Planning commission tables rezoning request for Nelson Ranch property after lengthy public hearing

Washington City Planning Commission on April 16 voted to table Z-25-08, a request to rezone about 35.42 acres near Heritage Fields Drive and Nelson Ranch Road from A-20 (agricultural) to an Open Space and Planned Unit Development-Residential (PUDR) designation, so the applicant can respond to concerns raised by residents and commissioners. The commission set the continuance for May 7, 2025.

Staff and the applicant described the proposal as a single-family subdivision with 91 lots on the 35.42-acre site, of which 23.99 acres would be developable and 11.43 acres retained as open space. Staff noted the overall density calculates to about 2.57 units per acre across the full parcel and 3.79 units per acre on the developable acreage. The plan called for a 10-foot master-plan asphalt trail to be dedicated to the city, roughly 41,800 square feet of amenities (a pavilion and two pickleball courts among the items listed), and typical PUDR setbacks including a 20-foot garage setback and 5-foot side yards.

The public hearing drew a long line of residents. Many speakers opposed the smaller lots, the proposed setbacks and the location of the project adjacent to the Virgin River floodplain and an identified erosion-hazard area. Retired fire official Mel Milgram told commissioners the development “is a firestorm waiting,” citing brush along the river and the proposed lot pattern. Resident Jason Smith cited the PUDR code’s requirement that proposed units be "similar in scale" to adjoining parcels and said many proposed lots are well under the average size of neighboring subdivisions. Other speakers raised traffic safety, school access, loss of cottonwood habitat and concerns about future flood insurance availability for lots near the river.

Eldon (city staff) presented the staff report and answered technical questions about the floodplain, erosion-hazard line and utility connections. Adam Allen of American Consulting and Engineering explained that a blue line on the plan showed the 100-year floodplain and a red line identified an erosion-hazard band; he said an armoring study and protective structures would be required where lots fall within the erosion zone. Applicant Dave Nasal said the proposal sought some smaller lots in internal locations while buffering edges to be compatible with surrounding neighborhoods, that a 40-foot riprap/fire buffer would be provided along the river, and that the PUDR option is intended to provide more flexibility to deliver housing at lower price points.

Several commissioners pressed the applicant on access and side-yard setbacks. Commissioner Anderson, who made the motion to table, said access was his “biggest heartburn” and asked the applicant to explore an additional access point closer to 20 East and larger side-yard setbacks (for example 5 feet on one side and 10 feet on the other) to reduce the project’s perceived impact. Commissioner Mitchell said she favored development patterns that more closely matched existing adjacent R-1-10 zoning and expressed concern about inserting smaller lots behind established homes. The commission voted 4–0 to table the matter to May 7, 2025. Commissioners Anderson and Mitchell made the motion and second; Commissioners Anderson, Schill, Mitchell and Volk voted aye.

The tabling preserves the public record (staff said written comments already on file would carry forward) and keeps the public hearing option open for the May 7 meeting. Staff and the applicant were directed to return with revised materials that address access, setbacks and other technical clarifications requested by commissioners.

Votes at a glance: Motion to table Z-25-08 to 05/07/2025 — Mover: Commissioner Anderson; Second: Commissioner Mitchell; Vote: Anderson (aye), Schill (aye), Mitchell (aye), Volk (aye). Outcome: tabled; public hearing to be continued on May 7, 2025.