addressed in recent posts. Email me at Mike@MikeScott4Ivins.com.
Recent “Development” posts
- Short-Term Rentals: A Difficult VotePDF đź“„At our December 18th meeting, I voted to approve a 160-unit short-term rental development called Mojave Village just off Hwy 91. I do not believe short-term rentals are good for Ivins. In addition to practical challenges they create, they undermine the sense of community that defines this city. That’s why I have consistently voted…
- SITLA Affordable Housing Proposal — Great Goal, Challenging LocationPDF đź“„As noted in previous articles, the Utah Trust Lands Administration (SITLA) is moving forward with a proposal to build 254 small, attainable single-family homes on its 40-acre parcel just off Hwy 91 next to Indigo Trails. The land is in unincorporated Washington County and within “Area 2” of the Ivins Annexation Policy Plan. The…
- Making Land Use Changes Work for the CommunityPDF đź“„Cities across Utah are feeling pressure from the State Legislature to help provide more affordable housing options. At the same time, communities like Ivins are trying to maintain neighborhood character, protect infrastructure capacity, and preserve our quality of life. Those goals aren’t incompatible, but they require thoughtful decision-making. When development proposals come forward, they…
- Red Mountain Resort Development: Update 2PDF đź“„Update – 10/17/25: The City Council last night approved a revised development agreement for Red Mountain Resort. The plan now allows 450 units instead of 500 and, more importantly, adds 16 conditions designed to reduce construction impacts, protect views, address traffic, ensure night-sky-friendly lighting, and more conditions to make the finished project fit more…
- Closer to Affordable Housing Off Hwy 91PDF đź“„The Trust Lands Administration (commonly known as SITLA) has selected a developer for its parcel of land just off Hwy 91 next to the Indigo Trails community. The land is in unincorporated Washington County in “Area 2” of the Ivins Annexation Policy Plan. The developer plans to build about 250 small detached single-family homes on 3,000…