La Paz County board declines to act on 40‑acre Rio Vista rezoning after safety and housing concerns

A proposed rezoning of 40 acres at 31455 Rio Vista Road in Parker — to allow a large RV and boat storage facility — died for lack of a motion at the La Paz County Board of Supervisors meeting on May 19, 2025, after residents raised traffic, safety and water‑service concerns.

Agent Gary Ritchie, representing the property owner Ronald Westman, described the project as a “high quality, secure storage facility” intended to fill a local shortage of storage units and boost tourism spending in Parker. He said the project is fully funded and ready to build, with an estimated project cost in the $20 million range and an anticipated increase in tax revenue compared with the current use.

Multiple residents opposed the rezoning during the public hearing. Troy (first name given) said the site has “only one way in and one way out,” predicting traffic spillover on holiday weekends and warning it could impede emergency response. Ria Clapperton told the board the turns onto Harbor Drive and Rio Vista are “very dangerous,” urged consideration of a one‑way pattern and said existing roads are narrow and in poor condition.

Brandon Kilgore, who identified himself as a local business owner and a competitor of the proposed project, urged denial on grounds that Parker needs housing rather than additional storage. “Approving the zoning change for boat storage, RV storage, would be a disservice to Parker,” Kilgore said, urging the board to prioritize residential development and transparent marketing of available land.

Other residents raised technical concerns about water and fire protection. Jesse Dearman said Lakeside 5 suffers low water pressure and lacks fire hydrants in parts of the area, and he asked that developers coordinate with EPCOR to address capacity before approving any use with plumbing or increased daily demands.

Board members discussed the parcel’s development history and the tradeoffs between residential and commercial uses. The planning and zoning commission had recommended approval by a 5–1 vote, and staff noted public notices and posted signs had been issued. However, after discussion the board took no motion; under county procedure the item "dies for lack of motion," an outcome equivalent to denial.

The record shows Supervisor Plunkett recused himself from items 9 and 10 before the hearing. The board did not adopt conditions or direct staff to return with revised materials before adjourning consideration of this docket.