Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Annexation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission recommends denial of Solara pre‑annexation and development agreement for 200‑acre project
Summary
Toquerville’s Planning Commission voted 3-2 to recommend denial of a pre‑annexation and development agreement for a 200‑acre Solara project that would allow up to 1,500 residential units after residents raised concerns about annexation, nightly‑rental exemptions and impacts on city services.
The Toquerville City Planning Commission on May 13 recommended that the City Council deny a pre‑annexation and development agreement for the proposed Solara Project, a 200‑acre residential development that the application said could include up to 1,500 units. After a combined public hearing, a motion to recommend approval failed 2-3 and a subsequent motion to recommend denial passed 3-2.
Attorney Bruce Jenkins outlined state procedures and LUDMA requirements for annexation and development agreements while developer representative Aaron Tilton described timelines and a proposed public infrastructure district. Tilton told the commission the developers were discussing “development and building timelines” and described coordination over access and infrastructure. Residents who spoke during the hearing raised multiple concerns, including affordable housing, the terms of a development agreement and whether nightly‑rental caps would be exempted.
Public commenters flagged potential community impacts. Dave Esquer expressed concern over affordable housing and growth pressures; Gary Chaves questioned whether the agreement complied with city code and whether nightly‑rental exemptions would be allowed; Kathy Bence asked what tangible benefits the city would gain from annexation. Attorney Jenkins responded to process questions and stated that “if it stays with the county, the county will bill for the water,” clarifying billing responsibilities raised in public comments.
Commission debate focused on statutory requirements and negotiable items in a development agreement. Commissioner Lonnie Christensen moved to recommend approval contingent on negotiated conditions; that motion failed 2-3. Commissioner Mila Allinson then moved to recommend denial; the motion carried 3-2. Commissioners recorded differing views about whether outstanding concerns could be resolved administratively before Council action.
The commission combined the public hearings for the Pre‑Annexation Agreement, the Development Agreement and an ordinance related to nightly‑rental caps to allow all public input to be heard together. The Planning Commission’s recommendation is advisory; the City Council will consider the agreements and any conditions at a later meeting.
