Commission recommends against Grand Island Estates land-use and zoning changes after residents and developers clash

The Lake Havasu Planning and Zoning Commission on Jan. 15 recommended denial of two related requests affecting parts of Grand Island Estates on the western end of the island: a minor general-plan amendment (Land Use Action ID 202251) to change an 11.4-acre site’s future land-use designation from “resort related” to “resort related island,” and a companion rezoning (ID 202250) to remove parcels from the Grand Island Estates planned development and rezone them from Mixed Use Neighborhood PD (MUN PD) to Mixed Use General (MUG).

Planning staff said the proposal would shift the general-plan category from a primarily commercial “resort related” designation to a designation that allows medium- to higher-density resort and residential uses, including condominiums and timeshares. Staff also noted the site is part of a larger, originally approved 106-acre Grand Island Estates development that included parcel-specific uses in the 1994 approval and a 2005 amendment.

“I’m not sure that we have any business making a decision on this right now,” Commissioner Chad Nelson said during discussion, reflecting concerns from neighbors about process and information. Attorney Louie Lopez, representing the Shoreline Homeowners Association, urged the commission to deny the first request as premature and said affected homeowners had expected residential limits under earlier representations and a development agreement. “This is premature at this particular point in time,” Lopez told the commission.

Applicant and owner Jim Rolle told the commission he bought the parcels after the island’s earlier financial troubles and said he intends to “blend in” with existing development; he said any units he might build would not exceed nearby building heights and that he planned rental units aimed at residents age 50 and older. Rolle said he had held a neighborhood meeting and believed he had followed the advised process for outreach.

Several homeowners and residents told the commission they had not received timely notice of the applicant’s neighborhood meeting and said they worried the change would increase density and traffic, strain services and permit uses not compatible with the island’s existing character. Residents cited the development agreement’s previously stated 400-unit cap for the island and warned rezoning to Mixed Use General could allow much higher densities. Homeowner Debbie Young quoted staff guidance that Mixed Use General could allow “40 dwelling units per acre,” and said that level of density would be much greater than what currently exists on the island.

City staff and the Development Services director, Stuart Schmeling, clarified that aspects of the development agreement no longer apply to lots once they have been sold to final owners, and explained the difference between general-plan designations, zoning and plan-development restrictions. Staff also noted any future specific development proposals would undergo standard review by engineering, fire and other departments and could trigger traffic or other studies as required.

After hearing applicants, staff and public testimony, Commissioner Nelson moved to recommend denial of the general-plan amendment (ID 202251); Commissioners voted to forward that recommendation to City Council. The commission then considered the related rezoning request (ID 202250); after public testimony and discussion, the commission voted to recommend denial of the rezoning, with the transcript recording the rezoning denial vote as passing 6–0.

Staff’s packet said the owner had not submitted a specific development plan for the parcels; commissioners and residents repeatedly urged the applicant to return with a site-specific plan or a plan-development amendment that would lock in intended uses and design details rather than straight rezoning to MUG.

The commission’s recommendations will go to City Council for final decision on Feb. 25, 2020.