[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-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",[32,76,88,100],{"_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":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6567922,"mediaKeyId","3241550-6fcee1d1ec811e33fd6060bbfbc07f27","parentId",3241550,"title","Planning commission debates EV-readiness draft: 20% parking readiness target, incentives and exemptions remain unresolved","audioSeconds",4592,"startMs",2964000,"endMs",7556000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3241550-6fcee1d1ec811e33fd6060bbfbc07f27&start=2964&end=7556","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3241550-6fcee1d1ec811e33fd6060bbfbc07f27/thumbnail_2964000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6567922/Utah/Planning-commission-debates-EV-readiness-draft-20-parking-readiness-target-incentives-and-exemptions-remain-unresolved","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6567922-f2eba556051d76caa00b4cc74285b334/orig.mp4?Expires=1770488843&Signature=HmYACd-Gbl2lL3odpvx1wSpN2pGh9Z6m7GAsRbAutoIPNgno4hQyLml~5lakVJpCy4FGUfkw~eCklPjQ4d63hK3WVvt7vwfVYfGDabek9ujFKNVs6RAnw0VrkKh~8ACL1owfKWug-81-XXR8XNTQ~BsHjTEvScshBqeuAolCly5PVJu~~7SfhHCmwh3XXBvoY5wRHiwON9StFaRy0LT7S-LblL~fOMLMT80kUGpxfxCYrDGJH7k2nYwxGR5cAny2PODfSHhR9AViEwOqgEtJG8vTunJRNSfiv5TDsMljrVUIJTL~OyUkxW3s-t0fkfjnkJXVj0Hw2Fk3ax9ZE859bw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Moab City","date","2025-05-09T00:04:13Z","article","The Planning Commission held an extended discussion on May 8 about a draft ordinance to require electric-vehicle (EV) readiness in multi-family housing. The item was a briefing and discussion; no vote was taken. Staff asked for direction on several key thresholds, incentives and exemptions before returning with a more-complete draft.

Staff framed the proposal around Moab’s community greenhouse-gas goals and the higher emissions associated with gasoline vehicles. The draft would apply to new multi-household dwellings (three or more units) and would require 10% of parking be EV capable (electrical capacity and conduit provided) and an additional 10% be EV ready (outlet provided), for a total of 20% EV-capable/ready parking as a baseline. Installed chargers were not required; the draft distinguishes three preparedness levels: EV-capable, EV-ready, and EV-installed.

Commission discussion focused on how to manage costs and where to place exemptions. Staff proposed an exemption where an EV-related transformer upgrade would make a project financially infeasible, using a percentage threshold (staff suggested ~5% of project cost as an example) to trigger the exemption. Commissioners debated whether exemptions of that type should be handled by a written threshold in the code or through the ordinance’s exceptions process. City staff recommended starting with an exceptions process while collecting data from early cases and then considering a by-right exemption if consistent patterns emerge.

Commissioners also discussed incentives for single-family and duplex properties undergoing electrical upgrades. Staff proposed waiving certain plan-review or permit fees for applicants who are already submitting electrical work so the city does not create a disincentive. The building-permit workload and revenue implications were discussed; one staff estimate put the waived permit-fee value “just south of $200” per application as a neutral approach that would remove a small disincentive without creating a large budgetary subsidy. Commissioners suggested a variety of alternatives, including a simple flat-rate, a partial waiver tied to in-house review only, or a larger incentive if resources and capacity allowed.

Other technical issues raised included: whether conduit terminations should be within 3 feet (as in the draft) or 6 feet (as used in some other jurisdictions), how to manage ADA-accessible EV spaces proportionally, whether load-management systems should be allowed to reduce upfront electrical capacity needs for multiple chargers, and how to treat fast-charging equipment (staff proposed counting a fast charger as replacing up to three level-2 chargers; commissioners discussed lowering that ratio to 1-for-3 instead of 1-for-5). Staff proposed the ordinance exclude short-term parking (example threshold discussed: 15 minutes) from counting toward EV-ready requirements.

A separate, frequently discussed procedural threshold was whether a parking area must be “substantially modified” before EV requirements apply. The draft used two triggers: (1) 50% or more of a parking area’s change by area, and (2) a numerical threshold (substantial modification of 10 parking spaces). Commissioners asked staff to add example language (\"including but not limited to…\") that clarifies what qualifies as a substantial modification to provide predictability for property owners while retaining administrative discretion and an exceptions pathway.

Staff said they will take the commission’s direction, consult further with the building official and city attorney, test several numeric thresholds (e.g., 10%/10% split, transformer-cost percentage), and return with a revised draft. The commission did not take formal action.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City of Moab - Regular Planning Commission Meeting - May 8th, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Commission discussed a draft EV-readiness ordinance for multi-family housing — proposed 10% EV-capable, 10% EV-ready (20% total) for new multi-family developments — and directed staff to refine thresholds, exceptions, and incentives after questions on transformer costs, permit-fee incentives, and 'substantially modified' parking triggers.","taxTitle","Moab City Council, Moab, Grand County, Utah","taxId",23560,"location","Utah","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6567927,"Planning commission approves Lost Springs condominium plat, applies active employment household set-asides",1564,1398000,2962000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3241550-6fcee1d1ec811e33fd6060bbfbc07f27&start=1398&end=2962","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3241550-6fcee1d1ec811e33fd6060bbfbc07f27/thumbnail_1398000.jpg","/articles/6567927/Utah/Planning-commission-approves-Lost-Springs-condominium-plat-applies-active-employment-household-set-asides","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6567927-84b4ca3f2beb24b2fc8db9df8f78b02e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770488843&Signature=JuczI7ZiD4I~KDhPYIA9tF4ECL~Y63QXcVmLB7MltgDvJMA16OnV8x4VEfIJElP9bfhhHoHlAiy7BDZ~WAvJg8fUlafVX~YLu86RPtpVhNkhjgReQwmWLYHZjgTHNbVF3OnrcW6yO7rJKtEuJBzt-Ogop9JmOWD9Uz4dNUTqP5Fc7QqQkOuzlMWRD2zH0zKeAI2Um7ztyStm3tFEHMAp0Ma2eAcHIZXJAVrV6cNxqK2plxtosX81l86zFft8N7STb20XDkRoW7MXDcQqzxd0CA-8ePYesmK5F4fKCxEROXb~11TuwNp0qdYgzK~i2f7iWK0x5bZbyqCMEUlm55yR2g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Moab City Planning Commission voted 4-0 on May 8 to approve the Lost Springs condominium plat on property at 238 South 400 East, an 80-unit development on a parcel split between R3 and C5 zoning. The approval establishes the condominium ownership overlay and records site-specific condominiums and deed restrictions required under local code and state condominium rules.

Staff and the applicant explained the project’s history: site-plan approval was granted in 2002, condominium plat materials were submitted and reviewed earlier in 2025, and staff found the May submittal sufficient to address outstanding comments. The development replaces a mobile home park and includes three residential buildings and an office building; the zone split runs through the site, with the R3 zone applying to part of Building 1.

Because of the R3 zoning, the city’s Active Employment Household (AEH) ordinance requires 33% of units in the R3 portion be designated as AEH. Building 1 has 12 units; staff and the applicant designated four units (33% of 12) as AEH and recorded corresponding deed restrictions and plat notes. The civil engineer on the project, Callan, provided unit-size details for the AEH set-asides: Unit 101 (about 650 sq ft), Unit 105 (about 400 sq ft), Unit 202 (about 1,000 sq ft), and Unit 206 (about 650 sq ft). Staff told commissioners those AEH designations appear to meet the code’s ‘‘rough proportionality’’ requirement because the AEH units include a mix of sizes rather than only small units.

Commissioners discussed the tradeoffs: some said they were disappointed the project was not proceeding as apartments (which would have created rental units), but they also noted the AEH designation applies an occupancy standard intended to benefit employed local households regardless of ownership. City staff clarified AEH is an occupancy standard, not an ownership restriction: AEH units could be rented or sold provided occupancy conditions are met.

Chair Kai Marenfeld moved approval, Miles Lofton seconded, and the commission approved the condominium plat 4-0. Staff will record the plat and the deed-restriction language that identifies the AEH units on the condominium plat and in recorded CC&Rs.","Commission approved the Lost Springs condominium plat for 238 S. 400 E., an 80-unit development split-zoned R3/C5; staff and applicant designated four units in Building 1 to meet the R3 active employment household requirement.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6567932,"Planning commission approves off-site parking for Expedition 88 restaurant with conditions",619,753000,1372000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3241550-6fcee1d1ec811e33fd6060bbfbc07f27&start=753&end=1372","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3241550-6fcee1d1ec811e33fd6060bbfbc07f27/thumbnail_753000.jpg","/articles/6567932/Utah/Planning-commission-approves-off-site-parking-for-Expedition-88-restaurant-with-conditions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6567932-2c7884059c40e0c7ee48b82f4be2e84a/orig.mp4?Expires=1770488843&Signature=YSWei5BwW0anm7-2~1i14s1JMlx4N1nz1DYy72UdODE2FGVrs3mYWb9M6xrjXJO58Xe2vB37uK~bWXLXooJn0BTcPF4spbwstE1ucfzcq-3eXl4odbbQ-XqnYVySvjpOEDmFyzgVkqaDzbKfnoMBJenhAVRSije4Y3TMYgh2P5wOx7St02MsTvATU0rwASxpsSg~xUGcpftLp7TDy45I~vXXx-pw49T~Z-SvKsS6czKvx8H6xSv4dXi9GcC48LqvolhE~8jF~hamb3y~z4Z-JMBHL6G~X6V7k3ahH7YkKJBprunRth7K72lXYQ4qsmynwlq73Dyra-nqk2cT1vdWRA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Moab City Planning Commission on May 8 approved Planning Resolution 08-2025, authorizing an off-site parking agreement that reserves eight parking spaces for Expedition 88, a proposed full-service restaurant at 477 South Main Street. The commission’s vote was unanimous, 4-0, conditioned on final city attorney review of the agreement and recording the agreement with the Grand County Recorder.

Staff said the restaurant is 1,541 square feet and requires eight parking spaces under the city’s standard (one space per 200 square feet for eating establishments). The restaurant occupies space within the Radcliffe Hotel property; the proposed off-site parking would be on an adjacent parcel also owned by interests associated with the hotel. Staff described the submitted materials as an off-site parking agreement and a site plan showing eight spaces outlined in red to be reserved for the restaurant.

“We're hoping that it won't be a domino effect because they are still in the process of redesigning their parking lot,” a city staff member said, describing how the recorded agreement will reserve the eight spaces for the restaurant and prevent those spaces from being used concurrently by other tenants.

Commissioner Carolyn Conant moved the resolution and Commissioner Miles Lofton seconded. Commissioners discussed ensuring the agreement would be recorded; staff recommended recording the agreement with the county recorder rather than only with the city recorder. The motion passed 4-0 with the two explicit conditions: (1) city attorney review and approval of the off-site parking agreement, and (2) the recorded off-site parking agreement filed with the county recorder.

Staff noted the parties previously considered a shared parking agreement and a lot-line adjustment; the shared-parking path was not pursued and the restaurant team sought the off-site parking exception to enable the restaurant use to proceed sooner.","The commission approved a planning resolution allowing eight off-site parking spaces for Expedition 88 at 477 S. Main, conditioned on city attorney approval and recording with the county recorder; vote 4-0.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6567936,"Moab Planning Commission recommends removing commission, council signature requirement from subdivision code",495,245000,740000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3241550-6fcee1d1ec811e33fd6060bbfbc07f27&start=245&end=740","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3241550-6fcee1d1ec811e33fd6060bbfbc07f27/thumbnail_245000.jpg","/articles/6567936/Utah/Moab-Planning-Commission-recommends-removing-commission-council-signature-requirement-from-subdivision-code","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6567936-ed9ba5fc2de6b1b0f8e534d764a11df0/orig.mp4?Expires=1770488843&Signature=JGMVDwa15oBnC3JT6ReEKyADgXLX2e5FBWrfad3xoci5AXx-UVwyhhYmx~mPhgb06RAVVZtUZO79f1xtRMi1cmjgkHUAjxnwJG6sjl952DME~f2i~5khiBLWhgOdeLrZRSLEezHUWPNL8-oecQmgmH1ZZQ7pWJfQg5xnNdElCSPfuUbqk0xUkDVkCMAEcrbAPjt9Ln7jksRhWl7oOd3i4cToVOQzW-a7OIbaEUqhb0HPxq8yG2n8Aw6QuXO5TViBvLxDKSgRAbvrLy7mCaEu3~acJaV8Z3wVwJCJiDW0xggDkNnzNZvzp5ywNVUywxdJ6h23oHY21b-6PvK5x2Coqw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Moab City Planning Commission on May 8 recommended approval of Ordinance 2025-07, an amendment to Moab Municipal Code Title 16 that removes the Planning Commission and City Council from signature authorization for certain final Mylar subdivision plats. The commission voted 4-0 to send the ordinance forward.

City staff told the commission the change is a technical cleanup prompted by state legislative changes to administrative land-use authority over the last two years. “As the land use authority has been amended … the planning commission and city council are no longer bodies that review some of these administrative actions,” a city staff member said during the public hearing presentation. Staff said the change aligns the municipal code with current practice and legal guidance from the city attorney.

The ordinance was introduced as a public hearing item. No members of the public were present to comment either in chambers or via the city’s comment portal, and the commission closed the public hearing before taking action. Commissioner Miles Lofton made the motion recommending approval and Chair Kai Marenfeld seconded it. The motion passed unanimously, 4-0.

Commission discussion framed the change as a straightforward code clean-up. Commissioner Miles Lofton said, “I mean, it seems incredibly straightforward. We don't review these documents. Why we would require a signature from us does not make any sense.” Staff emphasized the amendment preserves signature authority for those bodies that still must sign and only removes signature requirements where state law no longer gives those bodies review authority.

Staff said the amendment addresses inconsistencies that accumulated after recent state bills changed which entities perform administrative land-use functions and that additional, future code updates are likely to follow as staff and legal counsel continue to reconcile Moab’s municipal code with state statute.

The commission’s recommendation now moves the ordinance to the next step in the city’s legislative process.","The Planning Commission voted 4-0 to recommend Ordinance 2025-07, a narrow code amendment removing Planning Commission and City Council signature authorization for final Mylar subdivision plats after state law changed land-use authority.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning commission debates EV-readiness draft: 20% parking readiness target, incentives and exemptions remain unresolved

Planning commission approves Lost Springs condominium plat, applies active employment household set-asides

Planning commission approves off-site parking for Expedition 88 restaurant with conditions

Moab Planning Commission recommends removing commission, council signature requirement from subdivision code