Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Resource Protection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission recommends narrowing RPO calculations to exclude street rights‑of‑way; one commissioner dissents
Summary
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended City Council approve a limited change to the Resource Protection Overlay rules so that public rights‑of‑way (and major utility corridors) are excluded from resource preservation calculations for subdivision developments.
The Planning and Zoning Commission voted to recommend that City Council approve a zoning code text amendment (PZ2400216) to modify Resource Protection Overlay (RPO) applicability so that certain rights‑of‑way and major utility corridors are excluded from resource calculations for subdivision development.
Tiffany, city planning staff, told the commission the RPO was originally applied to large vacant parcels in the 1990s and focuses on three ordered resource priorities: floodplains, slopes and forest resources. Staff said standards were written when arterial and street sections were narrower and that the city now requires a 56‑foot residential right‑of‑way; the change would remove the land area inside public rights‑of‑way from the denominator when calculating required slope and forest preservation. Tiffany said the amendment is intended as a focused, interim change to avoid losing development opportunities in the John Wesley Powell corridor while a larger overhaul of the RPO is developed.
Commission discussion emphasized wildfire risk, tree preservation and the tradeoffs between connectivity and resource protection. Commissioner Mary Norton said she intended to vote no, arguing the amendment could undermine long‑standing forest and slope protections, and she noted the code language in 1050.90.030 prioritizing connected resource clusters. Other commissioners, and several outside speakers representing developers and engineering firms, said the proposed change is a targeted fix that will reduce the number of cul‑de‑sacs, improve through‑street connectivity and help projects meet minimum densities. Several speakers asked that the exemption apply to both public and private streets built to city standards; staff responded the amendment was intentionally limited to public rights‑of‑way to support connectivity and to avoid reopening a larger code rewrite in this intermediary step.
The commission moved and seconded a recommendation for approval; the motion passed with a recorded dissent by Commissioner Mary Norton. Staff said City Council is aware the amendment is being advanced as a small change prior to a larger RPO code overhaul.
