My number one goal is to involve Ivins residents early in the decision-making process. Providing information is an important first step. Listening carefully to feedback is the next step.
When there are strong opinions on both sides of an issue, I believe in looking for a solution that minimizes negative impacts for both sides. I believe the approach I outlined yesterday for dealing with building colors does that.
I know it still won’t make everyone happy. But hopefully both “sides” can appreciate that I’m not taking the issue lightly (no, that wasn’t meant to be a building color pun). Here’s how I look at this issue.
This isn’t something new
One thing was clear from comments and emails I got. At least some thought the City was considering creating a NEW ordinance to regulate building colors. That’s not the case. Ivins has been regulating building colors for many years. But the regulation is very subjective.
Subjectivity is unfair and needs to be eliminated
That subjectivity led to it being applied inconsistently, creating uncertainty, frustration, and unfairness. I heard that in both public hearings the Planning Commission had over the past nine months. The Planning Commission recommended changes to the ordinance, but still left it very subjective.
What do I think?
I believe we should continue regulating building colors. But we need to do it without the subjectivity.
What about my property rights
“Should we do it” brings up the issue of property rights. These are rights in a tangible thing, your real estate. So, some say the City has no right interfering with your personal stuff. But property rights are also rights in relation to other people. So, I believe the City needs to balance its duty to individuals with its duty to the community. That’s no small feat, but that’s what makes the job so much fun!
But Ivins isn’t a HOA
Some people told me that it’s okay for HOAs to regulate colors, but don’t impose HOA type regulations on residents who choose to live outside a HOA. HOAs aren’t the only ones in the regulation business. Cities have lots of regulations. Just one document, our Ivins City Code, has 253 pages of regulations.
That’s a lot of regulation. Each one of us will find at least one thing in those pages we don’t like… okay, two things. But that will be offset by something else we appreciate. Regulations help develop and preserve a sense of community and help keep Ivins a special place. But we need to be careful not to overdo it.
HOAs may create stricter regulations. I’m not proposing that. As an example, Kayenta limits building colors to six darker shades of brown. It’s fine for a HOA to be that restrictive. And Kayenta is beautiful. But cities should not be that restrictive. My recommendations would result in hundreds of colors/shades being acceptable, but clearly defined so the requirements are objective.
How to ensure balance
We all get upset about one regulation or another. I believe regulations are appropriate if they are: (1) Created for a reasonable purpose, (2) easily understood, (3) objective, (4) predictable, (5) applied consistently, and (6) based on our General Plan’s vision. I believe the approach I suggested does all this.
The importance of being reliable and stable
Just like we should be careful when we create a new regulation, we should be equally careful when we change an existing one. A community functions best when it can rely on a consistent, stable set of rules.
Does it serve a reasonable purpose?
Our building color requirements have helped Ivins develop its own unique character by prioritizing the views in our desert environment over the views of stuff we build. Our General Plan encourages the use of colors that blend with and complement the amazing natural beauty and character of our desert and Red Mountain.
I have to wear the hat of a trustee
Shouldn’t I respect the wishes of the majority? Well, aside from the fact that I don’t know what the majority would decide on this issue, the answer is no. My duty on the City Council is to represent the entire community.
How can anyone do that when the community is divided on an issue? It’s simple, at least in theory. It’s stressful in practice. I have a duty to act as trustee for the community. As a trustee I must respect and preserve the regulations we have if they meet the test for regulations outlined above.
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…