Hurricane Council approves ordinance cleanup but removes PDO overlay for civic center zoning

HURRICANE, Utah — The Hurricane City Council on Thursday approved an ordinance cleanup to permit government services in the city’s public facility zone while removing an option that would have allowed a Planned Development Overlay (PDO) to be applied over public‑facility zoning for city‑sponsored projects.

The change, filed as LUCA 24‑08 and discussed at length by staff, commissioners and residents, makes explicit that government offices and services are allowed in the public facility zone and clarifies several technical provisions; the council adopted the version that excludes use of a PDO over a public facility zone ("Option B").

City planning staff told the council the revisions are intended to remove a drafting oversight — the existing public facility ordinance does not explicitly allow “government services” — and to tidy up how density, setbacks and development processes are described. Dayton, a planning staff member, said, “there is not a zone change application on this agenda tonight. We're talking about updating the ordinances that govern the zones,” and emphasized that any specific civic‑center project would still require later zone changes and public hearings.

The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed ordinance and, following public comment that focused mainly on the civic center master plan rather than the ordinance language itself, voted 7‑1 to recommend the clean‑up version that does not permit a PDO over the public facility zone. Planning commissioner Kelby, speaking as a commissioner, told the council: "I don't think the planning commission... has any issue with an ordinance being changed to allow public buildings in a public facility zone." City staff recommended the alternative that would have allowed the PDO overlay (Option A); the commission and a majority of council members favored Option B.

Council debate focused less on the technical cleanup than on public process and perception. Several council members and members of the public urged more work sessions and open houses before the council moves toward any project‑level approvals for the 20‑acre civic center site west of the current city offices. One resident, Melanie McGinnis, said she had concerns about the plan's potential housing component and its impact, noting residents worried it could change the character of nearby neighborhoods and add traffic.

Councilman Thomas moved to adopt Option B (the Planning Commission recommendation); Councilman Faucett seconded. In the roll‑call recorded on the agenda, Councilman Thomas, Councilman Faucett and Councilman Ellerman voted yes; Councilman Preet recorded a no vote and explained his opposition as a transparency concern. The motion carried as recorded by those votes. The council also directed staff to schedule additional public work sessions to solicit more community input on the civic center concept and related zoning questions.

The council set a follow‑up work meeting in April to continue public engagement on the civic‑center concept and the ordinance language; council members and staff emphasized that specific project approvals — including any zone changes for the property and any density decisions for housing components — would return to the Planning Commission and the City Council with separate public hearings.

Key facts - Item: LUCA 24‑08, land‑use code amendment to Title 10 (Ch. 11, 17, 23) concerning the Public Facility Zone and the Planned Development Overlay (PDO). - Purpose: Make government services an explicit permitted use in the public facility zone; clarify PDO rules and other cleanup items. - Planning Commission action: Recommended Option B (remove PDO over public facility zone) by a 7‑1 vote at the March 27, 2025 meeting. - Council action: Motion to adopt Option B made by Councilman Thomas, seconded by Councilman Faucett; roll‑call recorded votes included Thomas (yes), Faucett (yes), Ellerman (yes) and Preet (no). Staff said other formal project approvals would require separate zone‑change filings, public hearings and council votes.

Why it matters The ordinance change fixes a drafting gap that, as written, did not explicitly permit government services on public property — an outcome that would have prevented the city from clearly carrying out civic uses on property it owns. The debate underscores two competing priorities: giving staff and the council tools to plan and assemble a civic campus, and ensuring broad public engagement and transparency before project‑level zoning or density decisions are locked in.

What’s next Council members instructed staff to hold additional work sessions and public outreach before bringing any project‑specific zone changes or site plans back to the Planning Commission and City Council. Any future request to apply a PDO or to set residential density on the civic center site will require separate public hearings and formal council action.