Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Willard planning commission recommends rezoning 48.19-acre Harry’s Land project to city council with park and phasing conditions
Summary
The Willard Planning Commission voted Nov. 21 to forward a rezoning and MPC preliminary site plan for about 48.19 acres at roughly 300 S. 300 W. The recommendation to city council includes conditions on trail material (asphalt), park timing (after phase 4), a hybrid HOA-to-city maintenance transition, and return of preliminary plats to the commission for each phase.
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Willard City Planning Commission voted Nov. 21 to recommend that the City Council approve Harry’s Land Development’s petition to rezone roughly 48.19 acres near 300 South and 300 West from R‑1 Half to the MPC (master-planned community) zone, but only after the developer incorporates specific park, maintenance and phasing commitments into the development agreement.
Garth, representing the applicant, told the commission his team contracted Riley Water Consulting and documented 205.35 acre‑feet of existing irrigation water for the larger property. “They are anticipating that there should not be a haircut,” Garth said of converting irrigation to culinary water, while acknowledging the parties will “execute all of that at the same time” with a development agreement so the city does not receive water without a guaranteed project. He said the developer expects to transfer on the order of 120 acre‑feet when the timing is appropriate.
Commissioners focused much of the discussion on how public open space would be delivered and maintained. The developer presented two landscape plans and three trail options—gravel, asphalt or concrete—and asked the commission to pick a service level. Commissioners expressed a preference for asphalt trails for long‑term repairability, and for a mixed service level that combines low‑maintenance native vegetation in some areas with mowed grass near playgrounds and courts. Several commissioners also supported a hybrid approach to maintenance in which an HOA builds and maintains park improvements for a set period and then the city assumes ownership and operations.
Garth said the project anticipates a multi‑phase buildout of roughly six to eight years and that park construction is likely to occur after the fourth phase of development. He noted sewer connections and the city’s capital facilities plan limit earlier large‑lot development and affect phasing. On recreation amenities, Garth acknowledged an earlier layout error for the pickleball courts and said courts would be reoriented north–south and constructed “in accordance with the National Pickleball Association facility standards” if the city elects to include them.
The commission also pressed the developer for clearer street connectivity. Commissioners raised concerns that a proposed 300/320 West stub would dead‑end and urged prioritizing a straight 400‑West alignment to improve future access; Garth and staff explained existing sewer easements and topography complicate a straight line, and engineering standards require intersections to meet near‑90‑degree sight‑line requirements.
After discussion, the commission voted to forward the rezoning and preliminary site‑plan recommendation to the City Council with the following conditions: require asphalt trails; require park construction to commence after phase 4; adopt a medium/mixed service level for parks; approve a hybrid HOA arrangement that sunsets park maintenance to the city (duration to be negotiated in the development agreement); require preliminary plats for each phase to return to the planning commission for review; and at the Wade property boundary require a 30‑foot conveyance for the Wades with a remaining 20‑foot trail access connecting to 200 West. The motion was seconded and carried by voice vote; the transcript records the vote by voice only and does not include a roll‑call tally.
Maddie (city staff) clarified that under the MPC ordinance this review functions as a preliminary site plan and that final approval and the development agreement will go to City Council. Commissioners emphasized they want phasing and the development‑agreement language to specify what the city will receive before the rezoning finalizes. The commission’s recommendation will be placed on the City Council agenda for final action.
