Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission denies Geneva Road townhome concept and rezoning request amid concerns about losing commercial land
Summary
A proposed 26‑unit townhome development and a concurrent rezoning from General Commercial to MDR at 113 & 191 N Geneva Road were denied by the planning commission after commissioners and public commenters said the site is a key remaining commercial opportunity on the West Side and the concept did not sufficiently demonstrate mixed‑use/commercial or
The Provo City Planning Commission voted to deny a concept plan for 26 townhomes and to recommend denial of a concurrent rezoning from General Commercial (CG) to Median Density Residential (MDR) for a 1.32‑acre site at 113 and 191 North Geneva Road, citing long‑term commercial goals for the West Side and shortcomings in the applicant’s mixed‑use proposal.
Staff presented the application and recommended denial, noting the general plan identifies the site for mixed‑use or commercial uses that the West Side needs to support neighborhood services. Applicant Jared Morgan (Albion Development) argued the 1.32‑acre, narrow and deep lot, combined with a 10,000‑square‑foot minimum retail footprint in mixed‑use rules and parking constraints, made viable retail unlikely; he described a design with 26 townhomes (20 du/acre), 60 parking stalls (including tandem stalls), 18 two‑bedroom and 8 three‑bedroom units, and eight live‑work fronting units intended to be for‑sale.
Public commenters — including long‑time property owners, residents and city staff — urged the commission to preserve the site for commercial uses where possible, arguing the parcel is one of the last opportunities to create a neighborhood commercial anchor on the West Side and that carving off the parcel could undermine assemblage of a larger, more viable commercial site at the corner. Neighbors raised traffic and driveway safety concerns on Geneva Road and said several adjacent parcel owners are not interested in selling, complicating any assemblage strategy.
Commissioners debated competing priorities: the property owners’ desire to redevelop versus the city’s long‑term plan to create a mixed‑use/commercial center. Concerns included the townhome plan’s tandem garage parking (which may not function as two‑car garages in practice), the small size of the proposed live‑work spaces, the limited guarantee of a homeownership component, and the potential that approving MDR would make future commercial assembly less likely. Several commissioners suggested alternatives that might be acceptable: clearer commitment to homeownership, larger or more substantive live‑work or commercial frontages, roadway connections to neighboring parcels, or seeking a variance to the 10,000‑square‑foot retail minimum to allow a smaller, realistic neighborhood commercial footprint.
After a motion to deny the concept plan, the commission voted 6–2 to deny item 5. Commissioners then voted unanimously to recommend denial of the zone map amendment (item 6). Commissioners advised the applicant that a revised proposal could be considered if it demonstrated stronger mixed‑use intent, a homeownership commitment, better parking/driveway design, and connections to adjoining parcels to support future commercial assembly.
