Lake Havasu planning panel recommends denying Grand Island Estates general-plan change and rezoning

The Lake Havasu Planning and Zoning Commission on Jan. 15 recommended denial of two linked land-use requests from owner Jim Rolle involving parcels in Grand Island Estates: (1) a minor general plan amendment to change the future-land-use map designation from “resort related” to “resort related island” (Land Use Action ID 202251) and (2) a rezoning request to remove parcels A and C (Lot 1) from the Grand Island Estates planned development and rezone them from Mixed Use Neighborhood (PD) to Mixed Use General (Land Use Action ID 202250).

The commission’s action was driven by concerns about the lack of a specific development plan, potential increases in allowed density under the new zoning, and strong opposition from nearby homeowners. Commissioner Chad Nelson moved that the commission recommend denial of the general-plan amendment; Commissioner Donald Bergen later moved denial of the rezoning. Both motions were approved by the commission (motion votes recorded as 6–0).

Why it matters: Residents who bought homes inside Grand Island Estates said they purchased with the understanding that the island’s plan development would limit uses and density. Several homeowners and a homeowners-association attorney told commissioners the proposed zoning would open the door to uses and intensities they did not expect when they bought in, including higher-density multifamily development, hotels, or other commercial uses allowed outright in the Mixed Use General zoning column.

Planning staff presented the requests as a two-step process: first a general-plan amendment is needed so the requested zoning would conform to the general plan; second, the rezone would remove the parcels from the existing planned development and allow the uses listed in the Mixed Use General column of the city’s zoning table. Planning staff said the applicant had not supplied a specific site plan; the owner said he had not submitted detailed plans because he first sought the zoning change.

Residents and specialists pressed the commission on three recurring concerns: - Density and infrastructure: Multiple speakers noted that Mixed Use General allows up to 40 dwelling units per acre and argued the island’s roads, emergency response, and utilities could be strained by higher-density development. “That is extremely high density housing. That is not consistent with what we have on the island right now,” said homeowner Debbie Young. - Process and notice: Attorney Louie Lopez and several homeowners said notice of the applicant’s neighborhood meeting was insufficient and that many island homeowners — often out-of-state secondary owners — learned of the filing too late to attend. Lopez told commissioners the record did not show the property was undevelopable as staff suggested; rather, he said the owner had chosen not to develop under the existing restrictions. - Unclear limits under the development agreement: Development Services Director and Zoning Administrator Stuart Schmeling explained the development agreement that governed parts of the island has lapsing provisions and that some lots no longer remain subject to parts of that agreement when sold to a “final owner.” Still, speakers including Greg Clark of Trinity Land Development said they had relied on prior representations of a 400-unit cap when they purchased lots, and that rezoning could effectively allow development beyond those expectations.

Owner Jim Rolle told the commission he intends “upscale” rental condominiums aimed at older adults and said he would not build 70-foot hotels or towers. “I’m trying to fit into the community,” Rolle said. Homeowners remained unconvinced: several said previous meetings with the owner produced no drawings or firm commitments and urged the commission to require a planned-development application that would lock in specific uses and standards.

With questions unresolved, the commission voted to recommend denial of both the general-plan amendment (Land Use Action ID 202251) and the rezoning (Land Use Action ID 202250). Both recommendations will go to the Lake Havasu City Council on Feb. 25 for a final decision.

The record will go to the City Council for final action on Feb. 25. Commissioners and speakers said a site-specific planned-development application that included a site plan, building heights, density limits, and traffic/fire engineering review would be the clearer way to resolve the competing concerns.

Ending: The commission’s recommendation does not itself change zoning or the general plan; it sends the commission’s advice to the City Council, which may take a different view at its meeting on Feb. 25.