Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission reviews broad rewrite of parking and commercial development code; staff proposes adopting APWA standards
Summary
Planning staff presented a 50-page draft rewrite of parking and commercial development sections (6-1-10, 10-10 series), proposing updated parking counts, driveway/access standards, surfacing rules, fencing where commercial adjoins residential, water-use analysis requirements and bonding/performance guarantees; commissioners debated driveway widths, gravel vs. paved surfacing, and ADA cross-references.
Planning staff presented a comprehensive draft rewrite of Mona City’s parking and commercial development code on Aug. 5, outlining new standards intended to improve pedestrian safety, clarify off-street parking requirements, and bring the city’s specifications in line with commonly used engineering standards.
Staff said the new section “promotes traffic and pedestrian safety and efficiency and minimizing of hard surface areas to reduce stormwater runoff and visual impacts while providing adequate parking that is sufficient to support associated user activity.” The draft includes numerical parking requirements (for example, office uses at 1 space per 300 square feet, three-space minimum), defined parking-space dimensions (9 by 20 feet), limits on access-driveway widths, and fencing requirements where commercial development adjoins residential lots.
Commissioners and staff debated specific numeric limits. One commissioner suggested increasing the driveway width cap in the draft from 20 feet to 36–40 feet for some commercial configurations to avoid nonconforming driveways; another warned that a strict paving requirement could rule out common gravel or road-base solutions used on many Mona properties. Staff proposed referencing APWA/DFCM specifications to provide technical pavement and drainage standards rather than hard-coding every material specification in city code.
Staff also proposed several procedural improvements: a standardized commercial application packet, a requirement that each reviewing entity provide written comments within 15 business days, a water-use (culinary) analysis requirement, and bonding/performance-guarantee language to ensure completion of required site improvements. On water demand, staff illustrated expected calculations for a hypothetical office scenario: 15 gallons per employee per day, 6 units × 10 employees = 60 employees → about 900 gallons per day, which staff said would equate to two culinary water credits in that example.
Next steps: staff said it will correct identified drafting errors, confirm references to state requirements (for water sizing and ADA), and bring the ordinance back for a public hearing at a future meeting after additional edits.
