Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves A‑5H to A‑5 development proposal for 594 S. 2400 W., with conditions on utilities, design and parking
Summary
Payson City Council narrowly approved on March 5 a proposal to remove an A‑5H holding designation and permit a field house at 594 S. 2400 W., subject to conditions requiring deferred utility connections (water/sewer/PI) until systems are nearby, power provision, design controls and a parking study.
Payson City Council voted 3–2 on March 5 to approve a development proposal to remove an A‑5H holding designation and allow a field house on a 5.5‑acre parcel at 594 South 2400 West, subject to several conditions.
Michael, a planning staff member, presented the request and framed it as one step in a four-step process that would include conditional-use review by the planning commission and subsequent site and building plan approvals. He said the use (a field house) is permitted in A‑5 zoning but the parcel carried an A‑5H holding overlay, which is why council action was required to remove the holding designation.
Applicant Ariel Martinez described the proposed field house as primarily for indoor soccer and youth sports, similar in use to existing field houses elsewhere in the county. Staff and council discussed infrastructure options: the applicant would need water and septic or a well and on-site storage for fire suppression if municipal water was not adjacent; staff suggested a condition allowing deferral of water, sewer and pressurized-irrigation connections until those services are within 300 feet of the site, but that power must be extended.
Council debate focused on neighbors’ concerns about traffic, parking, and building appearance; staff said infrastructure, parking and parking-count determinations would be part of the site‑plan review and could require a traffic/parking study paid by the applicant. Councilor discussion also emphasized notifying nearby residents for the planning‑commission hearing even though code did not require notice for this administrative step. The council motion that passed included several explicit conditions: defer water/sewer/PI until within 300 feet (except power must be extended), secure corridor-preservation right-of-way funding, require staff and applicant to ensure exterior building design fits future area character (e.g., material veneer), require a parking/traffic study to ensure adequate stalls, and require a courtesy public notice for the planning commission hearing.
The motion passed 3–2. Staff said the conditional-use application will go next to planning commission for review and any additional conditions, after which site-plan and building reviews will follow.
