[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},"mediaId",6603869,"mediaKeyId","2997442-ebaaa4e2a863c055bd40f2b745809bf7","parentId",2997442,"title","Planning staff previews HDHO overlay workshop and public infrastructure reimbursement program","audioSeconds",308,"startMs",256000,"endMs",564000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2997442-ebaaa4e2a863c055bd40f2b745809bf7&start=256&end=564","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2997442-ebaaa4e2a863c055bd40f2b745809bf7/thumbnail_256000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6603869/Utah/Planning-staff-previews-HDHO-overlay-workshop-and-public-infrastructure-reimbursement-program","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6603869-b740d1acc1aa1c872eb821f2ecf3df0c/orig.mp4?Expires=1770738042&Signature=A6bGowbPTMf56Ji3dJgyXUnNKPRIzTy6AJcqPAh8udwFZ-jiYgMEObkMPZOr2x7~dLeJOTBkK71VamGspke4hsuz7zgJBfnZsVCtK95jVEa90dYO3G73gCzS03iXzNu2Fauqhp1aE9dkUEm6QZTQRhg~u668Nbllk~85srJ2Rai5EQ9wtwFgyeoOjHkigOdJFj9XMfXZpECcf7xBG0E3vRyPg-WG-HnaYbzvMADpYsvCARug-oz3090yuPl4KB~ntkDqlEA~WtM1MLN28gefeYVVYePtsV9V--wApnGcSFe0vRBYLFfCpm7A5LT5O7FyPRrMyDTLGDzbXXBfyAUF4A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-04-15T12:21:02Z","article","Planning staff told the Grand County Planning and Zoning Board they will workshop proposed revisions to the HDHO (housing) overlay with the County Commission before scheduling public hearings and that staff are drafting a proposed public infrastructure reimbursement program aimed at encouraging development by allowing pro rata reimbursement to early infrastructure providers.

Chrissy Hawthorne, planning staff, said the HDHO revisions followed two earlier workshops and that she would circulate a red-lined draft to participants before a joint workshop with the County Commission and subsequent public hearings. \"Once they sort of get their red lines of what I rewrote, then we will workshop that with the Planning Commission and the County Commission. And then those will go to a public hearing,\" Hawthorne said.

Hawthorne also described a public infrastructure reimbursement concept intended to help developers recover costs of large, shared improvements. She explained the model as a common approach used elsewhere: an initial developer builds costly infrastructure and future subdivisions tapping those facilities pay a pro rata share, providing reimbursement to the original builder. \"If a developer is developing an area that requires very expensive and... involved infrastructure, that future subdivisions could tap onto those improvements and then the applicant who originally put them in would get a pro rata sort of reimbursement,\" Hawthorne said.

Trisha Dean, providing a County Commission update, expressed concern about packet preparation and legal review during recent Commission consideration of HDHO matters. \"What was bothersome to me was the agenda item in general, was there was nothing in the packet,\" Dean said, and asked for improved vetting and acknowledgement of volunteer schedules for future subcommittee work. Dean credited staff including Laura, Caitlin and Vin Riley for substantial work preparing materials but said she wanted clearer procedures so volunteers and commissioners receive legally vetted documents before public meetings.

Board members asked whether the housing subcommittee meetings were recorded and whether materials were available; staff said they would circulate draft documents and that the revisions had been well-workshopped but would also be debated by the Planning Commission and County Commission in sequence.

No formal action was taken during the meeting on either the HDHO drafts or the infrastructure reimbursement concept; staff will return with red-lined HDHO revisions and a more developed reimbursement proposal for the Planning Commission and County Commission to consider and take to public hearing.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Grand County Planning & Zoning's Personal Meeting Room","oneSentenceSummary","Grand County planning staff announced an upcoming joint workshop on revisions to the HDHO overlay (housing) and briefed commissioners on a proposed public infrastructure reimbursement program to offset developer costs for major infrastructure, while the County Commission review raised process concerns.","taxTitle","Grand County Boards and Commissions, Grand County, Utah","taxId",67556,"location","Utah","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6603872,"Grand County planning panel recommends denying rezoning of Raven’s Rim parcel",4378,1236000,5614000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2997442-ebaaa4e2a863c055bd40f2b745809bf7&start=1236&end=5614","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2997442-ebaaa4e2a863c055bd40f2b745809bf7/thumbnail_1236000.jpg","/articles/6603872/Utah/Grand-County-planning-panel-recommends-denying-rezoning-of-Ravens-Rim-parcel","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6603872-3cf8c328871c4888fcc3a287271612d1/orig.mp4?Expires=1770738042&Signature=JcHRzbjtUWwV2AbiObbrWxaUF3qbLobMJ8yZU~MuLI7vMk4TKA8-bxsWh2rVPTe1e9bODZ0RIFKZWxri8e8woKohfjnEuyis4qAwwRP7PvPYFtogpiaAMqx1uR9vTXyjuXI7tIclGH1yTdujI09hj7O7-pWVFBaXfN85gegOn3n766IeTMVo4jrXJDEnn0ydjOqwGR37uKckrds8coXMm5aDJ4dzTI1QWiXOOT5NYMb1FABSXOVKyCYuN1xtdrwHp~9rKnAQn7am-BDeDt3d1VBcKTCC6Z5XcOuUdVODS-znGYZHFFWpN0LuVf-Jl6waSFSNCHUhMg8-3e4knJbNiA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Grand County Planning and Zoning Board voted to recommend denial of a request to rezone roughly 234 acres identified as parcel 0300360063 from Range and Grazing to Resort Commercial, saying the county lacks the procedural and technical information needed to support a wholesale upzoning.

Planning staff summarized the application and recommended denial, saying the parcel “needs to be annexed to the city” and that changing the zoning to a broad commercial category would amount to spot zoning and raise access and infrastructure questions. Chrissy Hawthorne, planning staff, told commissioners the parcel is “accessed via Hell’s Revenge, which is a Class D road,” and that the most intense potential uses must be considered when reviewing a rezone.

The applicant and property owners said the land already functions primarily as a recreation and tourism site. “All we’re asking now is the zoning to recognize the reality that it actually exists on the ground right now,” said Mark Steen, who spoke for his family as owners of the property. Ashley, principal owner of MiniLea Ventures, said the county’s recent future land-use work indicated the parcel as resort or tourist recreation and argued the rezone is consistent with that guidance. “We cannot invest in infrastructure without proper zoning,” Ashley said, describing a chicken-or-egg problem between zoning and infrastructure investment.

Public commenters and some commissioners disagreed that a countywide Resort Commercial designation was appropriate for the entire parcel. Several speakers, including Bob Greenberg, Kirsten Pearson and former planning commissioner Kevin Walker, urged the board to reject or substantially narrow the rezoning request. Concerns cited by commenters and staff included the parcel’s size, the parcel’s varied topography and constrained areas, the lack of utility and road infrastructure, and the parcel’s inclusion in the city’s annexation area and in the North Gateway/future land-use planning work.

Commissioner Obi moved that the board send an unfavorable recommendation to the County Commission to deny the rezoning request; Jerry seconded. The motion passed with six votes in favor and one abstention (Mary), and the board closed the public hearing. The action sends the board’s recommendation to the County Commission, which retains final authority on the legislative rezoning decision.

Board members who supported the unfavorable recommendation cited three recurring points during deliberations: (1) the parcel is within the City of Moab’s annexation area and the board needs written confirmation from the city before acting; (2) Resort Commercial allows a density and range of uses that are inappropriate for much of the 234-acre parcel and could constitute spot zoning; and (3) the application lacked a specific development plan and detailed infrastructure proposals that would show how commercial uses could be supported given current access and utility limits.

Planning staff and several commissioners said narrower approaches could address both applicant and community concerns: subdivide and rezone only the specific developable portions along the highway corridor, pursue a different county zone (for example, Resort Special) tailored to remote tourist uses, or obtain a city annexation determination and then revisit the zoning question. Kevin Walker and others recommended aligning future land-use designations with a revised land-use code before approving large, generalized rezonings so that zone names and permitted uses match the county’s policy goals.

The public hearing remains part of the record and the County Commission will receive the Planning Commission’s recommendation, staff materials and written public comments filed during the required post-hearing period. The board did not approve any development permits or annexation and did not adopt a final county decision; it sent a recommendation to the County Commission to reject the rezone request.","Grand County Planning and Zoning Board voted to send an unfavorable recommendation to the County Commission on a request to rezone roughly 234 acres (parcel 0300360063) from Range and Grazing to Resort Commercial, citing annexation, access, infrastructure and spot-zoning concerns.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning staff previews HDHO overlay workshop and public infrastructure reimbursement program

Grand County planning panel recommends denying rezoning of Raven’s Rim parcel