Zion Canyon Corridor Futures Study - Five County AOG Canyon Corridor Futures Study ... students to...

Zion Canyon Corridor Futures StudyMarch 2009

Utah State UniversityDepartment of Landscape Architecture and Environmental PlanningOld Main Hill 4005, Logan UT 84322

Project Professors:Associate Professor David BellSwaner Assistant Research Professor Dr. Carlos Licon

Project Managers:Benjamin GeorgeLindsay Winkler

Project Team:Angelie Anderton Laurie HurstOsmer Beck Sarah NelsonCarmen Castillo Melanie NicholsColleen Corballis Ken RichleyJeff Hamarstrom Skyler WestergardChris Harrild Emily Wheeler

Primary Authors:Benjamin George Lindsay WinklerSarah Nelson

Contributing Authors:Angelie Anderton Chris HarrildDavid Bell Carlos LiconCarmen Castillo

GIS Maps:Lindsay Winkler

Layout & Design:Benjamin George

Acknowledgements

“ You never achieve success unless you like what you are doing. ” - Dale Carnegie

If Dale Carnegie had ever met the people within the Zion Canyon Corridor, he would consider the area to be the most successful of his time, as every citizen the students met in this area loved what they were doing, and in turn helped the students love what they were doing.

��Brian Cottam, with Southern Utah University, who was responsible for leading us to this project and provided most of the funding necessary for this project to be successful. Thomas Dansie, the City of Springdale’s Director of Community Development, kept us all on track throughout the project and coordinated the interaction between the students and the communities and through the City of Springdale also provide funding. Special thanks to Jim Crisp, a coordinator for the BLM, for his guidance throughout the project. And thanks also to USU Extension for providing assistance throughout the project.

Special thanks to all of the community members and visitors who met with us during our initial site visit; the insight that was gained during the meetings with each individual was crucial to formulating the students’ understanding of the Zion Canyon Corridor. ��

Above View Aviation Services of St. George for providing their services for the students to obtain the aerial photos of the corridor, Lennie Brinkerhoff for her insight into the history and culture of the region,Allen Brown, Anne Weiler-Brown, and Wayne Hamilton for hosting the students during their stay and discussing the geological history of the areaBoard members with Citizens for Dixie’s Futures Leon Lewis for participating in an interview and for sharing his music,The Cliff Rose Lodge within Springdale for providing lodging during the students’ stay in the corridor,Dean Cook with the Zion Canyon Visitors Bureau, Max Gregoric with the Rockville Planninig Commission for his insight into the trail opportunities within the corridor and for the discounts at his store ,Barbara Hjelle and Ronald Thompson with the Washington County Water Conservancy District,Ray Justice, City Councilmember from La Verkin, Kristen Legg, Kezia Nielson and Jock Whitworth with Zion National Park,

Mayor Dan McGuire of Rockville, both for his insight into the project and for hosting all of the students at his house for dinnerPatrick Moore with the Utah Division of Forestry, Kyle Paisley with the State Institutional Trust Lands Association,Neil Perry with the Utah Division of Wildlife, The Quality Inn within Springdale for providing discounted camping and lodging during the students’ stay in the corridor,The owners and staff of the Red Coyote Café for hosting the students during their stay, including Shirley Walker, Jan and George,The citizens of Rockville, including Jeff & Shirley Ballard, Pam Leach, and everyone else the students met with during the study,Lori Rose with the Virgin River Land Preservation Association,Lynne Scott with the Bureau of Land Management,Ken Sizemore, Darren Janes, and Gary Zabriskie with the Five County Association of Governments,The citizens of Springdale and their representatives who generously shared their area knowledge with the students, Peter Stempel and Elissa Black with Form Tomorrow,The citizens of Virgin, including Mayor John Grow and Pro-Temp Mayor Lee Ballard for their assistance in the camera surveys and providing community documents not easily found to the students,John Willie with Washington County.

The students also wish to thank the professionals who visited with them throughout the semester to increase their toolbox with which they could address this project. Thanks to John Allen for his excellent introduction to rural sociology and the use of his survey methods and materials. Thanks to Sumner Swaner and Rick LeBrasseur with the Center for Green Space Design for assisting the students in the review of each communities political documents. The students also would like to recognize Marcy DeMillion with the Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program for providing additional federal context to the project and for informing the students of existing work in the area.

Finally, the students wish to acknowledge their professors, David Bell and Carlos Licon, for their instruction, guidance, and unlimited optimism throughout the study. Special thanks to all of the citizens of every community who participated in this project, it is through the information and knowledge that you provided to us that the success of this report truly lies.

Ack

now

ledg

emen

ts

Intro

duct

ion

& S

umm

ary

Cor

ridor

Des

crip

tion

��

Land

sA

ltern

ativ

eFu

ture

sC

oncl

usio

nA

ppen

dice

s

Table of Contents

11244

99

121519212326293030

31313232323439404141

4343456587

109

1. Introduction1.1 Project Introduction & Purpose1.2 Current Corridor Activity1.3 Study Area1.4 Summary of Student Actions & Methodologies

2. Current State of Corridor2.1 Landowners in the Corridor2.2 Municipalities2.3 Natural Resources2.4 Scenic Resources2.5 Recreational Resources2.6 Cultural & Historical Resources2.7 Political and Socio-economic Affairs2.8 Tourism2.9 Vision Dixie and this Report2.10 References

�� 3.1 Introduction3.2 Purpose3.3 Background3.4 Process3.5 Individual Overlay Analysis�� 3.8 Discussion3.9 References

4. Alternative Futures�� 4.2 Status Quo Alternative4.3 Vision Dixie Alternative4.4 Balanced Tourism Alternative

5. Conclusion

Tabl

e of

Con

tent

s

111

119

126

129

131

133

169

179

205

215

Appendix AImplementation Toolbox

Appendix BSITLA Lands

Appendix CResident Employed Photography

Appendix DAffordable Housing Opportunities

Appendix ENight Skies

Appendix FVision Dixie Checklist

Appendix GSurvey Charts

Appendix H�� !�� "�

Appendix I�� !�� "�

Appendix JHighway Analysis

Intro

duct

ion

& S

umm

ary

Cor

ridor

Des

crip

tion

��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

1.1

Project introduction and purpose

The graduate students from the depart-ment of Landscape Architecture and Envi-ronmental Planning at Utah State Univer-sity undertook a project in the fall of 2008 that focused on the Zion Canyon Corridor and the four communities of La Verkin, Vir-gin, Rockville and Springdale, Utah. This ��

for the Regional Planning course taught by David Bell and Dr. Carlos Licon.

The Zion Canyon Corridor is currently at a crossroads. Estimated growth projec-tions for the year 2035 indicate that the combined population of these four com-munities will grow from the current 4,480 to 27,890 over the next 26 years (see Ta-�� !��"#� �$��

�� %��

impacts on the character of the individual communities and that of the entire corri-dor. The decisions that are made today and in the near future will have serious �� -tural, recreational, visual, political and ecological character of the corridor. In or-

der to address these issues, the students sought to develop an assessment of the ��%�� -tial threats to the resources of these four communities and the corridor as a whole. They then sought to incorporate this infor-mation into three separate development scenarios, or alternative futures for the corridor and communities, and to provide the communities with an implementation toolbox to help them attain their preferred scenario.

This report is the culmination of the Zion Canyon Corridor project. It includes de-scriptions of methodologies used, infor-mation regarding the current state of the corridor and four communities as well as ��

each community and the values held by the community members. Maps and de-��-tential alternative futures as well as an im-plementation toolbox comprised of model ordinances, funding opportunities and established programs to help these com-munities achieve their vision for the future are also included within the report as well.

Introduction

1

Intro

duct

ion

1.2

Current Corridor Activity

Scenic Byway DesignationThe portion of State Route 9 that runs through the Zion Canyon Entryway Cor-ridor is currently being considered for National Scenic Byway designation. The students were asked to incorporate this possibility into their study and to assess the implications of such a designation on the communities within the corridor.

Vision DixieIn 2007, Envision Utah conducted an ex-tensive visioning exercise involving resi-dents throughout Washington County, Utah. This exercise culminated in a report ��&��'�(��)*+,��-.��

Transportation Vision. This report served as an excellent resource and a driving force for the USU project. The ten guid-

ing principles that are espoused by Vision '�(��

1. Plan regionally, implement locally2. Conserve water and maintain air and��

3. Guard our “signature” scenic landscapes 4. Provide rich, connected natural recreation and open space5. Build balanced transportation6. Get “centered” by focusing growth on walkable, mixed-use center7. Direct growth inward8. Provide a broad range of housing types9. Reserve key areas for industry to grow the economic pie10. Focused public land conversion

These principles represent the ideals of the majority of residents that were sur-veyed, polled and that took park in the

$�� !��/��

Town 2000 Census

20080 �� 1��"

2035 Projected Population

Change0)**2��)*+,"

La Verkin 3382 ,)3450,#678" 24012 18718Virgin 394 ,+)�0+#2)8" 1463 931Rockville 247 )4655�0*#**8" 689 442Springdale 457 793�0+#268" 1726 1107Totals 4480 5873 27890 14666

Growth Populations based on 2000-2008 population growth (*La Verkin estimate based on general ��)**,��551��%�� :�� "#

2

Intro

duct

ion

& S

umm

ary

rrir

esri

tin

��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

visioning workshops. Many of these in-dividuals are residents of St. George, a large community whose issues and con-cerns bear little resemblance to those of the four smaller communities within our study area. Nonetheless, representatives of these four communities assured us that these ten principles were indicative of overarching concerns held by the major-ity of residents within our study area, and that the principles might simply need to be ��

four communities.

Zion Canyon Corridor Council The Department of Landscape Architec-ture and Environmental Planning was in-vited by the Zion Canyon Corridor Council 0;/+"��

insight into and feedback on future devel-opment patterns and their potential impact ��-munities and the corridor as a whole. The students were also asked to look in depth at the Vision Dixie report and to provide information regarding an alternative fu-ture based on Vision Dixie principles.

Figure 1: #�� "��"��$�� %�"&�� '" ��(�

3

Intro

duct

ion

1.3

Study Area

��

��(��#��$��-dents determined the viewshed from Hwy 9 to be the most critical connecting factor ��<��=

south extent of our study area is com-prised of everything that can be seen from �� #��0��>��9"��$��-ic landscape of steep walls rising to mesa tops typically establishes this viewshed along the majority of the corridor. The ��= ��(��-termined by the city limits of La Verkin on the west and the mesa edges on the east. The area of study is comprised of 125,955 acres of land. The majority of the land �� ?�@�0,+8"��A��

!��%��0))8"��%��

09*8"� ��B$�� 078"� 0�� )#9�

��"#

1.4

Summary of student actions & methodologies

Understanding

�� )��

Between September 29th and October 3rd of 2008, the students visited the study area to conduct interviews, attend meet-

ings, hand out surveys and explore the canyon and its communities. Students met with many groups and individuals, in-cluding mayors and city council members of each community, and many organiza-tions listed in Figure 2.

Much was gleaned from this visit, includ-ing critical data collection, the attainment of a more accurate understanding of the vital sense of place enjoyed by the com-

Figure 2:��

/��C��&��C�1��%��C��C�&��

��C�D��/��C�A��!��%��C�D��/��D��/�� servancy DistrictC�?��@��C�/��E��'�(��:��>��C�>��$�� C�;��/��&��?��C�>�%��/�� %� � ernmentsC��F�B��$��

AdministrationC�.��'�%��D��1��C�.��'�%��>��C�G��/��C�� C��?��C��1��

4

Intro

duct

ion

& S

umm

ary

rrir

esri

tin

��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

munity members, and a better concept of ��

of each community.

During this site visit, the students handed out 190 surveys, 52 of which were re-turned, resulting in a return rate of 27%. Also twenty-four photo survey cameras were also distributed to residents of the four communities within the study area. Eighteen of these were returned, result-ing in a return rate of 75%.

$�� %��-taining to the residents’ sense of place and sense of community. The students

were hoping to discover the factors and �� %��

the most about their communities and surrounding environment. They were also interested in the changes that resi-dents would like to see take place and the changes they fear the most.

The students had a similar goal in mind for the photo surveys, but the residents were instead asked to take a visual ap-proach to describe the most valued ele-ments of their homes. Each photo survey participant was asked to capture images of the elements in their communities they deem to be the most valuable. Finally, the respondents were asked to provide a written description of each photograph to help us understand the meaning and sig-��#

The written survey results indicate many topics of consensus across the four com-munities, including the protection of air ��

��

value of outdoor gathering spaces, and an overriding concern about the impact of future development. There were also several topics of divergence between communities, including the importance of job opportunities, the value of indoor gathering spaces and the need for inclu-sive housing. (See Appendix C for more ��%��#"�

Students Angelie Anderton and Chris Harrild speaks with community members at the Rockville town meeting to discuss the survey. (Photo: Dr. Carlos Licon)

5

Intro

duct

ion

Analysis

Analysis: Methods of organizationThe students applied the knowledge gained from the survey, photo survey and extensive communications with the resi-dents of the four communities to the sig-��#��

B�� :��

lands could be organized into four sepa-rate groups that each embodied distinct local and tourist values. These groups ��

and historical landscapes and structures, �� 0�� %��"� ��#��

For purposes of organization, the stu-�� %�� -search into these four separate entities. ��

lands groups, was added to address the political issues of the corridor, see Appen-dix F for more information.

Analysis: GIS data collection$��

within the study corridor, the students collected GIS spatial data related to ex-isting recreational and scenic areas, cul-tural and historical landmarks, and natu-ral components of the landscape. See Chapter 3 for a more detailed description of the components.

Analysis: Comparisons between the Vi-sion Dixie Checklist and each communi-ty’s General Plan and Codes

The students conducted a review of the general plans and codes of La Verkin, Virgin, Rockville and Springdale to as-sess the level to which they address the Vision Dixie principles. Also, this review was conducted for the communities to get an initial view into how their ordinances and plans would need to be updated to meet the principles of Vision Dixie. It is clear that an awareness of preferred de-velopment strategies is helpful, but that this is not enough to affect on-the-ground change. For this, the town codes and or-��H�� !��

is organized around the preferred devel-��#��'�%�:��

the extent to which each community’s or-��H��#��>��

more detailed information, see Appendix F.

Design

Design: Build out Diagrams for Each ScenarioBefore creating the alternative futures ��

key areas in each community where de-velopment could occur. Each of these key development areas were developed based on the principles of each alterna-tive future scenario. Two diagrams were ��

growth scenarios and community dia-grams, see Figure 3.

6

*��)��

Alternative future studies are composed of a set of potential future outcomes that may transpire should certain actions be taken by a community and its decision-makers. The predictions are based on a number of variables including zoning, codes, land ownership patterns, demo-graphics, projected growth, historical precedents, etc. The future study illus-trates how changes in any one, or all of these variables, will impact a community or region. While only hypothetical, futures studies are very valuable tools in the plan-ning process at both a community and re-gional scale.

Design: Photo SimulationsAfter the completion of the alternative fu-ture plans, photo simulations using Ado-be Photoshop were conducted to photo-graphically illustrate the changes each alternative future scenario could bring. See Chapter 4 for an in-depth discussion on the photo simulations.

Intro

duct

ion

& S

umm

ary

rrir

esri

tin

��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies Figure 3:

The build out diagrams illustrate the potential areas

for growth within the community of La Verkin. Note

�� H��

the Alternative Future Scenarios, see chapter 4 for

a more in depth discussion on the principles.

7

Intro

duct

ion

8

ntr

uti

nu

arC

orrid

orD

escr

iptio

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

Section 2.1

Landowners in the corridor

National Parks Service (NPS)During the students’ visit to the area of study, they interviewed several Zion Na-tional Park personnel, including Envi-ronmental Protection Specialist Kezia Nielson, Chief of Resource Management Kristen Legg, and Park Superintendent Jock Whitworth. The current corridor poli-cies of the NPS do not extend beyond the

boundaries of the National Park, although the park’s shuttle system does extend westward through Springdale to minimize 0��"�� -in Zion National Park.

There are, however, a few issues that the NPS would like to be able to address, par-��=��%��-��#��$��

this interface, particularly near Kolob Ter

Current State of Corridor

Students Jeff Hamarstrom, left, and Sarah Nelson, right, discussing issues with Kezia Nielson of the

National Park Service, center. (Photo: Dr. Carlos Licon)

9

Cor

ridor

Des

crip

tion

race, where there is high fuel density in the form of large stands of oak brush. There are also areas that are not natu-��%��

��E�� 0��"�

and red brome. These species dramati-��

can be devastating to areas that are not accustomed to it. The Park is interested ��-gime, but there is a great concern from residents. A private landowner coopera-tion program has been established with some success, but much work remains to ��#��

Dogs, which can be highly detrimental to populations of the endangered Mojave Desert tortoise, can also pose threats �� =��%�� #��

There are no dogs allowed in the park, but an established monitoring system has not been initiated to prevent their negative effects along the edges.

The National Parks Service has many goals ��%��

throughout the corridor, but since their juris-diction terminates at the boundary of Zion National Park, the NPS personnel act primarily as stakeholders in the future of the Zion Entry Corridor. They do maintain ��=��%��

interface, however. In these areas they would like to map the areas that constitute �� %��-tion plans to mitigate those threats.

Bureau of Land Management (BLM)The Bureau of Land Management owns 66,767 acres, or 53% of the study ar-ea’s 125,955 acres. The BLM engages in many land management activities on its parcels within the study area, includ-��E��

and the management of energy resources and recreational opportunities. The Bu-reau has the ability to enforce regulations and mandate closures of areas to spe-�� %��#� � B��

the maintenance of its recreational areas. It has the capability to engage in land di-vestments, though there are few parcels within the corridor that are slotted for dis-posal. Land exchanges with conservation groups and with the School and Institu-tional Land Trust Administration are pos-sible and not unprecedented, but these are not currently considered to be priority actions.

The BLM controls two major developed trail areas in the Zion Canyon Entryway Corridor, Gooseberry Mesa and Hurri-��/��#��B��

Virgin that is intended for both commer-cial and community use, though there is some concern about the negative implica-�� %��

pits within the viewshed. The Virgin River Falls Park falls under the BLM Recreation and Public Purpose program through an agreement with the city of Virgin. Recent closures of recreational areas include

10

ntr

uti

nu

arC

orrid

orD

escr

iptio

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

mountain biking on the Rockville bench. !�� @��

/�%�� H��

(see Recreational Resources for more in-��"#��

$��D��/��?�@��-cated in St. George, and the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve, which is outside of the study area, is their primary priority. It is a BLM Special Area associated with the Na-tional Landscape Conservation System. B�� -ditions that create ideal habitat for several endemic species of plants and animals, and recreational activities are permitted or restricted according to management zones. The monitoring of this critically sensitive area dominates the majority of BLM energy and resources in its Wash-ington County district.

� � �� "%� � �� ""�� !� � �"��

Trust Lands Administration (SITLA)�B$��E��%-enue from the management of their school trust lands and deposits it into Utah’s Per-manent School Fund, an endowment that annually distributes income to each K-12 public school in the state. This revenue is obtained by several means, including grazing permits, timber contracts, ease-ments, land sales, oil and gas extraction, mining and development. SITLA currently owns 8,052 acres of land within the corri-dor, which is a little over six percent of the

total study area. It has full mineral rights to 9,436 acres and partial mineral rights to 1,070 acres within the area of study. SITLA, whose primary focus in Washing-ton County is oil and gas, is currently tak-ing very little action in the corridor, aside from a small amount of development oc-curring near the city of Virgin. They are able to partner with the BLM, and will oc-casionally trade sensitive lands for eco-nomic gain. SITLA’s land parcels are open for recreational opportunities if the area lends itself well to this, and most of their lands are open due to an inability to regulate activities. An analysis of ap-

Through an agreement with the City of Virgin, the

+��'��,��-.�� /�0�"�-

ership, is managed for public use. (Photo: Lindsay

��-��1�

11

propriate surface uses of SITLA parcels within the corridor according to Vision Di-xie principles has been completed by the ��0��(�?"#��

Section 2.2

Municipalities

�� "�2" �

Washington County’s policies, which the planners attempted to align with Vision Dixie principles, are enforceable in all un-incorporated areas of the county. Though the county planners do not interfere with planning choices within each municipality, they would prefer that development oc-curs within municipal boundaries to avoid leap-frog developments that incur much higher infrastructure costs. They would also prefer not to see the use of off-highway

vehicles on county lands within the cor-ridor, though the county codes do not ex-pressly forbid it (personal communication, John Willie, Washington County Adminis-��"#

During a meeting with the Washing-ton County Administrator, the students learned that future development outside of the municipalities will likely be natu-rally regulated because steep slopes and H��

land in the corridor. It is also unlikely that municipalities will annex county land be-cause cities are not allowed to propose annexation unless they are able to pro-vide public services and infrastructure to ��#��D��

county, however. In areas that are reliant on septic systems, there is some concern about the potential contamination of the water table.

Cor

ridor

Des

crip

tion

There is great diversity amongst the communities in the corridor. (Photo: Osmer Beck)

12

ntr

uti

nu

arC

orrid

orD

escr

iptio

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

La Verkin:!�� 4�4+4@�� )2#2��0�%�#�.��)6#9��"@��E�� +#)�%�#�B�� I4)�,**�%�#�J��!�� I976�***��'�%��%��%�� %��(�� %��scenic resources��&�� !��/��)***

Virgin:!�� ,+)@�� +6#9��0�%�#�.��)6#9��"@��E�� )#6�%�#�B�� I4+�6**�%�#�J��!�� I963�6**�� '�%�� H�� drainage,��== #��-��#��=��=&��-.��#��/��)***

13

Rockville:!�� )46@�� 49#2��0�%�#�.��)6#9��"@��E�� )#9,�%�#�B�� I46�6*3�%�#�J��!�� I+73�+,7��'�%�� %��== #��-��#��=��=1��%��-.��#��/��)***��!��

Springdale:!�� ,+)@�� 4+#3��0�%�#�.��)6#9��"@��E�� )#+2�%�#�B�� I,)�+,)�%�#�J��!�� I4*4�+32��'�%��== #��-��#��=��=��-.��#��/��)***

Cor

ridor

Des

crip

tion

14

ntr

uti

nu

arC

orrid

orD

escr

iptio

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

2.3

Natural Resources

IntroductionThe natural components of the landscape ��

C wildlife habitatC riparian areasC wetlandsC H��

C springsC conservation easements C sensitive slopesC landslidesC fault lines C tar sands C oil reserves C wind energy

These natural resources are extremely valuable and should be considered as-sets within the corridor. They constitute the backbone of the natural systems upon which all life in the area depends and are ��:��

of place. These valuable natural resource areas also can be viewed as constraints to development. They should be consid-ered undevelopable for reasons of public health, safety and welfare and for natural resource conservation.

Existing Ecological Conditions

��%��$� � �

The determination of wildlife habitat was based on eight threatened or endangered species whose ranges fall within the cor-ridor study area. These are the desert sucker, the Virgin River chub, the wound-��.�� -��

�� H��-er, the Mexican spotted owl and the Mo-have Desert tortoise. These species have a variety of food, water, cover and space needs that constitute their essential habi-

��%��$� � �� "��"��

(Photo: Osmer Beck)

15

tat, and a habitat model for each species was created using vegetation information. These habitats range from shrublands to densely forested areas to riverine sys-tems, and preservation of these habitats is vital to the continued existence of the species that depend on them. These habitat types should be regarded as high-ly sensitive, and the negative impacts of development within critical habitat ar-eas should be carefully considered and ��#��

Virgin River and associated riparian area@�� 0��"�� -ened and endangered species who have habitat in the study area rely on the riparian corridor to meet their essential life needs. The portion of the Virgin River riparian area that falls within our area of study has endured relatively little fragmentation, in-cluding the extensive cottonwood gallery forest along the river. Preserving riparian connectivity is essential to sustaining the health of the ecosystem and the species that depend on it.

It is also critical to preserve the natural hy-drologic regime of the Virgin River to the greatest extent possible. This natural re-gime allows for the dynamic maintenance of the riverine ecosystem, thereby ensur-ing that a balanced, stable cottonwood gallery will be maintained. This healthy cottonwood gallery not only provides ex-cellent habitat for many species; it also

acts as a buffer that prevents pollutants from entering the river system and serves �� -munities adjacent to the river.

��

There are very few wetlands within the study area, and most are associated with �� 9**��H��-plain. The scarcity of existing wetlands makes them extremely important to the maintenance of wildlife diversity because many species will be reliant upon these small patches of wetland habitat.

��""�3��

'�%�� 9**� �� H��-plain has been fairly minimal thus far.

Cor

ridor

Des

crip

tion

The Virgin River is the lifeblood of the corridor.

(Photo: Jeff Hamarstrom)

16

ntr

uti

nu

arC

orrid

orD

escr

iptio

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

This development trend should continue to ensure the health, safety and welfare of residents and to maintain a buffer be-tween development and the riparian cor-ridor, for reasons discussed above. The H�� H��

��<� �� -tion, groundwater recharge and the pres-ervation of the natural hydrologic regime. It is a key factor in the maintenance of the healthy water system upon which all of the residents within the Zion Entry Corri-dor depend.

SpringsWithin the study area, there are several springs that are integral to the natural hy-drologic system and provide freshwater sources for small streams and other wa-ter bodies. It is essential to protect these springs from development and pollution in ��%��

systems that they feed.

Conservation easementsExisting information indicated there are �� %�� %��

located within the corridor study area. Two of these, located within the La Verkin municipality boundary, are owned by the Utah Department of Natural Resources. They compose the two phases of the Vir-��1�%��/��H��#��$��

of Rockville, Grafton and the Grand Can-yon Trust hold the other three easements, which are in place to ensure the protec-

tion of the historic site of Grafton.

Geology

Sensitive slopes (30% or greater)The steep slopes within Zion National Park and its entry corridor are extremely ��#��$��-��

their dramatic beauty to the spectacular landscape that is enjoyed by residents and visitors alike. The four communities within the study area consider slopes that are 30% or greater to be undevelopable for reasons of healthy, safety and welfare. This regulation should be viewed as an opportunity rather than a constraint. Be-cause these steep slopes are not stable enough to sustain development, their geologic integrity can be preserved.

The steep slopes of the corridor are the source of

much of the area’s unique beauty.

17

Landslide areasOf the 125,955 acres that make up the area of study, 24,908 acres are consid-ered to be landslide areas, see Figure 4. This means that nearly 20% of the en-tire study area falls within these potential landslide areas. For reasons of health, safety and welfare, these areas should be deemed undevelopable.

��

Fault lines should be considered sensitive areas because they have the potential to

directly threaten the health, safety and welfare of community residents who own and choose to develop land over them. These areas should be deemed undevel-opable.

Energy

Tar Sands and Oil ReservesAreas that contain tar sands and oil re-serves are valuable resources within the area of study. As potential locations of future energy resource extraction, these

Cor

ridor

Des

crip

tion

Figure 4: Due to the steep slopes and geologic formations there are many landslide areas in the corridor

18

ntr

uti

nu

arC

orrid

orD

escr

iptio

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

areas should be protected and deemed undevelopable.

��"��4��

According to the information obtained by the students, wind and solar energy po-tential is distributed relatively uniformly throughout the study area. It should be noted that these sustainable energy sources are a valuable asset to the cor-ridor and its four communities. Efforts should be made to take advantage of them where appropriate. It must also be remembered that, though wind is a sus-tainable source of energy, locations for potential wind turbines must be carefully chosen due to the degrading impacts they can have on wildlife habitat and species populations.

Environmental Threats

The primary threat to the ecological in-tegrity of the Zion Canyon Corridor is the placement of future development within the previously discussed sensitive areas. This could potentially lead, depending on the type of sensitive land impacted, to the destruction of essential wildlife habitat, an increase in uncontrollable erosion prob-lems, severe sedimentation, the degrada-�� -��H��%��#��

The manipulation of the natural hydro-logic regime would also be highly detri-

mental to the environmental health of the area. This could lead to many problems associated with heavily channelized river systems, such as the development of sin-gle-age cottonwood stands that are non-renewable and highly unstable. This has been seen along streams throughout the Intermountain West, such as Teton Creek ��B��0'��#�"#��

2.4

Scenic Resources

IntroductionThe scenic resources within the Zion Canyon Entryway Corridor could well be considered one of the area’s most vital re-��I2+��-ist revenue annually. The dramatic land-scape of Zion National Park and its entry corridor is the primary reason so many %��H��%��#��

this signature landscape is likely the rea-son many of the residents chose to settle ��#��B��

region.

Mesa edges/steep slopesThe mesas play an enormous role in the spectacular geology that makes the land-

19

scape so intriguing. The mesa edges de-��%��

of experiences as one travels the corri-dor. The sense of enclosure varies as the mesa edges contract and expand, adding to the experience of the landscape and enhancing one’s sense of arrival.

Viewshed from SR 9For most visitors to Zion National Park, the landscape that can be seen from State Route 9 is the only part of the en-tryway corridor they ever see. The spa-

tial scenic assessment was determined using an adapted Forest Service fore-ground, middle ground and background view tier analysis, see Figure 5. All land within a 500 foot buffer around the road is considered to be foreground and there-fore highly scenic. In other situations, the middle ground is more highly valued than the background, but interviews and sur-veys from the study area led the students to believe that this is not true within the Zion Canyon Corridor. In this corridor, the mesa edges create such a solid and strik-

Cor

ridor

Des

crip

tion

Figure 5: Visible lands from State Route 9.

20

ntr

uti

nu

arC

orrid

orD

escr

iptio

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

ing backdrop to the landscape that the background was deemed to be more sce-nically valuable than the middle ground. Thus, the visual analysis of terrain visible from State Route 9 was calculated using GIS Spatial Analyst, and the foreground and background are valued at the same scenic level.

Threats to Scenic ResourcesThe primary threat to the scenic resources of the Zion Canyon Corridor is the accre-tion of developments within the viewshed that are not in keeping with the character of the area. The interviews and surveys conducted by the students repeatedly in-dicate that the preservation of rural char-acter is extremely important to most resi-dents. Allowing developments that are not congruent with the current rural atmo-sphere would compromise these critical visual resources that are so important to the preservation of sense of place for both residents and visitors.

$��(��-cant to this discussion because they are arguably the most visible areas in the en-tire corridor. Their scenic value should be preserved. Development should be rel-egated to less visible areas and to areas adjacent to current developments in order to preserve the valuable open space.

It is also critical to note, however, the communities within this corridor have de-

veloped over time according to personal tastes. Attempting to pigeon-hole their ability to build what they choose could po-�� %��-ment dominated by homogenization. A compromise between these two extremes ��-proach to future development.

2.5

Recreational Resources

TrailsThe Zion Canyon Entryway Corridor is an excellent location for hiking, and there are numerous trails designated for this type of recreation. Visitors and residents alike can and often do take advantage of these trail systems, see Figure 6.

ATV accessATV use is permitted in some areas to allow opportunities for this popular recre-ation activity, and it is restricted in other areas to provide safe opportunities for ��-et recreation experience. Most of these opportunities exist on BLM land.

Mountain bike accessThe terrain within the area of study is �� %��

many trails have been designated that al-low bikers to engage in this activity. Other trails have restricted biking opportunities

21

to safeguard the integrity of the sensitive landscape.

RoadsRoads are perhaps the most heavily used recreational amenities in the study area. Many visitors come to the area strictly to experience the landscape that can be viewed from these roads. There are many pullout locations where visitors can stop and absorb the spectacular vistas or take photographs. These locations offer excellent opportunities for the posting of educational signage that might inform vis-�� -cance of the area or guide them to places

that would otherwise go unexplored.

Riparian areasThe Virgin River and other rivers and streams in the study area are heavily used for recreation by locals and visitor alike. Fishing, rafting, canoeing, kayak-ing, tubing and hiking along the river are very popular activities, making the wa-terways within the corridor exceptionally valuable.

Threats to Recreational OpportunitiesA major threat to recreational areas is their overuse. The landscape can be-�� (��

Cor

ridor

Des

crip

tion

Figure 6: Location of recreation resources

22

ntr

uti

nu

arC

orrid

orD

escr

iptio

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

heavy or inappropriate uses. This is a �� %��

��%��

for personal use, and monitoring activities on vast stretches of BLM land is virtually impossible. This has been a problem for the BLM in the past. For example, a rec-�� H��

@��/�%��-gency closure. It is currently being heav-ily overused, particularly by off-highway vehicles, and the students learned in their interview with the BLM that this agency simply does not have the management power to maintain it.

Another constraint to recreational oppor-tunities within this corridor is the lack of ��%��0��>��7"#��$��

currently an abundance of trail systems, but they lack the contiguity that would allow for the expansion of recreational options within those systems. Funding, manpower and private property issues appear to be the primary limiting factors to the establishment of trail connections.

Residents’ concerns about private prop-��(��

overcome. For instance, the possibility of a bike trail along the river elicits highly di-verse reactions from residents because a ��

to be established on some private proper-ty parcels along its length. Most residents are in favor of such a trail. Those that are

not in favor of it are typically landowners whose property would be impacted by an easement. A concern was also expressed that a trail adjacent to the river would be ��H��#��-tial temporary solution to this problem would be to move the trail along SR 9 for the areas where easements could not be obtained.

Another potential threat to recreational resources in this corridor is the possibil-ity of sale, leases and transfers of BLM land parcels. It is the hope of the students ��

�� -erence tools to assist in determining ap-propriate action regarding development on BLM land parcels.

2.6

Cultural and Historical Resources

Prehistory of the study areaK%�� ;��

Canyon region date to the Archaic period 0�� 7***� ?#/#� �� #'#� ,**"#� � $��

people lived in small bands and subsist-ed through hunting and gathering tech-��#� � �� %�� %��

some artifacts from this period, includ-ing woven baskets, nets, sandals and some stone tools such as knives, drills and points that were attached to wooden shafts and launched with atlatls. These

23

stone tools indicate a relatively complex ��0��"��#

Toward the end of the Archaic period 0��#'#�+**"��

�� =��-erer subsistence strategy with crop culti-%��#� �$��

groups are referred to as “the Basketmak-ers” due to the numerous woven baskets excavated from archaeological sites dat-ing to this time period. Their increased dependence on cultivated crops made them more stationary, leading them to de-velop food storage facilities and partially underground dwellings known as pithous-es.

By the Formative period (A.D. 500 – 9+**"� �� %��

larger part in the subsistence of the peo-ple in the Zion Canyon region. Evidence of two distinct cultural groups has been found in the archaeological record from this time. These groups are known as the Virgin Anasazi and the Parowan Fremont. Both established sedentary lifestyles with year-round dwellings, and the two groups probably interacted along cultural contact zones in the later years of the Formative period. It is not clear to what extent these two groups continued to practice hunting and gathering subsistence strategies, but ��

persisted in order to supplement the agri-cultural diet.

Around A.D. 1300, both the Virgin Ana-sazi and the Parowan Fremont disap-pear completely from the archaeological record of the area. It is suspected that severe droughts made their agricultural subsistence practices impossible.

The Southern Paiute and Ute peoples ar-rived in the area around A.D. 1100. These groups had much more mobile lifestyles, probably enabling them to survive the dif-��(�-dus of the Virgin Anasazi and the Parowan Fremont peoples. The period between A.D. 1300 and the late 1700s is known as the Neo-Archaic period due the revival of the more mobile lifestyles and the hunting and gathering subsistence strategies.0��==��#��#��=!��=E��#

��"��

History: Euro-American explorers and Mormon pioneersIn the late 1700s traders from New Mexico began making their way into Utah, creat-ing the Old Spanish Trail, which paralleled the Virgin River for a portion of its length. In the 1800s trappers and government surveyors such as John Wesley Powell made their way into the region, establish-ing routes that would eventually become wagon roads. In 1861 Brigham Young, the president of the Mormon church, sent pioneer families to southern Utah where cotton could be grown to supply the ter-ritory. Towns were established, enduring

Cor

ridor

Des

crip

tion

24

ntr

uti

nu

arC

orrid

orD

escr

iptio

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

H��

of this Cotton Mission. Remains of a few of these towns can still be seen, including the well preserved Grafton and parts of '�� #� 0��==��#

��#��=!��=E��#��"��

History: Zion National ParkIn the early 1900s the natural scenic beauty of Zion Canyon began to be rec-ognized, and its potential as a tourist destination realized. In 1909 it was des-ignated as Mukuntuweap National Monu-ment, and work began on the highway and railroad systems that would make it possible for tourists to reach it. In 1919, the Canyon was designated as Zion Na-tional Park. In 1930 the Zion-Mt. Carmel Highway was completed and able to bring even more visitors to the park. With its 5,613 foot tunnel cut directly through a vertical sandstone cliff, this highway was one of the most phenomenal engineering feats of its time. Visitor numbers have escalated over the years, and in 2006 an estimated 2.67 million people visited Zion A��!��#��0A!/��)**7"��

RoadsThe roads within the study area have sub-��#��$��%��

��H� ��-tion, people and goods from one cultur-al hub to the next; thereby transforming the area over time into the culturally rich place that it is today. Currently the roads

are in use more heavily than ever, par-ticularly State Route 9, which serves as the single corridor for millions of people to travel to and from Zion National Park every year. This heavy use presents nu-merous opportunities for educational and interpretive signage that might offer visi-tors insight into the little-known history of the area.

Historic and archaeological sites$�� -cant sites within the Zion Canyon Cor-ridor, including historic livestock corrals, canals, homes and other structures on the Historic Register and ruins of historic settlements and cemeteries. These sites add layers of interest to the communities of La Verkin, Virgin, Rockville and Spring-dale. They remind residents of the rich history of the place, and they add a scenic element to the landscape that accentu-ates the sense of place.

There is also an abundance of archaeo-logical sites throughout the study area, though the locations of these sites are not intended for public knowledge. Archaeo-logical remains are extremely sensitive resources, and often looting and vandal-ism occurs when too many people be-come aware of these locations.

2 � ��

/��

meeting spaces, iconographic locations,

25

schools, cemeteries, parks and civic build-ings. These sites do not have to have histor-��%��

many of them do. These cultural sites help to make up the fabric of community life with-in La Verkin, Virgin, Rockville and Spring-dale and the corridor as a whole.

Virgin RiverThe history and current welfare of this re-gion hinges on the presence and health of the Virgin River. This river has sustained human life in the area since the arrival of people in the Archaic period, and ani-mal life since much earlier. The complex ecology of the region and the cultures that have relied on the ecological health of the area owe their very existence to this �� #� � B��

��%��-stated, and the preservation of the natural hydrologic regimes of the Virgin River is critical to the preservation of the historic and cultural ways of life in the area.

Agricultural LandsThe agricultural lands within the Zion Canyon Entry Corridor are extremely ��

evolution of the region. They dominate the landscape matrix, contributing to the beauty of the area as well as its economic stability. Without them, the Zion Canyon Corridor would be an entirely different place altogether.

Threats to Cultural & Historical ResourcesUndoubtedly, the largest threat to cultural and historical resources within this corri-dor is development. As new roads and structures are built, existing cultural and historical landscapes are in danger of per-manent removal. The integrity of archae-ological deposits is particularly threat-ened by new development, especially road-building. This is not to say that new development must negatively affect these resources or that it should not occur; in fact it must occur to provide for projected populations and to create continuous cul-tural evolution within the corridor. What is necessary is a balance between the pres-ervation of valued historical and cultural resources, the prevention of a complete homogenization of cultures and the con-tinuity of cultural development within the Zion Canyon Entryway Corridor.

2.7

Political & Socio-economic Affairs

Springdale��-ing the western gateway to Zion National Park. As a result of this it hosts a diverse crowd of residents, part-time residents and tourists for the majority of the year with tourism being the main economic driver. Many who work in Springdale commute from Virgin or La Verkin each day, or from

Cor

ridor

Des

crip

tion

26

ntr

uti

nu

arC

orrid

orD

escr

iptio

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

��#��$��%��

about Springdale’s identity due to the dif-fering opinions of the long-term residents and the new transplants. A strong belief of residents, new and old alike, is that �� -cantly alter the environment that originally attracted them to the community.

One of the threats to the community is the increase in part-time homeownership. $�� -��

home ownership are twofold. First, part-time homeowners drive up prices in the local property market by creating greater ��#� � B��

by increasing property tax revenues, how-ever, it becomes problematic when long-time community members are no longer able to afford their property taxes. This is especially problematic for members of the �� (��#�

$�� -��

ownership is that these individuals often do not reside in Springdale for a long enough portion of the year to become fully integrated into the community. Part-time home owners may not contribute their time to the local government or school system to the same degree that a full-time resident will. Additionally, part-time residents can become disconnected from the community because they are not ever present and aware of community issues. City leaders are aware of these issues and

have stated they are concerned with the disappearing sense of community. Lim-iting part-time home ownership through codes and ordinances can work to ad-��-��

homeownership; conversely, encourag-ing alternative methods to allow part-time homeownership and still maintain lower property taxes for year-round residents could be explored.

RockvilleThe town of Rockville currently is experi-encing a lull in development, however this pattern cannot continue forever. Rock-ville residents have a clear vision of how they foresee their future in terms of com-munity development and it is important for Rockville to look at the long term possibili-ties for development in order to anticipate and plan for them. As existing residents increase in age, and properties begin to change hands, new ideas may begin to challenge the views of the current resi-dents. Exploring opportunities for pos-sible growth, and establishing guidelines should it occur, will help keep the commu-nity ahead of the curve when faced with change in the future. In order for Rock-ville to maintain its vision, it may be ben-��

ways, but also investigate ways to incen-tivize growth in smarter ways, or in areas ��

natural resources or detrimentally impact ��%��#��B��

27

Rockville to put night sky laws into ordi-nance as a component to maintain their ��-��%��#��

Virgin.$��&��

because the face of their community and ��

impacted to the same degree as other nearby communities, which have seen large amounts of recent development. Virgin has a closely-knit sense of commu-nity with many long-term residents partici-pating in local government and issues. At the same time, there has been increasing division amongst community residents on the direction the community should take in the future.

L��&��

of opportunity for younger residents to re-main in the community due to the limited number of businesses located in the com-munity and the lack of employment oppor-tunities. When children in the community reach a certain age, they often move to �� %�� #��

This dynamic can increase the incidence of diverging ideas between the long-term residents, community stake-holders, and recent transplants.

A challenge for Virgin is that its Main Street is situated on a main thoroughfare of SR-9 and has been widened to accom-

�� #� � $��

physically separates the town and makes it unsafe for pedestrians. Exploring ways to increase safety for pedestrians and connectivity between the two sides of Main Street needs to be addressed; cre-ating this connectivity will help to maintain ��(��

in Virgin.

La VerkinLa Verkin has several opportunities re-garding their proximity to Zion National Park, as well as its location in the “Grand Circle” with relative proximity to the Grand Canyon, Bryce Canyon, Monument Valley, and Lake Powell. Owing to its larger size when compared to the other corridor com-munities, La Verkin may have the great-est opportunity for implementing certain development strategies to accommodate future growth. La Verkin provides hous-ing for many of the workers employed in the corridor but, as a bedroom commu-nity, has a limited commercial and service sector. Currently, La Verkin’s zoning is ��E��

�� E��

development along the highway and very little mixed-use.

Cor

ridor

Des

crip

tion

28

ntr

uti

nu

arC

orrid

orD

escr

iptio

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

2.8

TourismAlmost 2.7 million annual visitors travel through the Zion Canyon Corridor. Ac-�� )**7� �� %�� I2+� ��-lion dollars in annual visitor spending is brought into the Zion Canyon Corridor. As a result of this spending, over 2,000 lo-cal jobs are created, not including agen-cy jobs within the National Park Service 0J��@�M��"#�

With this heavy use of the corridor by tourists comes a threat to the corridor’s

resources and integrity, including the deg-radation of the road system, impacts to wildlife habitat, and the potential for wa-ter resource overuse. At the same time, the students found, through their survey, overwhelming support for increasing tour-ism in the corridor, see Figure 7. Efforts to increase and support tourism also should focus on responsible tourism, ensuring that tourists have little to no impact on the area’s resources through their use

Figure 7: Survey response in response to support for further tourism development

29

2.9

Vision Dixie and this ReportThe Zion Canyon Corridor Futures Study addresses many Vision Dixie principles and is intended to compliment the Vision Dixie report. This study examines the Zion Canyon Corridor and the four com-munities of La Verkin, Virgin, Rockville and Springdale in more detail than the Vi-sion Dixie process was able to do.

Much of Vision Dixie’s focus, and indeed many of their resulting principles, is cen-tered on land use planning issues fac-ing St. George, a highly urbanized com-munity. Some of these distinctive issues currently affect or will affect the four rural communities within the Zion Canyon Cor-ridor in the future, and some of them are completely removed from the rural com-munity context. The students expanded on the basic underlying concepts behind the Vision Dixie principles and adapted them to the more rural communities within the corridor.

2.10

References

Hardner, Jared and Bruce McKenney. 2006. $��.#�#�A��!��K��

Asset at Risk. Hardner and Gullison. Prepared for the National Park Conservation Association. �%�� == #��#��=��N��=

A!/�NK��N��N1��#��#

Dunford, Megan, et.al. 2008. Teton 2��-�4��"�)��%��5�$� � �2"-servation Planning Study. Utah State University Department of Landscape Architecture and Environmental Plan-ning, Logan, Utah. C

orrid

or D

escr

iptio

n

30

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

Land

sAl

tern

ativ

eFu

ture

sn

lusi

nA

eni

es

Section 3.1

Introduction

D��

analysis? Are there lands within the Zion /��/�� -ments within them? Are there landscapes in the Zion Canyon Corridor with which �%��O�$��

the students grappled with as they sought �� ;��

Canyon Corridor, see Figure 8.

In previous sections, the students have addressed their methodology in a three-�� -sis, and design. To gain understanding of the place, a group of fourteen students spent a full week in the communities adja-cent to Zion National Park to assess their love for their place. We also conducted verbal and camera surveys to obtain mul-��%�� -es within the corridor, see Appendices C and G for more detail on the process.

��

Figure 8:��Terminology

Perhaps you have heard of the terms critical lands analysis or suitability analysis. For this proj-ect, the students debated this concept thoroughly and concluded ��P��Q� ��most appropriate for the following ��

1. All of the lands within the Zion Canyon Corridor have value

2. Use of the word critical implies a threat to their loss; while the stu-dents recognize that some lands are threatened, they wanted to choose a term with a positive con-notation, instead of one that only suggests negativity.

31

��

Section 3.2

Purpose

After the students weeklong visit and com-munity surveys, the students began to map �� ;�� /��-yon Corridor. Initially, the study compiled an overlay analysis based on the four catego-��

C� NaturalC� RecreationC� ScenicC� Cultural

From this overlay analysis, conserva-tion priorities can be set based on criti-cal features within each community. For example, a development near Grafton in 1��%��%��

Cultural Lands map for conservation pri-orities, whereas a new development in Virgin would be concerned with the en-croachment on the community’s expan-��%��%��

at the Scenic overlay map.

To provide the region and individual communities with an overall perspective �� %��

lands map was created to illustrate the composite of all of the corridor’s assets. $��

an unweighted map, based on an over-lay analysis of the four categories, and a weighted map, where priorities for weight-

ing were gleaned from the camera sur-veys conducted by the area’s residents in September and October 2008.

Section 3.3

Background

The process of using overlay maps to make natural resource decisions was de-veloped in the 1960s by Ian McHarg, a landscape architect and author of Design with Nature. Initially using physical fea-tures, such as slopes and water resourc-es, within the same property to determine development suitability, this method can now incorporate complex cultural and so-cial factors, such as historical resources and development patterns into the analy-sis process, see Figure 9. This advance-ment in the overlay method has largely been due to the development of GIS tools that are widely available to planners and designers. For this project, students capi-talized on previous land analysis models to develop both the individual overlay ��#�

Section 3.4

Process

While much of the design and devel-opment activities that occur within our communities are done at the site scale, GIS allowed the students to analyze re-sources across multiple scales (Pulliam

32

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

Land

sAl

tern

ativ

eFu

ture

sn

lusi

nA

eni

es

��G��)**)"#�>��- B�� 3#+� 0�� B�"� ��

combine spatial information in an overlay analysis. According to the Genesee Land Trust Plan, “a suitability model helps iden-tify lands that have the highest conserva-tion value relative to the value of the study ��Q�0)**6"#�

Data CollectionThe GIS data was primarily obtained from the AGRC Utah GIS Portal, the Utah Divi-sion of Wildlife Resources Conservation Data Center, the Intermountain Region Digital Image Archive, the NatureServe

Explorer, Utah Trust Lands, and Lynne Scott from the BLM. All data was collect-ed within GIS and projected in the Univer-sal Transverse Mercator Zone 12N.

Data AnalysisTools within GIS allow for easy viewing of overlay data. For this project, a math-ematical model was developed to illus-�� #�$��

�� %��

Individual Overlay AnalysisIndividual elements within each larger �� 0�#�#� �� "� ��

mapped to understand the areas where resources are concentrated

�� Lands Analysis – unweightedEach larger element (e.g. scenic or ��"��E��

),�0��9**��"#��

��%��

lens.

�� Lands Analysis – weightedWeighting based on the camera sur-vey is performed. The content of each of the photos from the camera survey was analyzed to identify elements and sub-elements. These elements were tallied and used as the basis for the weighting scores.

As each of these elements are mapped, GIS uses a tool called “union,” which breaks apart the polygons to allow for

Figure 9: Overlapping elements produce a higher

��"%��

33

overlaying of elements to occur, see Fig-ure 9. This breaking of features allows us to assign numerical values to each poly-gon, based on whether or not a sub-ele-ment is present within the spatial unit on the map. For more information on suitabil-ity analysis mapping, see Hopkins, 1977.

3.5

Individual Overlay Analysis

As noted above, four elements were ana-E��;��/��/��

C� NaturalC� ScenicC� Recreation, andC� Cultural.

These individual elements have been further analyzed into sub-elements, see Table B. A detailed explanation of the in-dividual elements and their sub-elements can be found below and in the section en-titled Current State of the Corridor.

NaturalExtensive natural resources exist within the Zion Canyon Corridor. Based on simi-lar studies, the students categorized natu-��

wildlife habitat, hydrology, energy and ge-ology.

The wildlife habitat category incorporated habitat values for threatened and endan-gered species within the corridor. The selection of these species was based on the availability of time and conducting our analysis on the most critical species in the corridor. The analysis was based on GAP data, using the vegetation types based on the wildlife species’ preferred breed-ing, nesting and wintering habitat. Other ��:��

Table C below.

Limitations:Habitat—species models developed

��

Riparian resources, such as the Virgin River, con-

nect the communities together. (Photo: Lindsay

��-��1�

34

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

Land

sAl

tern

ativ

eFu

ture

sn

lusi

nA

eni

es

Table B:Sub Elements and analysis

Elements andSub-elements

Weighted Unweighted

Natural 25 17Wildlife Habitat 6.25 12.50Hydrology 6.25 4.09Energy 6.25 0.25Geology 6.25 0.16Subtotal 25 17.00

Scenic 25 2930% + Slopes 12.5 13.96Viewsheds 12.5 15.04Subtotal 25 29.00

Recreational 25 12Trails 5 1.02ATV Access 5 0.16Mountain Bike Access 5 0.0Roads 5 10.04Riparian 5 0.78Subtotal 25 12.00

Cultural and Historical

25 42

Historical/Archaeological Sites

5 4.89

Roads 5 10.68Cultural Significant Sites 5 21.94Virgin River 5 2.86Agricultural Lands 5 1.63Subtotal 25 42.00TOTAL 100 100 100 100

35

��%��0��933,��#"<�

individual species models could be re-%�� #�#� ��

� :��-clude appropriate slopes and curvature of the land.

ScenicScenic resources are perhaps the number one reason why visitors visit the Zion Can-yon. Sub-elements in this category were determined as viewsheds and slopes over 30%. The viewshed corridor was calculated from State Route 9, with viewsheds from SR9 taken along every milepoint along the route. Slopes over 30% are indicative of key mesa viewing areas.

Limitations:Caution should be taken when examining

�� %�� %��

analysis only takes into account natural topography. Thus, in communities, such as Rockville and Springdale, where sig-�� %��

�13��

collected to determine the true viewshed of these areas.

RecreationalRecreational resources within the corridor are also abundant. Sub-elements within ��

C� Trails,C� ATV access, C� Mountain bike access, C� Roads, andC� Riparian areas.

��

Table C:Features mapped within the Natural Overlay Component

Element Feature ��

Natural Habitat Mojave Desert tortoise; desert sucker, ��&��1�%��-western Willow Flycatcher; Yellow-billed cuckoo; Mexican spotted owl; Utah prairie-dog

Hydrology Streams, Springs, Wetlands, Flood-plain,

Energy Wind energy potential; tar sands; oil reserves

Geology Landslides, fault line

36

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

Land

sAl

tern

ativ

eFu

ture

sn

lusi

nA

eni

es

#��&�� 6�"�2��"�2"��"��"&3"�� 3�� "%� ��"��"�7�� 8,�" ")�

��-��1

Recreation in the corridor takes many forms, from ATV riding to mountain bike riding and hiking to river

� ��3�� -��" ��3"3 ��3"� ��8,�" ")��-��1

37

Limitations:Many of the recreational resources in the corridor are not connected and many more are not formal trails. The students recognize that a stronger analysis of recreational resources would include a GPS-survey of resources within the cor-��

residents of the corridor’s communities to fully map and understand.

CulturalIn the cultural group, features were mapped based on the information gleaned in the site visit in September 2008, the verbal and camera surveys and research conducted by the students on the history of the region and communities within the Zion Canyon Corridor. Five sub-elements ��

��

C� J��=��

C� RoadsC� /��

C� Virgin RiverC� Agricultural Lands

Limitations:As cultural features often are not easily mapped, other methods to illustrate sig-�� #� $ ��

main limitations of this mapping process ��

the canals in Rockville, and unmappable

elements, such as the annual Grafton re-union in September.

Alternatives to mapping included illustrat-ing resources in Google Earth and the weighting of resources based on the cam-era survey results, see below.

��

Cultural resources help to form the character and

identity of each community. (Photo: Chris Harrild)

38

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

Land

sAl

tern

ativ

eFu

ture

sn

lusi

nA

eni

es3.6

��

unweighted

$��

the individual overlay maps into a single analysis resource to guide the production of alternative futures. In the unweight-ed analysis, each of the four elements was scored with a rank of 25, with sub-elements rankings illustrated in Table B. Summing each of the four elements pro-

vided a normalized score of 100, easing the ability to communicate results more ��

��#�

The creation of the unweighted map al-lows resource managers, communities and citizens to view their corridor as a re-gion of conservation priorities. Within the unweighted map, scenic resources, mesa tops, wildlife habitat and the streams and rivers within the corridor have the highest ��#�

�� 9� ��&�33�� " ��.�&�� "3�.��%��$�-

� .�� 7��"�"��

39

3.7

��

weighted

The weighted analysis was performed based on the camera survey results. The elements contained within photos were tallied and compiled into a spreadsheet. The results of this tally can be seen in Ta-ble B. In this exercise, the students found that 42% of the elements within all of the photos taken were related to the cultural

category. As these data were not collected randomly or from a large sample number, they are only a hint at a true weighting of resource value within the Zion Canyon Corridor. However, this weighting process can illustrate how to incorporate more hu-man-based values into the study.

��

�� 9� �� "��.��3�� " ��

��

40

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

Land

sAl

tern

ativ

eFu

ture

sn

lusi

nA

eni

es3.8

Discussion

��

�� (��

potential opportunities and challenges for community members and managers seeking to use this information.

From an opportunities perspective, this collation of over 30 resource elements into a single map represents an opportu-nity to view the corridor from a regional perspective. At the community perspec-tive, decision-makers can use the maps to guide decisions on conservation and development; map users can seek ways to attenuate the effects of develop while ��(��E�� %��

efforts.

Challenges, though, are many and should not be underestimated. The data that has been collected for the mapping process comes from numerous sources, each de-signed to be viewed and used at different scales and resolutions. For this reason, users should take caution in using the maps as guidance in their decision-mak-ing process.

J� �%�� B��

these projects will be provided to each ��%��

�� -tion contained within the maps. In addi-

tion, critical information within the maps is useful as it stands, e.g. where 30% slopes exist, where hydrology patterns exist, and the potential for energy production within the corridor. While we do caution users of this information, we recognize that the ac-tive use of these maps in decision-making is also the best available tool for viewing communities from a regional perspective. Towards that end, we encourage their use as a dynamic decision-making tool.

3.9

References

Department of City and Regional Plan-ning, Strategic Conservation Workshop. 2007. Genesee Land Trust Conservation Plan. Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.

J�� '#� 09366"#� P@��

�� @��

Comparative Evaluation.” Journal of the �� !�� #� 4+�4��

386-400.

��G#��@#� ��#�0933,"#�P ��-�� %��

ecological network approach.” Landscape ��.��!��++09-+"��963-93+#

Pulliam, H. Ronald and Bart R. John-��#� 0)**)"#� PK��:�� A� � !��

What Does it Offer Designers and Plan-

41

��OQ�K��'��>��

�� #� B�� !�� D��

D.C., pp. 51-84.

��

42

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

4.1

What is an Alternative Future study?

Alternative future studies are composed of a set of potential future outcomes that may transpire should certain actions be taken by a community and its decision-makers. The predictions are based on a number of variables including zoning, codes, land ownership patterns, demo-graphics, projected growth, historical precedents, etc. The future study illus-trates how changes in any one, or all of these variables, will impact a community or region. While only hypothetical, futures studies are very valuable tools in the plan-ning process at both a community and re-gional scale.

B��

a decision may have on a community. Decision-makers try their best to evalu-ate a proposal based on its potential ��

very complex. Decisions are not made in �� %�� -

��

arise out of the interaction between deci-sions. A future study is valuable because it takes into account the interplay between decisions to produce a cohesive vision of the future.

This allows communities and their de-cision-makers to successfully visualize what their future may look like based on a series of potential actions they may take. The study also creates a basis for comparison, as it provides multiple end scenarios. In this way, communities are able to choose a solution and then work backwards, identifying what steps they will need to take to achieve their vision of the future. While every effort is made to make a futures study as comprehensive as possible, it is not always feasible to ac-curately predict the impact of decisions, and there is a degree of educated guess- �� #� � J� �%��

future study will provide enough informa-tion to community members and their decision-makers to develop an effective plan that will safeguard their future, up-hold their values and achieve their goals.

Alternative Futures

“ !��#�” - Yogi Berra

43

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

To illustrate the alternative futures in the Zion Canyon Corridor Futures Study, �� %��

Build out diagrams – these diagrams illustrate the potential areas of growth that would be taken up in each sce-nario

�� ,�� – completed in a GIS format, these plans illustrate the alternative future scenarios poten-tial in plan view

Photo Simulations - To increase the realistic view of the alternative future scenarios, existing aerial photos were �� !�� -lustrate how the existing landscape could change in each alternative fu-ture scenario.

To accommodate growth in the corridor, population projections must be taken into account, see Table D.

Three alternative futures were explored in ��;��/��/��

: Status Quo Alternative��%�� /�� '�%��-ment Densities��%��?� !�� /��-munity Zoning Visions

: Vision Dixie Alternative

: Balanced Tourism Alternative

For each of the alternative futures, acre-age summaries were calculated for how much land would be needed to accommo-date development, see Table E.

Table D:Population and Dwelling Unit Projections

��

��

��

��

�� ! "��! �� #� $%� �%� �%�� %$&

'"��(��)*+�� %�, -%�& -%�& -%,�

�"�� !��

�"�� .�� /��

�&��& ,$� �� -�

� .��0��0��"�� &�, $�� -1 �1�

44

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

Section 4.2

Status Quo Alternative

$�� %�� %��

as the control group for the alternative fu-tures study. In order to have a basis of comparison for the other two scenarios, it is necessary to visualize the state of the communities and the corridor given the projection of the current development pat-terns into 2035. It was found that current development patterns for each commu-�� H�� E��

plans. In order to form an assessment of the impacts of future development, it was necessary to look at both the historic de-%�� H�� -rent build-out, as well as each communi-ty’s vision for appropriate development as ��H��E��#��$��-mation was used to form two separate de-velopment scenarios, hereafter referred ��R��!��/��

Development Densities and Status Quo ?��!��;��&��#�

Status Quo A: Projection of Current De-velopment Densities

To assess the current residential develop-ment densities, an estimate of the acre-age of developed land was calculated for each community by tracing over the visibly developed land seen in an ortho-graphic photo in ArcGIS. Next, the 2008 population numbers for each community were obtained from the Utah Governor’s L�� !�� ?�� 0 L!?"#��

These numbers were used to establish the current density of each community in � ��0'.=��"��

information was extrapolated to obtain the projected number of new dwelling units for the year 2035. The current density was then used to calculate the acreage ��

Table E:��1��%��>��

��

��

��

�� !"� #"$

��%��&��'� ��(�

��)�*��

�"�� #�� # #"$

��+�� "� �$, �"� !$,

%�� -�� , �! , �"$ !��

45

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

number of dwelling units for 2035 for each ��0��$��"#��@��

created that visually convey the amount of land that will be developed in each com-munity and the corridor as a whole given the current development patterns.

There are some limitations to this ap-proach. First, it must be assumed that the persons per household and the growth rates for each community will remain con-stant (and in the case of Rockville, the use of Springdale’s growth rates consti-��%��"#��

locations of projected growth are fairly arbitrary. The intent is simply to demon-��

be needed to accommodate the projected populations given current development patterns.

Status Quo B: Projection of Community Zoning Visions

To assess each community’s vision of de-sired future densities, the students used the zoning information for each communi-ty to determine where the projected num-ber of dwelling units would be placed and how much land would be developed in or-der to accommodate the projected popu-lation according to current zoning plans. The students could not gain access to a useable zoning map for the town of Virgin, so they made educated guesses as to the

projected densities and development lo-cations for this community. Again, the representation of this scenario has some limitations. For example, maximum den-sities for each zone were assumed, which ��%-�� %��#� �J� �%��

this scenario allows each community to visualize in a generalized way the impacts of their current zoning densities.

46

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

Status Quo AlternativeDiagrams and Illustrations

Build Out Diagram of Rockville

Build Out Diagram of La Verkin

47

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

Build Out Diagram of Springdale

Build Out Diagram of Virgin

48

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

49

Status Quo A: Current Development Densities Alternative Plan of La Verkin

Status Quo B: Com-munity Zoning Visions Alternative Plan of La Verkin

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

50

Status Quo A: Current Development Densi-ties Alternative Plan of Virgin

Status Quo B: Commu-nity Zoning Visions Al-ternative Plan of Virgin

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

51

Status Quo A: Current Development Densi-ties Alternative Plan of Rockville

Status Quo B: Com-munity Zoning Visions Alternative Plan of Rockville

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

52

Status Quo A: Current Development Densi-ties Alternative Plan of Springdale

Status Quo B: Com-munity Zoning Visions Alternative Plan of Springdale

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

LaVerkin

La Verkin - Present-day view.

La Verkin - 2035 view under Status Quo Alternative.

53

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

54

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

La Verkin - Present-day view of the Twist.

La Verkin - 2035 view of the Twist under Status Quo Alternative.

55

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

Virgin - View looking northeast.

Virgin - 2035 view looking northeast under Status Quo Alternative.

56

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

Virgin - Present-day view looking southeast.

Virgin - 2035 view looking southeast under Status Quo Alternative.

57

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

Rockville and Springdale - Present-day view looking southwest.

Rockville and Springdale - 2035 view looking southwest under Status Quo Alternative.

58

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

Rockville - Present-day view looking east.

59

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

Rockville - 2035 view looking east under Status Quo Alternative.

60

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

Rockville - Present-day view looking west.

61

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

Rockville - 2035 view looking west under Status Quo Alternative.

62

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

Springdale - Present-day view looking southwest.

63

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

Springdale - 2035 view looking southwest under Status Quo Alternative.

64

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

Section 4.3

Vision Dixie Alternative

Vision Dixie was an effort by leaders throughout Washington County to listen to the preferences of citizens regarding growth. Through Vision Dixie, residents expressed their ideas about a future where growth occurs in a thoughtful, ef-�� #� � $��

summarized in 10 Dixie Principles.

; � �� "�"%�3��3��

$�� %��

a Vision Dixie alternative at the January 2009 meeting of the Zion Canyon Corri-dor Council. The purpose of developing the Vision Dixie alternative was to assist the communities in visualizing what the implementation of the Vision Dixie prin-ciples would look like in 2035.

Hypothetical ApplicationsWhile the Vision Dixie Alternative future cannot predict the future, the future pre-sented here does represent a probable future for what the communities and corri-dor could look like if the Vision Dixie prin-ciples are implemented.

For each community, the present build-out patterns were examined; the students sought to connect proposed develop-ment with existing development wherever ��#�� -sources were protected in every commu-��#�� (��

was considered a priority. Finally, connec-tivity of the pedestrian landscape, includ-ing trails and open space, were a priority in the design of this alternative.

Vision Dixie principles$��&��'�(��%��

1. Plan Regionally, Implement Locally2. Maintain Air and Water Quality and Conserve Water3. Guard Our ‘Signature’ Scenic Landscapes4. Provide Rich, Connected Natural Recreation and Open Space5. Build Balanced Transportation6. Get ‘Centered’ by Focusing Growth on Walkable, Mixed-Use Centers7. Direct Growth Inward8. Provide a Broad Range of Housing Types9. Reserve Key Areas for Industry to Grow the Economic Pie10.Focused Public Land Conversion

65

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

La VerkinFor the Vision Dixie alternative, the stu-�� -lation projections into the city boundaries �� -sources, such as scenic landscapes. The students increased the density in exist-ing zoning map to accommodate popula-tion growth, but still fell short of the 2035 population projections. Thus, as it stands, the existing city boundaries and zoning of La Verkin does not allow for the increased population projected in 2035 and the pro-��:��#�

Critical Design Needs for La Verkin in the Vision Dixie Alternative:C� An entry landscape into State Route 9C� An increased focus on low lighting to

protect the community’s night skiesC� Pull out information throughout La

Verkin and throughout State Route 9 C� Buffers within the town between com-

mercial, tourism and residential uses.

RecommendationsSince there is existing commercial light industrial on the North end of town, it is encouraged to slowly transition the light �� =�� -mote opportunities for tourists to stop. Also, it is recommended that mixed-use ��

��%��#�D��(��=��-tail areas are located, it is recommended that parking lots are placed in the back of

buildings to encourage a pedestrian-ori-��

a pedestrian scale in mind. This type of development can enhance the entryway landscape into the Zion Canyon Corridor and increase the attractiveness of La Ver-kin to tourists.

Additional recommendations include the following:Movement of the tourism core to the en-trance of the State Route 9 corridor.B�� -posed to placing residential development ��:��#

Connectivity throughout the town and into the corridor should be increased through trails and increased public transportation opportunities.

VirginWith its extensive vistas and rural commu-nity nature, Virgin may be the best poised, of all the communities within the study area, to implement the Vision Dixie prin-ciples. The students were able to place the increased, projected population into the landscape without affecting the sig-��&��#�

Additionally, the alternative future design for Virgin creates additional neighbor-hoods, increases the vitality of the town center through walkability and increased commercial opportunities, and provides for connectivity between all of the existing recreational opportunities.

66

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

Of course, as this is a hypothetical ex-ercise, the students were able to ignore property boundaries in their design. In re-ality, the community of Virgin will need to develop architectural standards and regu-lations for how building within its scenic vistas should be conducted. An alterna-tive to developing within the areas sig-��

lands between the community and private landowners to maintain the overall char-acter of Virgin in perpetuity.

Critical Design Needs for Virgin in the Vi-sion Dixie Alternative:C Increase connectivity between exist-

ing trailsC Develop trailheads to indicate those

connectionsC Develop a pedestrian connection

across SR-9 to connect existing & fu-ture development into downtown.

C Protection of the scenic viewshed, H�� &��-gin.

C Where possible, develop building ar-�� %�� H��-plains, cultural areas of Virgin, and landslide areas;

C If building is to occur inside of these areas, the students would recommend additional protections to ensure the landscape is preserved

RecommendationsVirgin has enough land within its munici-

pal boundaries that can be developed re-sponsibly, avoiding sensitive landscapes and enhancing the pedestrian connectiv-ity of the town. Existing sensitive lands 0H�� "�

serve as wildlife corridors, and at present are wide enough to accommodate a ma-jority of species. With additional residents, additional commercial opportunities will follow. Concentrating the core commer-cial activity in downtown will increase the likelihood that the community goals of pe-destrian connectivity will be attained.

Preservation of the viewshed and night skies has been noted as something that everyone in Virgin can agree on. An overlay district on the areas within Virgin that are within the community’s viewshed should be discussed. Architectural guide-lines, including lighting standards and building appearance, should be consid-ered within this district to achieve com-munity and regional goals. This overlay district could be similar to the node dis-cussion in the Virgin general plan, where creating a consistent image for each com-munity node is discussed.

RockvilleWhile Rockville’s population has remained stable for the past few years, the poten-tial for development to encroach into this community remains strong. Due to the ex-isting political strength of the community, development pressure has been limited.

67

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

However, the generally weak nature of Rockville’s general plan and ordinances to maintain the community’s character suggest much work needs to be done to meet the Vision Dixie principles.

Critical Design Needs for Rockville in the Vision Dixie Alternative:C� Continued protection of existing cul-

tural resources and sites, scenic ar-eas, and night skies via future growth and development planning.

C� An increase in single and multi-family housing to accommodate future popu-lations

C� More pedestrian connectivity via trails and sidewalks

C� ��

lands mapC� Continued inter-community planning

with neighboring communities

RecommendationsIt is recommended to utilize existing build-��

handle growth projections. Also, exist-ing sense of place can be preserved in growth by incorporating community goals and ideals into the community’s general plans and ordinances. Planning for future growth will prepare the community for the likely inevitable increase in development pressures.

SpringdaleWhile the gap between Springdale’s av-

erage income and average home price is ��:��

and ordinances are well-poised to adopt the Vision Dixie Principles. However, a few critical needs still need to be met.

Critical Design Needs for Springdale in the Vision Dixie Alternative:C� Stronger centers for mixed use devel-

opment; current commercial establish-ments are scattered.

C� More pedestrian connectivity via trails and sidewalks.

C� Lower cost, higher density housing to support a local workforce.

RecommendationsAfter analyzing Springdale ordinances and existing conditions it was concluded ��(��

to handle growth projections. Also exist-ing commercial development and zoning currently encourages three core areas for mixed-use development. It is recommend-ed to continue the development of these ��

��

the alternative future scenario. This will create multiple, mixed-use destinations. Additionally, pedestrian connectivity be-tween development centers provides an opportunity to expand and connect trail systems, and to tie the commercial cen-ters together.

68

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

Vision Dixie AlternativeDiagrams and Illustrations



69

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res



70

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

Vision Dixie Alternative Plan of La Verkin

71

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

Vision Dixie Alternative Plan of Virgin

72

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

Vision Dixie Alternative Plan of Rockville

73

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

Vision Dixie Alternative Plan of Springdale

74

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

LaVerkin


La Verkin - 2035 view under Vision Dixie Alternative.

75

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

76

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies


La Verkin - 2035 view of the Twist under Vision Dixie Alternative.

77

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res


Virgin - 2035 view looking northeast under Vision Dixie Alternative.

78

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies


Virgin - 2035 view looking southeast under Vision Dixie Alternative.

79

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res


Rockville and Springdale - 2035 view looking southwest under Vision Dixie Alternative.

80

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies


81

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

Rockville - 2035 view looking east under Vision Dixie Alternative.

82

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies


83

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

Rockville - 2035 view looking west under Vision Dixie Alternative.

84

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies


85

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

Springdale - 2035 view looking southwest under Vision Dixie Alternative.

86

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

Section 4.4

Balanced Tourism Future

The Balanced Tourism future focuses community development around princi-ples that will improve existing tourism in-frastructure and encourage the develop-ment of new infrastructure. The goal of this future is to protect the nature of the corridor by balancing tourism demands with the needs of local residents.

; � �� "�"%�,��3��

!��9��$��%��

the economy in the corridor, accounting for much of the revenue and employment in the municipalities in the corridor. Visi-��;��A��!��I99+��-lion in the communities within an hour’s drive of the park entrance, which includes all of the communities in the corridor. The economic multiplier for the corridor is 1.5,

meaning that for every dollar spent in ��

cents is generated in the local economy through secondary sales and other in-direct effects. Tourism directly supports 2,432 jobs in the counties around Zion Park, with the largest portion of those jobs located within the corridor.1

With changing world economic dynamics it can be expected that visitor numbers to Zion National Park will continue to grow. As long as a weak dollar persists, tourism in the United States will remain attractive, especially to tourists from Eruope and Asia. It can be expected that visitor num-bers will dramatically increase from coun-tries such as China and India as more residents of those countries have access to disposable income. This potential ex-pansion of the tourism market presents both opportunities and challenges for the

Balanced Tourism Principles

1. Recognize tourism as primary source of economic development

2. Protect existing sites and landscapes with tourist value

+#�'�%�� %��ting with Principle 2

4#�K(��with Principle 2

5. Concentrate tourism infrastructure and H� ��E��

6. Separate local and tourist activity except at designated nodes

7. Focus new development in seldom seen areas

87

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

affected communities. There is an oppor-��%��

but this is balanced by the challenge of dealing with increased tourist numbers. It is therefore critical to recognize that tourism is essential to the economic de-velopment of the region but, in order to fully capitalize on that potential, it must be carefully and systematically planned for and accommodated.

!��)��$��1-3��%��

to tourists because there is a plethora of recreational activities that cater to a broad range of tourist types. The corridor is noted foremost for its scenic value, but it also has many well-regarded recreation-al, cultural, natural, and historical sites. In order to maximize the value of these sites it is important that they are managed and protected in a manner that allows for maximum visitor enjoyment with the least possible impact. Doing so will pre-vent the corridor from turning into a giant tourist trap, which would be detrimental to residents and visitors, as well as the local landscapes and ecosystems. Identifying important sites of tourist value and work-ing closely with the responsible manage-ment organizations is vital to preserving ��#��

!��+��>��

sites and opportunities within the corridor could be harnessed as a means of reduc-ing pressure on existing sites and protect-

ing important sites. Depending on the degree to which tourism expands in the corridor this may be a valuable method of protecting existing sites. Any develop-ment of new recreational sites should not detract from existing sites, nor should they ��

corridor whenever possible. The goal is not to exploit every last tourist opportunity in the corridor, but rather to protect sites ��

status and developing management and preservation procedures.

!��4��/�� -ism sector will place greater strain on the existing tourism and transportation infra-structure in the corridor, and it will become necessary to expand both. Anticipating this, long-term planning should begin now to prepare for needed infrastruc-ture growth. Infrastructure improvement should occur in a manner that will not detract from the existing landscape and tourist sites. Should tourism demands �� %��

and well-formed plan in place may lead to poorly planned expansion of infrastruc-ture that will have a long lasting negative impact on the communities in the corridor.

!��,��$��

be concentrated in tourism zones intend-ed to provide necessary visitor amenities. Concentrating tourism infrastructure is preferable to permitting tourism infrastruc-

88

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

ture to sprawl throughout the corridor, a development pattern that would be detri-mental to the corridor’s character. Tourism zones should be planned and developed in a manner that is in keeping with the goals of each community and should re-inforce the community’s identity. This will minimize the visual and social impact of ��E��#��$��H� ��

also be concentrated so as to reduce the impact on the communities in the form of ��E��#

!�� 7�� %��

some degree of disruption to local com-munities, but this should be mitigated as much as possible by separating tour-ist and local activity except at designed nodes of interaction, such as shopping districts or hospitality districts. By doing this, locals can chose when and where to interact with visitors, rather than feeling that tourists are overrunning their com-��#� �$�� H��

between the interests of local residents and tourists.

!�� 6��

the scenic views, natural habitats, recre-ation, historic and cultural sites. Sprawl can be reduced through the adoption of higher densities in urban boundaries. To reduce the impact of growth on the cor-ridor, development should be focused in on buildable lands in seldom seen areas. Buildable land consists of land that poses

��-��#� � ��-��

as lands that cannot be seen from SR-9, where development will have the least vi-sual impact on the corridor experience.

Hypothetical ApplicationsFollowing is a series of hypothetical appli-cations of the Balanced Tourism scenario in each community. These represent only one possible application and should not �� %��

the future.

La VerkinA central tourism core focused on the junction of SR-9 and SR-17 could create a downtown atmosphere in the heart of La Verkin. This could be used to estab-lish a gateway feel to the corridor and a stopping point for tourists before they be-gin their drive. This center could be rein-forced by the creation of a higher density zone of residential units near the central tourism core.

In order to have the least visual impact, the majority of new development should be constructed on the mesa tops, set ��

��%��%��H��#��K��

developments should be built in other sel-dom seen areas.

VirginA central tourism core could be located

89

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

where existing businesses in Virgin are already built. This would include land for non-local businesses in addition to an area dedicated to local business interests, which might include such ventures as �� #��

Lower density developments, matching with the character of the town’s current development pattern, could be located in seldom-seen areas on both the north and south sides of the river.

The Hurricane Mesa Test Facility is on SIT-LA land and, should the facility be closed in the future, the land could be used for a resort development. This would be an at-tractive location for a developer and could be designed to have little visual impact. Such a development would also provide a very sizable stream of revenue for the town of Virgin.

RockvilleThe town of Rockville has a visible ag-ricultural presence and this is an impor-tant part of the identity of the town and its residents. Rather than creating a tourism zone with typical tourist services, Rock-ville could develop an agrotourism zone that could highlight the town’s agricultural roots while simultaneously protecting that legacy. Agricultural lands in Rockville will see increased pressure for development due to increased land values and popula-tion pressure. Agrotourism is being used increasingly by small farmers to make

agriculture more cost effective, allow-ing them to continue to farm and protect these valuable lands.

'��

Rockville, development could be shifted away from the town proper to other areas within the city boundaries. This will help to preserve the charm of the town while driving through on SR-9.

SpringdaleSpringdale has the beginnings of an agro-tourism district at the southwest end of city already, and this could be expanded upon. Coupled with a matching district in Rockville, this expansion could create a rural entrance to the town of Springdale. Because of its location adjacent to the en-trance to Zion National Park, Springdale will see the most pressure of any of the four communities to expand its tourism of-ferings. The tourism district could be ex-tended along SR-9 to accommodate this growth, or alternatively clusters of tourism development could radiate out from SR-9 along side streets.

There are several areas of buildable land in seldom-seen areas that can be devel-oped, but not enough to accommodate all of the projected population growth. Springdale will need to increase housing densities to accommodate new growth and avoid negative impacts on the view while driving through the town.

90

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

Balanced Tourism AlternativeDiagrams and Illustrations



91

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res



92

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

Balanced Tourism Alternative Plan of La Verkin

93

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

Balanced Tourism Alternative Plan of Virgin

94

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

Balanced Tourism Alternative Plan of Rockville

95

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

Balanced Tourism Alternative Plan of Springdale

96

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

LaVerkin


La Verkin - 2035 view under Balanced Tourism Alternative.

97

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

98

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies


La Verkin - 2035 view of the Twist under Balanced Tourism Alternative.

99

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res


Virgin - 2035 view looking northeast under Balanced Tourism Alternative.

100

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies


Virgin - 2035 view looking southeast under Balanced Tourism Alternative.

101

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res


Rockville and Springdale - 2035 view looking southwest under Balanced Tourism Alter-native.

102

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies


103

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

Rockville - 2035 view looking east under Balanced Tourism Alternative.

104

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies


105

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

Rockville - 2035 view looking west under Balanced Tourism Alternative.

106

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies


107

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

Springdale - 2035 view looking southwest under Balanced Tourism Alternative.

108

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

Con

clus

ion

Aen

ies

Conclusion

Above all else, the students that worked on this project hope this report will be an eye-opener for planners and community members alike, making them aware of the future implications of maintaining current development patterns. In offering some attainable alternatives to these traditional land use patterns, the students hope to make it clear that doing things “the way they have always been done” is not nec-essarily the best alternative, and that there are many other options for the conserva-tion of these wonderful places through the use of alternate development strategies.

It must be noted that, while the students made every attempt to be as accurate and as comprehensible as possible in the de-velopment of the four components maps, it is never possible to be all-inclusive. There is great potential for further and

more detailed research. For example, the habitat maps within the natural compo-nent are based exclusively on vegetation used by each species. In many cases, %��%��

the habitat used by a species, such as the Mexican spotted owl, which nests pri-marily in caves within the Utah part of its range. Topography was not considered in determining Mexican spotted owl habitat, which results in a spatial analysis of its habitat that is much more inclusive than it would have been had topography been factored in. Many of these inaccuracies �� -straints, a fact which emphasizes the po-tential for further research.

It must also be noted that the alternative future maps are not intended to be precise plans that indicate which parcels to de-velop and which ones to conserve. They are conceptual, and they should be con-

Conclusion

“ Always plan ahead. It wasn’t raining when Noah built the ark. ” - Richard Cushing, novelist

“ Growth is inevitable and desirable, but destruction of community character is not. The �� #�$�� #�” - 4��#��0�0��".�#��2"�� "��

109

Con

clus

ion

sulted as such. They are simply meant to demonstrate the potential that alternative development strategies can offer for the ��%�� %��

lands within the Zion Canyon Corridor.

In conclusion, the students recognize that ��

path of least resistance because people often fear what they do not understand and existing plans and ordinances sup-port this pattern. However, the students hope the Vision Dixie and the Balanced Tourism alternatives espoused in this re-port demonstrate alternative development patterns that can meet the needs of this and future generations, while still preserv-ing the splendor that is the Zion Canyon Corridor.

110

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

Planning implementation tools Alternative futures represent expected ��

hierarchy of issues. Similarly, these ��%��

implementation strategies to produce the expected outcomes. The table presented in this section lists a series of available implementation tools, with suggested potential uses that have proven to be effective to achieve planning goals.

In recent years, the planning profession‘s focus on smart growth and livability concepts has produced a large number of alternative approaches to traditional planning. These alternative tools can be employed to accomplish a wide variety of planning- and design-based issues and topics, and, more recently, have become available through electronic and printed sources. The planning implementation tools presented here are composed of a range of sources, which are derived from an even greater group of sources and practical experiences.

This table should serve the corridor ��

the creation of a planning strategy. This strategy should be based on a careful

selection of the provided implementation tools, followed by a constant review of progress. The table consists of three ��

Alternative futures$��

alternative futures developed in this project and the goals applicable to each one of them. These goals guide the planning strategy and achieving them should be used to assess progress.

Planning goals$�� 0 ��%��(�"�

lists planning goals. These goals include different expectations on the development process.

C� Individual goals, such as the protection of property rights and ��

assurance.C� Economic goals serve as the

foundation of the productive sector in the corridor.

C� Administrative goals help create ��%��

effective planning actions and products.

C� Physical or environmental goals

Appendix A:Implementation Toolbox

111

App

endi

ces

promote healthy relationships between human activities and the natural ecosystems

C� Social, community goals focus on creating meaningful, fair, and ��

��

residents.

Planning toolsCompiled from different sources, this list includes different categories of planning ��

C� Local government approaches.Tools that can be used by local governments to manage land uses. Analyses and studies create knowledge useful to understand community needs and conditions.��

as TND (Traditional Neighborhood '�%��"��!.'�0!��.��

'�%��"��

process and help achieve planning goals.

C� Local government administration.Through a series of tools, local governments can regulate land uses. Traditionally this is what zoning does, and it is addressed in a separate category. Regulation tools listed here ��%��

and designations of different land uses.

C� ��%��#�'��

participation of local governments in

the development process. Throughthis series of tools, governments can stimulate or neutralize trends favoring consistent and coherent plan developments.

C� Zoning. Zoning is the main land-use managing tool used by communities today. Listed in this table are different tools helpful to implement zoning in different way. Zoning is not only a planning tool widely used, it is also a H�(�� %��

its use in different planning strategies. As the main land use management tool, it is important to take advantage of its capability to address different planning goals.

C� Transportation. As one of the main issues planning efforts address, transportation goals also have a variety of tools available.

C� Open space and farmland protection. Open space is associated with multiple goals and community expectations. It is also a critical element in environmental conservation strategies. Theeconomic aspect of open space is also very important since these open spaces can also be associated with increased economic activity.

C� Citizen participation. Different tools can be applied to create favorable conditions for public participation.Plan success is strongly tied to community input and support.

112

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

Cultural identity is built through the collective image created by every resident’s participation.

C Regional cooperation. Every locality needs to understand its role in a greater array and network of all kinds of systems. Whether transportation, revenues, watersheds, or investment, ��%��

community to participate. At the same time there are issues that can be resolved only through a wider understanding of the context and through appropriate sharing of information and resources.

C State and Federal governments.Institutions and agencies support many aspects of local communities planning efforts. These institutions are also responsible of helping communities develop consistent and coherent plans with state or federal priorities. There are also opportunities, through these levels of government, to expand and improve technical capabilities and access to valuable information sources for planning.

Sources

Curtis, Evan. 2009. The State of Utah Planning and Education 1��.!K1�$��S.��:��

online portal for planning ��T#� �%��:��L��

Planning and Budget.Envision Utah. 2001. Urban Planning

$��R�� U��

Community Toolbox. Salt Lake /��.$��K�%��.��#

NACo, National Association of Counties, Joint Center for Sustainable Communities, and Environmental Protection Agency. 2001. Local $�� !��

��$��

Improve Our Communities. Washington, DC.

Sprawl Watch Clearinghouse. 2008. Best !��SD��T�)**2�S��

November 2008]. Available from www.sprawlwatch.org.

Western Rural Development Center. )**9#�D��'��$��

for Discussing Community �� #��.$��D��1��

Development Center, Utah State .��%��0K(��"��@��

State University.Lacy, Jeffrey R. 2002. Growth

@��$��

for Planning Boards in Massachusetts. Metropolitan District Commission, Division of Watershed Management, Quabbin Reservoir Section.

113

App

endi

ces

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

�

�� !��

��

��

��

�"

""

�

��#��

��!�$�� $��

��

��

��

�"

""

"�

%��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

""

�

��&��'�&�(

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

)

*��+��'*+�(

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

""

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

""

�

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

�

,�-��.��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

)

��

��

��

��

��

""

/

��

��

��0��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

)

%� ��1��

��

��

��

��

�"

"/

$��

��

��

��

��

��

""

"�

��*��

��

��

��

��

��

��

")

��$ ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

"/

2��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

")

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

"/

$��

��3��$��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

"/

4�� #��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

)

*��#��#��

��

��

��

��

��

""

/

1�� #��

##��

%� ��5��#��

*��

6#-7��.��.�#.��7�

$��

*�� !��

2��0��

*��

*�� #��

*��8��!��#��#�

*��#��#��

2��0��

6#-7��.�9��9��

��0��#��

4�� 0��

��!��5� ��

��.�#.��#-7��!

114

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

:��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��5��

��

�;��.��.��.��

!��

��<��

"��=��

��

��

��#��<��

��

"��=��

�;��.�$��$��

%��=��

&��=��

:��<��5��

��.��.��;��<

��

��

��

��

��

��

:��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

"'

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

(

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

)

%��

��

��

��

��

�"

""

�

��*��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

""

�

��<��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

"'

��*+��

��

��

��

��

""

'

,��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

"'

��

&��=��

��

��

��

��

��

��

""

"�

:��=��

��

��

��

��

��

��

""

"�

-��

��=��

��

��

��

�"

"'

%��<�=��'��(

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

""

'

,��=��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

""

�

>��$��.=��.?@��.=��A

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

(

��=��

��

��

��

��

""

"�

��=��

��

��

��

""

"�

��

��.��

��

��

��

��

��

""

"�

/��.��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

""

�

0��*��.��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

"'

��:��.��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

"'

115

App

endi

ces

:��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��5��

��

�B��.��.��.��

!��

��"��

#��$��

��

��

��%��"��

��

#��$��

�B��.��

&��$��

'��$��

:��"��5��

��.��.��B��"

��

��

��

��

#��5� ��&��(�' &

�(�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

")

��

��#��

��' �

#(

��

��

��

��

��

""

*

#��&��

��

��

��

�"

"*

+�"��,�"�

��

��

��

��

��

�"

"*

,��"�

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

"*

-��

��

��

��

�"

""

�

.��

��

��

��

��

""

"�

.��/!��.��

��

��

��

��

��

""

"�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��$��

0��$��1

��

""

"�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

")

��

��.

��

0��

��%��1

��

��

")

:��-��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

"*

2��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

"*

:��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

""

*

&��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

""

*

3��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

)

116

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��5��

��

C�!"�#�.��.��.�#��"#

$��

��%��

&��'��

��

��

��(��%��

��

&��'��

C�!"�#�.�D��D��

)��'��

*��'��

��%��5��

�#�#�.��.E��!"��%

��

� ��

��

��

� ��

�

&��+��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

""

�

�� %�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

",

�� %��$��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

",

*��$��-��

��

��

��

��

��

��

""

"�

.��/�� (��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

""

"�

0��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

""

,

��

��

��

��

��

��

""

"�

0��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

",

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

"1

2� ��

��

��

��

��

��

""

"�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

""

,

)��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

""

,

��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

""

"�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

""

""

�

&��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

""

"�

��-��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

""

,

��%

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

""

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

""

"�

�� /��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

""

�

��'��%��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

""

,

3��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

",

117

App

endi

ces

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

C��.��

��

4��

�� 5��

��.��. ��

*��

*��

*��!��

*��

2��

1��

"��

%��5��

*��

C��.��.��.��

#��

*��

2��

��

��

��

��$��

��'��$�(

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

""

�

%��"��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

""

"�

��%��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

""

�

&��

��

��

��

��

�"

""

�

%��'��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

""

�

(��'��(��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

""

""

$��4��

��#��

��

��

��

��

��

��

""

""

�

� � �

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

'��

��

��

��

�"

""

�

)��

��

��

�"

""

�

'��

��

��

��

��

��

""

"�

*!��

��

��

��

��

�"

""

�

)��

��

��

��

""

"�

)� ��

��

��

��

�"

""

�

&��

��

��

��

""

"�

%��

��

��

��

""

"�

%��

��

��

��

""

"�

#��%��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�"

"+

118

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

SITLA Parcel Summaries

1Southern portion hard to access due to steep slopesMiddle portion consists mostly of slopes greater than 30%Northern portion is potentially buildable and access is feasibleSmall eastern strip is buildable, but sensitiveOutside municipal boundary'�%��)6#)��

'�%��%��4#7��

TRADE

2Mostly buildable land with good potential for access Southwestern corner consists of steep slopes and sensitive landsNortheastern corner has some steep slopesOutside LaVerkin municipal boundary'�%��4,,��

RETAIN

3All developable with reasonable access potential, though it is not near existing develop-ment, so other basic infrastructure could be problematic'�%��4*#,��

RETAIN

Appendix B:SITLA Lands

119

App

endi

ces

4@��&��L%��

Buildable, but sensitiveNo access from west due to steep slopesExisting access from northeast'�%��%��))#6��

TRADE/DEVELOP REC. OPPORTUNITIES

120

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

5Mesa top parcelWestern half and northeastern portion are buildable with some sensitive piecesSoutheastern portion buildable, but occurs between two steep slope portions (still rea-��"

'�%��%��++#)��

TRADE

6A��

In the LaVerkin TwistMostly developable, but also mostly sensitive'�%��,4��

'�%��%��)*4#7��

DEVELOP REC. OPPORTUNITIES/SCENIC BYWAY VISITOR’S CENTER

7��

In the LaVerkin TwistAll buildable with good accessEastern portion sensitive'�%��44#)��

'�%��%��+6#4��

DEVELOP REC. OPPORTUNITIES

8��

@��0��E��"

All buildable'�%��9276#)��

CONSIDER LIGHT RECREATIONAL DEVELOPMENT – RESORT?

121

App

endi

ces

9��

Buildable with good access, though with some sensitive portionsRight below mesa'�%��927#+��

'�%��%��937#9��

DEVELOP

10All buildable land, but far from existing developmentPotential for access'�%��)*#,��

TRADE

11Mesa tops far from existing developmentLots of buildable land, but not much access potential?�� AK��

road built from the southwest into the SW polygon'�%��

AK��423#2��

�D��429#+��

��'�%��%��72#7��

TRADE/DEVELOP REC. OPPORTUNITIES

12Adjacent to private land parcels, but far from central community developmentGood accessAK��

Mostly buildable with some sensitive portions'�%��46)#4��

'�%��%��+6#)��

RETAIN

122

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

13�D��

All buildable; western portion sensitive'�%��+2#2��

'�%��%��)7#9��

RETAIN

14All buildable, but far from existing development��(�� %��(��

Also not near existing private lands'�%��93*#+��

RETAIN

15All buildable with good access, but not near existing development or existing private lands'�%��99)#9��

RETAIN

16Mostly sensitive lands; partially too steepGood access from the northTwo buildable portions'�%��9)3#+��

'�%��%��)9+#9��

TRADE

17Mostly steep slopes and sensitive landsNorthwest corner is buildable with good potential for access'�%��27#,��

TRADE

123

App

endi

ces

18��)=+��H��%��

$�� 0��"��

of the parcel'�%�� 37#9��

TRADE

19Mostly sensitive lands; partially too steepK��%��

Western portion of mostly high scenic value with excellent access (there are already ��%��"

'�%��++��

'�%��%��92*#3��

TRADE

Potential SITLA ��

These recommended actions are based on the 10 principles outlined in the Vision Dixie report.

Trade: It is recommended that SITLA trade these parcels for BLM parcels that are more appropriate for development.

; � �� "��-� ��

C� Parcel is located far from existing ��%�� expensive infrastructure improve-ments and maintenance.

C� Parcel is highly visible from State Route 9.

C� Parcel is composed primarily of ��%��0V+*8"#

Retain: It is recommended that SITLA retain these parcels for the time being.

; � �� "��-� ��

C� Parcel is neither far from nor adja-cent to existing development.

C� Parcel is either somewhat visible from SR 9 or partially composed of ��%��0V+*8"#

C� Parcel is likely to become more valuable over time as development expands.

Develop: It is recommended that SITLA sell off these parcels for development be-fore any of the others. See “SITLA Parcel Summaries” for more detailed information on appropriate types of development for certain parcels.

124

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

Aen

ies

; � �� "��-� ��

C� Parcel is near existing develop-ment.

C Parcel has existing access.C� Parcel has a low percentage of ��%��0V+*8"#

C� Parcel is predominantly outside of the viewshed from SR 9.

125

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

1�� K�� !�� 01K!"�

is a process that involves placing a cam-era in the hands of the residents of a com-munity and directing them to photograph certain elements, i.e., places, people, �%�� %�� W� ��

they value about their community. Each participant is given a logbook handout for recording the photos’ locations, content, and descriptions as well as reasons for taking the photo.

The REP process can facilitate a deeper understanding of a community’s experien-tial context. This increased understanding can help improve design and planning by ��H�� %��

the community.

For the Zion Canyon Corridor Study, 24 individuals were invited to participate. The individuals that were invited were identi-�� -ing and based on the referral of invited in-��%��0�� "#�K��

of the 24 individuals actively participated, ��H��6,8��#�.��

�� %��

comments from the logbook were re-

viewed and data elements were collected. $��H��-es captured in the photos, and the content of the comments from the logbooks that correspond to the photos.

The data was analyzed to determine the number of times that cultural, natural, scenic, and recreational elements were �� =��

(see REP spreadsheet for more detailed ��"#� $�� -ements of highest importance for the community members participating in this study, and it was discovered that cultur-al elements were predominant in photos across all four communities. The follow-ing photos contain at least one example of the cultural element.

Appendix C:Resident Employed Photography

126

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

127

App

endi

ces

Bridge

Development

��&��< �3&�

�"� �6�"��

Photo Examples

128

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

An issue that is intrinsically tied to part-time home ownership is the availability of affordable housing for the workforce. Many tourist areas struggle with providing ��

��E��#��$��%��-�� D��

considered affordable? Should there be subsidized affordable housing opportuni-ties? Are there ways to provide affordable ��-ers?

Blaine County in Idaho provides a case study for providing affordable housing to its residents. The county has worked tire-lessly to provide affordable housing op-portunities for its workforce and, although there is demand for more, they are making progress in addressing the problem after experiencing how part-time homeowner-ship affects the sense of community in the long term. The Blaine County Housing �� 0?J/�"��%��-sidy monies to provide affordable hous-ing options to those who are members of the workforce of Ketchum, Idaho that are unable to purchase their own home, ��-��H��

rates. BHCA work with developers to pro-vide opportunities for affordable housing, knowing that it is necessary for the pres-ervation of the community. Although there are many different models for affordable �� %�� -cial for the community of Ketchum, Idaho, which has many similarities to Springdale in its year round population and relative distance to the communities where most of its workforce now resides due to a rela-tive lack of affordability for average peo-��#��

P?��/��J��0?/J�"�

is a public organization committed to pro-%��

the 1997 Ketchum-Blaine County Hous-ing Needs Assessment. BCHA’s primary goal is to develop and implement various methods for providing housing at afford-able sales prices and rental rates to peo-ple comprising the “working population”. These individuals and families are unable ��

housing within Blaine County due to mar-ket-rate housing price levels. BCHA and ��

economic health of the county that people

Appendix D:Affordable Housing Opportunities

129

App

endi

ces

working in Blaine County can become permanent members of the community %�� =��#�

BCHA maintains affordable housing via BCHA-regulated rental agreements, Deed Restrictions, and ownership and leasing of land. By advising governmental staff and agencies on possible changes to zoning and land use policies, BCHA works with local governments and planning enti-ties to encourage the development of and minimize constraints to affordable hous-ing development. BCHA also promotes well-designed, community-oriented, en-�� P ��

Development” principles.

Wherever possible, BCHA provides hous-ing within close proximity to the employ-ment location of residents. In particular, housing opportunities are provided rela-tively close to employment centers, in-cluding the cities of Ketchum, Sun Valley, Hailey, and Bellevue. Locations for Com-munity Housing are integrated through-out Blaine County, thus avoiding the con-struction of one or two large complexes meeting the needs of the area’s work-force. Community Housing is constructed with the intent of creating, preserving, and maintaining a sense of community.” ��== #��#��

The Housing Authority maintains a list of those people who have applied for af-

fordable housing and individuals seeking ��%��-tion with the housing authority to ensure �� #� � $��

criteria are based on a point system, in which individuals receive points for spe-��

have worked in the community. More points are awarded if the individual is a �� %��-ment volunteer. Once there is a vacancy, ��

��#��B��:��-��

etc., they may decline without losing their position on the list, and it is offered to the next person in line.

Because it is subsidized, it only accrues up to 3% interest a year, instead of regu-lar market price. Individuals are offered ��I9*�***��%�-ments. Because of this, the system op-erates more like a savings account than a property investment. If an individual should decide to sell the unit in the future, it must be sold to someone on the list. In order to safe-guard these units, it is man-dated that they must be used as a primary residence. This model could prove ben-��

there will always be a high demand of people who want to live and work in close proximity to Zion National Park.

130

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

As the area continues to grow in popu-lation and built development, Night Sky L��%��

the availability to enjoy beautiful, starry nights. Preservation of the night sky be-fore signage and neon lights threaten to ��%��-��#��!��

issue for residents. Dark skies are nec-�� -ing healthy circadian rhythms. As new development occurs, light from bright signage can creep into windows, disturb-ing residents. Protecting night skies can work to attract tourists to the area, provid-ing opportunities for tourists to experience night in a way that is unavailable to them �� #��'��

wildlife as well and are an integral part of habit, especially providing opportunity for uninterrupted nocturnal activity.

Often referred to as “dark-sky” ordinanc-es or “night-sky” ordinances, they aim to �� #� � $�� -cally relevant to areas such as the Zion National Park area, which has been set aside for people to experience a natural environment and thus, should be entitled

to a beautiful, star-lit night sky. These ini-tiatives and ordinances take into account the various problems with light pollution and its detrimental effects on tourism and the human and non-human environments. The ordinances range from those that are ��

��

ordinances to suit their particular vision and needs.

There are two particularly interesting places to start when researching these ordinances. “The Starlight Initiative” is an “international initiative in defense of ��:��-tural, and natural right.” Its objectives spe-��

gazing, as well as addressing the vanish-��%��#��== #

��)**6#��=��#��

Another organization for education on dark sky initiatives is “The International Dark Sky Association.” This association is particularly useful, as it provides links to approved lighting vendors and offers spe-��#��

www.darksky.org

Appendix E:Night Skies

131

App

endi

ces

Some excellent case studies of cities with dark-sky laws where communities and ��%��

��

C� Las Cruces, New Mexico

C� Taos, New Mexico

C� �� ?�� /��

New Mexico

C� San Bernadino, California

C� Ketchum and Hailey, Idaho��== #��#��=��=��=

��=��#��

C� Deerlick Astronomy Village, Georgia.

132

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

Introduction

In order to understand the political context of the four communities and county within the Zion Canyon Corridor, a comparison of the jurisdiction’s existing general plans and ordinances to the Vision Dixie plan was conducted. The students were in-troduced to the comparison process by Sumner Swaner and Rick LeBrasseur of the Center for Green Space Design based in Salt Lake City.

Methodology

To complete the comparison, students uti-lized Vision Dixie’s Suggested Compre-hensive Planning Checklist available at ��&��'�(�� ==%��(��#

org. The students chose this comprehen-sive checklist because this comparison would best illustrate the broader issues that are acting as barriers for the commu-nities and the county to implement Vision Dixie.

Key Findings

Barriers to Implementing Vision DixieWhile the majority of the communities have passed a resolution in support of the Vision Dixie principles, several critical barriers for implementing Vision Dixie re-main. While all of the communities have a sensitive lands map of some sort, e.g. ��H��

the communities or the county has an up-��-��

their general plan. Such a map should in-dicate priority conservation areas (Vision '�(��!��+#9"<� ��

map provided in this report can serve as a ��%��%��-��-��#�

In addition to lacking a comprehensive �� %�� -tween the general plans and ordinances and across jurisdictions is a second barri-er discovered in the analysis (Vision Dixie !�� 4#9"#� >�� (�� &��:��

general plan discusses the need for open space and trails, yet, there is nothing in ��

�� #� �� (-

Appendix F:Vision Dixie Checklist

133

App

endi

ces

ample comes from Springdale, where the �� %��

space within their own projects, but only encourages developers to provide trails and open space within their projects. Rec-tifying these discrepancies between the codes and the general plans can serve as an excellent step towards meeting the goals of Vision Dixie.

Thirdly, all comprehensive plans and or-�� -nitions for terms used within the general plans. As an example, Virgin contains a steep slopes map within their general plan for use in their decision-making pro-cess. At the same time, the students were ��

slope is within Virgin’s general plan and ordinances. This lack of clarity on terms can hinder communication between cities and developers and can reduce the pos-sibility of cities getting what they want out of development.

>��-ing consistency between proposed proj-ects and their general plan (Vision Dixie !�� 9#+"#� D��

�� %�� E�� -mance or non-conformance with their general plan (see the Springdale check-��(��"��

the project be consistent with the general plan. Or, as in the case of Rockville, the references to consistency are to adjacent

public land development and do not refer-ence private land development projects.

�� "&& � ��

poised to implement Vision Dixie

Most of the communities have compo-nents within their general plans and or-dinances that make them well-poised to address the barriers noted above. For example, Springdale already recognizes the need for pedestrian-friendly, walkable �� 0&��'�(��!��7#9"��

and their noted intention to create a trails and open space plan will help them in their endeavor to implement this goal.

Additionally, many communities are dis-cussing affordable housing and incorpo-rating these concepts into their general plans and ordinances (Vision Dixie Princi-��2#9"#�>��(��

entire section of their general plan dedi-cated to methods for encouraging afford-able housing, such as density bonuses

Most of Springdale is pedestrian friendly.

134

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

for developments that provide affordable housing.

Further, three of the four communities are taking political steps to conserve water re-�� 0&��'�(�� !�� )#)"#� >��

example, Virgin offers density bonuses when developments adhere to xeriscap-ing standards. Also, LaVerkin and Spring-�� %��

be completed for all new developments.

Finally, all communities recognize the val-ue of agricultural preservation within their ��0&��'�(��!��+#)"#

Discussion

This comparison between each commu-nity’s or the county’s general plan and ordinances to the Vision Dixie Checklist ��

removing the barriers each jurisdiction has to implementing Vision Dixie. It is likely that the reviews do not contain every barrier or every component of the com-munity’s plans and ordinances within the review. At the same time, these reviews and summary above illustrate critical bar-riers that can aid communities in prioritiz-ing their ordinance and general plan re-visions to ensure they are not acting as obstacles to accomplish the communities’ visions for the future.

135

App

endi

ces

Summary of Checklist FindingsTown of LaVerkin, UT

November 24, 20081�%�� A��M��1��

��K!�79**��1��!��B��'�%��?��/��

!��9��!��A�1K BLA��U��B@!�K@KA$��L/��UWe’re all in this together.

-Pass a resolution endorsing the Vision Dixie principles and checklist

Nothing in the general plan or codes about Vision Dixie

Implement regional goals with local considerations.-/�� %��H��

inconsistenciesYes, page 44 of the General Plan under “Economic Goals” 1.B.3

-Work with the County, DIXIE MPO, UDOT, etc. to incorporate regional plans into the general plan, adapting them to local conditions as necessary

There is some addressing of internal connections, but nothing regional (corridor- ��"#

!��)��/LA�K1&K�D�$K1��A'�@�BA$�BA��B1��A'�D�$K1�R.��B$U� )#9�'��:�� #

��%��General Plan, although it is not very explicit.D��/��PD�� QX$��2

2.2 We all need to take actions to use less water.� � /��PD��/��%��!��QX$��2��/�#�7��#�4�

!��+�� .�1'�L.1��B A�$.1K��/KAB/��A'�/�!K�� +#9�!��#

General Plan Goals “Environmental Goals” 1 and 2 and in “Community Design Goals” 2 and 3

3.2 Preserve our agricultural and ranching heritage. ��!��/�#�)X��%��$'1��easements, etc. G.P., Ch. 15 Art. E—many design guidelines talk about preservation, and ag lands are included as “sensitive lands”G.P. Goals—nothing on ag land preservation or farmer incentives/��P!��/��'�%��!��Q��space preservation

!��4��!1L&B'K�1B/J��/LAAK/$K'�A�$.1��1K/1K�$BLA��A'�L!KA��!�/K4.1 Preserve and connect open spaces and trails.

��!��@��$�� )#��K�%�� +��Parks and Recreation Goals 1 &2—all of these cover connectivity within the

136

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

municipality/��<��%��X��be included in Goals, Codes, and Planned Community Development section

!��,��?.B�'�?��A/K'�$1�A�!L1$�$BLA�$J�$�BA/�.'K��U�$K@�L>�!.?�B/�TRANSPORTATION, CONNECTED ROADS, AND MEANINGFUL OPPORTUNITIES TO BIKE AND WALK

5.1 Build a system of public transportation.� ��!��$�� )��/��/��$��!��

5.2 Reserve major road and transit corridors.� ��!��$�� 9#�

5.3 Connect the streets. ��!��

5.4 Build community-friendly streets.� ��!��/��/��$��!��

!��7�� K$�P/KA$K1K'Q�?U�>L/.�BA � 1LD$J�LA�D��M�?�K��@BYK'-.�K�CENTERS

6.1 Allow for new growth to be focused into and around strong, walkable, mixed-use centers

��!��/�#�9,X!��/��'�%��<��.�� +#/#��X�� /�� %�E��

6.2 Provide all the ingredients of mixed-use centers.� A�� !��#

!��6��'B1K/$� 1LD$J�BAD�1'� 6#9�>�� -��%��

/��/�#�6#,�� inward; this is one of the main disconnects between LaVerkin and Vision Dixie

!��2��!1L&B'K��?1L�'�1�A K�L>�JL.�BA �$U!K��$L�@KK$�$JK�AKK'��L>�ALL INCOME LEVELS, FAMILY TYPES, AND STAGES OF LIFE

8.1 Enable the housing market to meet housing wants and needs. ��!��J�� XP��large lot zoning throughout the community” and “restrict multiple-unit housing through zones and the zoning ordinance”

8.2 Provide housing for our workforceWe found numerous references to a “Moderate Income Housing Plan”, but it is not accessible through LaVerkin’s website.

8.3 Provide most compact housing types in centersNo mention—this is a major disconnect

8.4 Design makes a differenceNo mention

!��3��1K�K1&K�MKU��1K��>L1�BA'.�$1U�$L� 1LD�$JK�K/LAL@B/�!BK9.1 Keep areas of prime transportation access for employment and not just for retail.

� ��!��K�� 9#�

137

App

endi

ces

!��9*��>L/.�K'�!.?�B/��A'�/LA&K1�BLA��JL.�'��.�$�BA�/L@@.AB$U�GOALS AND PRESERVE CRITICAL LANDS

10.1 Washington County residents value public lands for scenic, recreational and environmental values and want any conversion of public lands to be done with care.� ��!��L��)**+-*)��&��/��(��!��!��,�contains a good ordinance, though it is unclear to what extent it is enforceable since it �� !��#��P$��/��%��"��=��<��"��%��%��<��"��%��%��<��"��"��%��(�� (�� the property owners within the municipality in order to prevent double taxation and to ascertain that the annexation will not be a tax liability to the taxpayers within the City.”B��%��than the importance of scenic, recreational and environmental values, but hopefully the ordinance will still have the desired effect.10.2 Public lands should only be considered for conversion to development in logical, contiguous extensions of communities.See previous comments.10.3 Encourage preservation of critical state school trust and private lands through voluntary exchanges for public land more suitable for development.Nothing in General Plan or in Codes

@��

$�� !��%��&��'�(��principles very nicely. Unfortunately, these attempts do not show up as well in the Codes.

There is very little in the General Plan or the Codes about the preservation of agricultural and ranch lands. This is a pretty major disconnect between LaVerkin’s material and Vision Dixie, since Vision Dixie is very strong on the preservation of agricultural and ranching heritage.

The General Plan talks a lot about the importance of preserving and connecting open spaces and trails within the boundaries of the municipality, but there is nothing about it in the Codes. There is also nothing in either the General Plan or the Codes about connecting open spaces at the corridor scale.A�� !��/��%��(��-use centers.

There is not enough information in either the General Plan or the Codes about discouraging leap-frog development.

There is a major disconnect between the LaVerkin material and Vision Dixie when it comes to meeting the housing needs of all income levels, family types and stages of life. The Moderate Income Housing Plan would likely refute this assumption, but it is nowhere to be found…

138

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

Summary of Checklist FindingsTown of Virgin

November 24, 20081�%�� /��/��/��/��F��D��

��K!�79**��1��!��B��'�%��?��/��

!1BA/B!�K�9��!��A�1K BLA��U��B@!�K@KA$��L/��U1.1 We’re all in this together-Pass a resolution endorsing the Vision Dixie Principles and checklist

Per Lindsay Winkler’s email conversation with Lee Ballard, the town of Virgin has passed a resolution in support of the Vision Dixie principles.

1.2 Implement Regional Goals with Local Considerations-/�� %��H��

a. Incompatible land-uses across boundaries -Yes, page 26 of the General Plan, Land Use Goals and Policies

-Yes, page 21, of the General Plan, Land Use Goals and Policies, “Pursue cooperation with governmental entities that administer and control areas bordering Virgin Town regarding all policies and activities which may have cross-boundary impacts.”

b. Spacing of centers too close or too far apart-No, mentions establishing an image for each node, could be under the Highway Resort Zone (survey respondents indicate they are not ��E��W"

c. Discontinuous road systems -mentioned, but not directly

d. Overlapping annexations -No

-Work with the County, DIXIE MPO, UDOT, etc. to incorporate regional plans into the ��

a. Reserving corridors for regional transit and arterial roads��A�b. !�� Noc. !��%��%�� Yes, general

pland. Adapting highway designs when they pass through downtowns and developed areas�� A��%�<�� resort zone, but we would need a zoning map to evaluate this component

1.3 Closely follow general plans-��P��Q��-��0E��%��#"�� #�� that if there is a potential inconsistency, it must be resolved beforehand, rather than be ignored.U��3-+�07"�>��!��0��"��0)"�!��/��1�%�� under approval procedures and approval process

139

App

endi

ces

!1BA/B!�K�)��/LA�K1&K�D�$K1��A'�@�BA$�BA��B1��A'�D�$K1�R.��B$U� )#9�'��:��

a. In the general plan, identify natural hazardous conditions (erosion, ��H��"#

Yes, page 21 of the general plan entitled “General Environmental Goals and Policies”

b. In making land-use decisions in the general plan, consider pollution from non-point sources, i.e. storm water facilitiesA�� <��3-4��1��'��B��%��must manage for 2-10 year storm events, etc.c. In the general plan, adopt policies and designate buffer zones around water �� Page 33 of the General plan, designating areas for restricted development around water resources�#��0��"#�/��(��:�� %��0�� "#

Not in general plan or ordinances�#��-��0��E��"��community accessibility and pedestrian, bicycle, and transit travel opportunity.-Mobile home parks, no less than 10% dedicated to recreation and open space, ��9)��2��1��

-General Plan—page 38, goal #1-Design Review, page 104, chapter 10, show pedestrian entrances

-Chapter 20, trails allow highway, mentioned pedestrians and bicycles 0/��;��"

2.2 We all need to take actions to use less watera. Include in the general plan community-wide goals for per capita water

consumption.No

b. Adopt policies that encourage water conservation (such as the use of (�� "

-Yes, general plan, Quality and Maintenance of Development, page 28-/��/��3-4��)��1��'��B��%��incentive, along with conservation development, increased yield if you approve xeriscaping standards, page 94c. Eliminate barriers to water conservation (such as zoning that precludes small ��"��??

!1BA/B!�K�+�� .�1'�L.1��B A�$.1K��/KAB/��A'�/�!K�+#9�!��

�#�/��%�� H��habitat, drainages, and any other features that are important to the community.

� � J�%��H��b. Identify and adopt policies necessary to restrict visible development impacts �� %��local character.

140

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

� � -A��-Page 78, Development Yield Analysis, Restricts sensitive areas from yield

calculation-Page 83, Discovery Process, Application procedure, Chapter 9-Page 96, Open Space Conservation Ranking

-page 22, General Plan, Development in areas subject to risk and natural ��E��X��%��

3.2 Preserve our agriculture and ranching heritagea. Identify valuable agricultural lands within the community Identify valuable agricultural lands within the communityNob. In developing the general plan, consider agricultural preservation within the context of economic development (both preservation of local character and ��"#Page 26, General Plan, encourage retention of ag lands, but not in the context of economics, “Types of Mix of Land-uses to be designated in the Planning Areas”�#��'��P��-��Q��0�"#�0B��E��#"Need zoning map!d. In the general plan, include a policy to maintain agricultural zoning until development is cost-effective from a long-range perspective (such as when �� %��"#Noe. Be sure that city statutes permit clustering of development.U��37��,��/��3-4��1��/��1��Design & Improvementsf. Adopt a policy that conditions annexation and up-zoning upon clustering or use of aTransfer of Development Rights program.Nog. Consider the possibility of land exchanges to preserve prime agricultural lands.No

!1BA/B!�K�4��!1L&B'K�1B/J��/LAAK/$K'�A�$.1��1K/1K�$BLA��A'�L!KA�SPACE

4.1 Preserve and Connect open spaces and trailsA. Identify on the general plan priority conservation areas within city limits and annexation area (the Vision Scenario’s open space is a good place to ��"#Zoning maps are currently being revised; however, existing maps do not indicate priority conservation areas. B. Adopt a policy to ensure all development proposals address open space, agriculture and trail elements of Vision Dixie and the general plan.L��X��3+��<�agriculture is not addressedC. Work with the BLM to identify in or near your community public lands ��%��(��1��

141

App

endi

ces

��!��!��01F!!"#NoD. Coordinate your trails plan with adjacent jurisdictions’ and Washington County.No trails planK#�/��0��"� �� trails planning, including Washington County, Vision Dixie, and the DIXIE MPO.NoF. Where appropriate, be sure the general plan extends and connects areas that are valuable for natural recreation and habitat (e.g. – surface waters, riparian areas, wetlands, forests, grasslands, wildlife habitat, other ��%��%��"#The codes and plan discusses natural features, but not connecting themG. Designate in the general plan any hazardous areas in which ��%��0��H��"#Yes, page 22, General PlanH. Designate a rich, connected natural recreation system to encourage physical and aesthetic enjoyment of the outdoors.While the plans discuss trails, they do not discuss connectivity, except to ��/��2��$� ��/��/��Uses, Section 8.1.7.i—assure future connectivity of utilities, streets, roads, trails and open space

!1BA/B!�K�,��?.B�'�?��A/K'�$1�A�!L1$�$BLA�$J�$�BA/�.'K��U�$K@�OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, CONNECTED ROADS, AND MEANINGFUL OPPORTUNITIES TO BIKE AND WALK

5.1 Build a system of public transportation�#�B��0�"��(in�� '�(��@!L"#NoB. Make sure that land-uses and transportation plans are appropriately aligned (e.g. do not locate low density development and other development that is not ��%��"��"#We don’t know from the information provided. C. If there are planned station areas in your community, designate in the general plan a��-��%��E��0��E��%��"#A=�D. Be sure the general plan encourages intermodal connections throughout the transportation system.

� A=�5.2 Reserve major road and transit corridors

A. Provide to the Dixie MPO an opportunity to comment on the transportation

142

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

element of the general plan.?B. Coordinate with the Dixie MPO to appropriately designate in the general plan right-of-way needs for future road and transit corridors.?C. Provide to the Dixie MPO general plan conditions and policies that may affect areas of��0�#�#��and��"#?

5.3 Connect the StreetsA. Include in the general plan and in the transportation plan, policies to ensure connectivity between developments (eventually implement the policy in the ��%��"#Need circulation map, talks about standards but not connectivityB. If necessary to provide coordination to multiple smaller land owners, through detailed subarea planning, determine the location of connected streets.No

5.4 Build community-friendly streets.A. Designate in the general plan locations for collectors and arterial street segments that pass through existing and planned pedestrian-oriented areas and centers and that should, therefore, have context-sensitive design.Yes…B. Work with UDOT and others to adopt appropriate context-sensitive road ��0��P��Q��"#No…

!1BA/B!�K�7�� K$�P/KA$K1K'Q�?U�>L/.�BA � 1LDJ$�LA�D��M�?�K��@BYK'-USE CENTERS

6.1 Allow for new growth to be focused into and around strong, walkable mixed-use centers

�#�'��(��0��(��"�centers using criteria suggested by the Vision Dixie Tools.

Cannot tell from existing information, will update when maps are receivedB. Include policies and land-use criteria for centers to provide guidance for developers and review agencies.Suggestions in page 22 of the General Plan, Distribution and intensity of Land Use DevelopmentC. For centers that will occupy more than a single property, undertake more detailed sub-area planning to enable multiple land owners to coordinate their efforts over time.'�� /��2��2#9��to be upheld, section 6—promote integrated, lively, walkable commerce centers

6.2 Provide all the ingredients of mixed-use centers�#�B��o Minimum housing densities that will assure a critical mass in centers.��@��H��-��-��%��#o Desirable levels of land-use mixing in centers.

143

App

endi

ces

o Street connectivity standards for centers? Only in residential development��'��0��"��%��groundH��#��1��#o Parking policies that recognize shared use and locate parking so as to create��-��#�/��o Guidelines for centers that encourage buildings close to, and fronting on, the street.o Policies that support context-sensitive streets or “complete streets” in centers.��1�� Oo Sign guidelines and polices such that new signs are oriented and scaled topedestrians.

Also discusses sensitivity to scenic resources, page 27 of the General Plan, did ��#

!1BA/B!�K�6��'B1K/$� 1LD$J�BAD�1'� 6#9�>�� -��%��#

�#��%��-frog,hopscotch development outward.2Chapter 8, Town Standards, Conditions and Conditional Uses, section 8.1.7.e—Discourages strip development and sprawl, did not see policies that recommended how to accomplish avoiding strip development and sprawlB. Analyze and consult with local developers to identify regulatory barriers to ��%�� 0�"��#�$��(��%��-�� -��0�#�#��"�� #Not something we can cover here, I think./#�.��-��0��E��"��%��barriers while ensuring design compatibility.Not something we can cover here, I think.D. In the general plan, map priority areas for land re-use in your city, such as areas for a new or expanded downtown and centers.Need full resolution maps. E. In the general plan, establish policies to charge fees for leap-frog development that are consistent with its higher level of impacts (e.g., longer ��"#Not exactly; on page 21 of the General Plan under Land Use Goal s and Policies—Growth Management Policy—“Utilize development impact fees to ��%��Q

!1BA/B!�K�2��!1L&B'K��?1L�'�1�A K�L>�JL.�BA �$U!K��$L�@KK$�$JK�NEEDS OF ALL INCOME LEVELS, FAMILY TYPES, AND STAGES OF LIFE

8.1 Enable the housing market to meet housing wants and needs.A. In addition to the low densities found in most Dixie communities, be sure the ��0��%��E��"��

144

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

of housing than isotherwise typical in your city.The general plan does not mention higher density housing. The zoning map is not legible enough to obtain information.?#��E��-��0��"��

��1�� #��1��0!.'�E��"��anduncertainty the permitting process.��1��(��%��-��#��1��(��%��#��1��(��%��0��"#

The existing maps are not legible enough.

8.2 Provide housing for our workforce.�#��?��-��0��E��"��designated for�� #�� proportionate to your projected share of the county’s workforce population. The Dixie Area Workforce Housing Advisory Committee can help you identify appropriate affordability targets, your proportional share, and ways to meet the targets.Not exactly, the ordinances have the purpose to provide for a diversity of lot sizes, housing choices and building densities to accommodate a variety of age ��0/�#�3-9�L��"#�?��typical workforce of the town.?#��homesaffordable to the typical workforce.This is not mentioned.

8.3 Provide most compact housing types in centers.A. Especially for areas where centers are desired, develop policies and regulations that will reduce the barriers to well-designed projects at higher-than-typical densities.In the ordinances, on chapter 21, describe the permitted and conditional uses for the Resort Zone. Chapter 22 describes the permitted, conditional and prohibited uses and the site considerations for the Highway Resort Zone. In none of these chapters housing is mentioned, it is purely commercial oriented, residential use is prohibited.

8.4 Design makes a difference.A. Adopt a basic design review procedure to ensure that areas of higher-than-typical��community.Yes, this is mentioned for the Highway Resort Zone, Chapter 22-7 in the ��0��/��"#

145

App

endi

ces

B. Include in the general plan basic design standards for appropriate areas, such as�� 0��"��#�/��

o Building height. Yes, in the ordinances, for the Commercial District under /��)*-,�0J��1��"��J�� 1��;��))-6�0��1��"#o Maximum and minimum setbacks from sidewalks. Yes, for the Highway 1��;��))-6�0��1��"#o Placement of the garage and parking to maintain a welcome street ��#�U��6�0��-��"��),-+�01��"��J�� 1��;��))-6�0��1��"#o Limited repetition of models and colors. No

!1BA/B!�K�3��1K�K1&K�MKU��1K��>L1�BA'.�$1U�$L� 1LD�$JK�K/LAL@B/�PIE

9.1 Keep areas of prime transportation access for employment and not just for retail.A. Identify in your general plan priority areas or sites for basic employment.The general plan does not mention this.?#��0��"��%��%��-��0�(��"#We don’t know from the information provided.

!1BA/B!�K�9*��>L/.�K'�!.?�B/��A'�/LA&K1�BLA��JL.�'��.�$�BA�/L@@.AB$U�GOALS AND PRESERVE CRITICAL LANDS

10.1 Washington County residents value public lands for scenic, recreational and environmental values and want any conversion of public lands to be done with care.

A. Coordinate with the BLM to identify adjacent public lands suitable and �%��(��1��!��!��01F!!"#'��:�� %��cooperative effort with the BLM, an 80-acre recreational area known as “The Falls”.?#�B�� -��(contiguous toexisting development or servicesWe don’t know from the information provided.

10.2 Public lands should only be considered for conversion to development inlogical, contiguous extensions of communities.

A. Coordinate with the BLM to identify adjacent public lands suitable and �%��(��1��!��!��01F!!"#'��:�� %��cooperative effort with the BLM, an 80-acre recreational area known as “The

146

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

Falls”. ??#��B�� -��0��(��%��%��"��future development.We don’t know from the information provided.

10.3 Encourage preservation of critical state school trust and private landsthrough voluntary exchanges for public land more suitable for development.

A. Work with SITLA and private landowners to identify in the general plan public landssuitable for land exchange or other forms of conservation.No…

147

App

endi

ces

Summary of Checklist FindingsTown of RockvilleNovember 25, 2008

1�%�� /��J��D��@��A��K!�79**��1��!��

B��'�%��?��/��


Not included or discussed in General Plan.1.2 Implement Regional Goals with Local Considerations

-/�� %��H��

a. Incompatible land-uses across boundaries Yes, see p.4 of the General Plan, Chapter 1, Land Use, Planning

Policiesb. Spacing of centers too close or too far apart

Not included. c. Discontinuous road systems Not included.

d. Overlapping annexations Not included.

-Work with the County, DIXIE MPO, UDOT, etc. to incorporate regional plans into ��

a. Reserving corridors for regional transit and arterial roads��A��#b. !�� No included.c. !��%��%�� No,

seep.8 of the General Plan, Chapter 4, Transportation and Circulation, Planning Policiesd. Adapting highway designs when they pass through downtowns and developed areas��A�#

1.3 Closely follow general plans-��P��Q��-��0E��%��#"�� #�� %��beforehand, rather than be ignored. Yes, see p.2 of the General Plan, Chapter 1, Land Use, Planning Policies; however it is directed toward adjoining and adjacent public lands only. There are other mentions of consistency, however they are vague and do not speak to land-use decision making in relation to the general plan.

!1BA/B!�K�)��/LA�K1&K�D�$K1��A'�@�BA$�BA��B1��A'�D�$K1�R.��B$U)#9�'��:��

148

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

a. In the general plan, identify natural hazardous conditions (erosion, ��H��"#Yes, see p.9 of the General Plan, Chapter 5, Environment, Assumptions for the future.b. In making land-use decisions in the general plan, consider pollution from non-point sources, i.e. storm water facilitiesYes, see p.4, of the General Plan, Chapter 1, Landuse, Community Goals.c. In the general plan, adopt policies and designate buffer zones around �� Yes, see p.13 , of the General Plan, Chapter 8, Annexation, Community Goals.�#��0��"#�/��(��community’s health as well as economic development (the ability to attract �� "#

Not included.�#��-��0��E��"��community accessibility and pedestrian, bicycle, and transit travel opportunity.Not included.


consumption.Not included.

b. Adopt policies that encourage water conservation (such as the use of (�� "Not included.c. Eliminate barriers to water conservation (such as zoning that precludes ��"�Not Included.

!1BA/B!�K�+�� .�1'�L.1��B A�$.1K��/KAB/��A'�/�!K�+#9�!��

�#�/��%�� H��that are important to the community.

Have outdated critical lands map.b. Identify and adopt policies necessary to restrict visible development impacts on steep slopes, ridgelines, drainage ways, or other features that ��%��#Yes, see p.4 of the General Plan, Chapter 1, Land Use, Community Goals.

3.2 Preserve our agriculture and ranching heritagea. Identify valuable agricultural lands within the community.

149

App

endi

ces

Yes, see p.4 of the General Plan, Chapter 1, Land Use, Community Goals.b. In developing the general plan, consider agricultural preservation within the context of economic development (both preservation of local character ��"#Yes, see p.11 of the General Plan, Chapter 6, Economy, Community Goals.�#��'��P��-��Q��0�"#�0B��E��#"Not included.d. In the general plan, include a policy to maintain agricultural zoning until development is cost-effective from a long-range perspective (such as �� %��"#Not included.e. Be sure that city statutes permit clustering of development.Yes, see p.98 of Land Use Code, Section 13.3.2.1.B, Provision and Protection of Open Space, and P.137, Section 25.3.1.9.A.2a.f. Adopt a policy that conditions annexation and up-zoning upon clustering or use of aTransfer of Development Rights program.Yes, see p.137 of the Land Use Code, Section 25.3.1.9.A.2c.g. Consider the possibility of land exchanges to preserve prime agricultural lands.Not included.


4.1 Preserve and Connect open spaces and trailsA. Identify on the general plan priority conservation areas within city limits and annexation area (the Vision Scenario’s open space is a good place to ��"#Critical Lands Map needs to be updated, and also needs to indicate priority conservation areas.B. Adopt a policy to ensure all development proposals address open space, agriculture and trail elements of Vision Dixie and the general plan.Open Space and agriculture—yes, general discussed in the General Plan; trails are addressed but as a negative aspect and not a positive.C. Work with the BLM to identify in or near your community public lands ��%��(��1��!��!��01F!!"#Not included.D. Coordinate your trails plan with adjacent jurisdictions’ and Washington County.Trails plan is not generally supported in the General Plan, however, the ��.��/��#9*+��9+#6#4#B99#��

150

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

circulation in regard to bike and pedestrian systems.K#�/��0��"� �� trails planning, including Washington County, Vision Dixie, and the DIXIE MPO.Trails plan is not generally supported in the General Plan, however, the ��.��/��#9*+��9+#6#4#B99#��circulation in regard to bike and pedestrian systems.F. Where appropriate, be sure the general plan extends and connects areas that are valuable for natural recreation and habitat (e.g. – surface waters, riparian areas, wetlands, forests, grasslands, wildlife habitat, other ��%��%��"#Natural features are generally discussed in the General Plan, however, connectivity is not addressed.G. Designate in the general plan any hazardous areas in which ��%��0��H��"#Yes, see p.9 of the General Plan, Chapter 5, Environment, Community Goals.H. Designate a rich, connected natural recreation system to encourage physical and aesthetic enjoyment of the outdoors.

Yes, see p.10 of the General Plan, Chapter 5, Environment, Planning Policies.


5.1 Build a system of public transportation�#�B��0�"��station areas (in�� '�(��@!L"#Not included.B. Make sure that land-uses and transportation plans are appropriately aligned (e.g. do not locate low density development and other ��%��%��"��"#Not included.C. If there are planned station areas in your community, designate in the general plan atransit-oriented development zone (and implement through zoning �%��"#A=�D. Be sure the general plan encourages intermodal connections throughout the transportation system.

A=�5.2 Reserve major road and transit corridors

151

App

endi

ces

A. Provide to the Dixie MPO an opportunity to comment on the transportation element of the general plan.Not included.B. Coordinate with the Dixie MPO to appropriately designate in the general plan right-of-way needs for future road and transit corridors.Not included.C. Provide to the Dixie MPO general plan conditions and policies that may affect areas of��0�#�#��intersections, and��"#Not included.

5.3 Connect the StreetsA. Include in the general plan and in the transportation plan, policies to ensure connectivity between developments (eventually implement the ��%��"#Need circulation map, the General Plan talks about policies but not connectivity.B. If necessary to provide coordination to multiple smaller land owners, through detailed subarea planning, determine the location of connected streets.Not included.

5.4 Build community-friendly streets.A. Designate in the general plan locations for collectors and arterial street segments that pass through existing and planned pedestrian-oriented areas and centers and that should, therefore, have context-sensitive design.Yes, Hwy 9.B. Work with UDOT and others to adopt appropriate context-sensitive road design policies and standards (such as “complete streets” ��"#Yes, see p.8 in the General Plan, Chapter 4, Transportation and Circulation, Planning Policies.

!1BA/B!�K�7�� K$�P/KA$K1K'Q�?U�>L/.�BA � 1LD$J�LA�D��M�?�K��@BYK'-USE CENTERS


A. Designate in the general plan approximate areas for future (or �(��"��&��'�(��$��#Not included.B. Include policies and land-use criteria for centers to provide guidance for developers and review agencies.Not included.C. For centers that will occupy more than a single property, undertake

152

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

more detailed sub-area planning to enable multiple land owners to coordinate their efforts over time.Not included.

6.2 Provide all the ingredients of mixed-use centers�#�B��o Minimum housing densities that will assure a critical mass in centers. No.��@��H��-��-��%��streetscape. No.o Desirable levels of land-use mixing in centers. No.o Street connectivity standards for centers? No.��'��0��"��attractive groundH��#�A�#��1��#�A�#o Parking policies that recognize shared use and locate parking so as to createpedestrian-friendly streets. No.o Guidelines for centers that encouraged buildings close to, and fronting on, the street. No.o Policies that support context-sensitive streets or “complete streets” in centers. No.��1�� O�A�#o Sign guidelines and polices such that new signs are oriented and scaled topedestrians. No.

!1BA/B!�K�6��'B1K/$� 1LD$J�BAD�1'6#9�>�� -��

development.�#��%��leap-frog,hopscotch development outward.Need to be included.B. Analyze and consult with local developers to identify regulatory ��%�� 0�"��#�$��(��%��-�� -��0�#�#��"�� densities.Not included./#�.��-��0��E��"��%��these barriers while ensuring design compatibility.Not updated.

153

App

endi

ces

D. In the general plan, map priority areas for land re-use in your city, such as areas for a new or expanded downtown and centers.Not included.E. In the general plan, establish policies to charge fees for leap-frog development that are consistent with its higher level of impacts (e.g., ��"#Not included.


8.1 Enable the housing market to meet housing wants and needs.A. In addition to the low densities found in most Dixie communities, be ��0��%��E��"��density range of housing than isotherwise typical in your city.No designation for higher density.?#��E��-��0��"��that��1�� #�A�#��1��0!.'�E��"��the time anduncertainty the permitting process. Ok.��1��(��%��-��#�L�#��1��(��%��#�L�#��1��(��%��0��"#�L�#

8.2 Provide housing for our workforce.�#��?��-��0��E��"��designated for�� #�� would beproportionate to your projected share of the county’s workforce population. The Dixie Area Workforce Housing Advisory Committee can help you identify appropriate affordability targets, your proportional share, and ways to meet the targets. Not included.?#��proportion of homesaffordable to the typical workforce.Not included.

8.3 Provide most compact housing types in centers.A. Especially for areas where centers are desired, develop policies and regulations that will reduce the barriers to well-designed projects at

154

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

higher-than-typical densities.Not included.

8.4 Design makes a difference.A. Adopt a basic design review procedure to ensure that areas of higher-than-typical��community.Not included. There some mention of maintaining the character of the ��#B. Include in the general plan basic design standards for appropriate areas, such as�� 0��"��#�/��No consideration for higher densities, but there are standards for low density development.

o Building height. Yes.o Maximum and minimum setbacks from sidewalks. Minimum setback yes, max. no.o Placement of the garage and parking to maintain a welcome street character. No.o Limited repetition of models and colors. No.


9.1 Keep areas of prime transportation access for employment and not just for retail.

A. Identify in your general plan priority areas or sites for basic employment.Yes, see p.11 in the General Plan, Chapter 6, Economy, Existing Conditions.?#��0��"��%��%��-��0�(��"#Not included.

!1BA/B!�K�9*��>L/.�K'�!.?�B/��A'�/LA&K1�BLA��JL.�'��.�$�BA�COMMUNITY GOALS AND PRESERVE CRITICAL LANDS


A. Coordinate with the BLM to identify adjacent public lands suitable and �%��(��1��!��!��01F!!"#Not included.?#�B�� -��

155

App

endi

ces

(contiguous toexisting development or servicesNot included.


A. Coordinate with the BLM to identify adjacent public lands suitable and �%��(��1��!��!��01F!!"#Not included.?#��B�� -��0��(��%��%��"��for future development.Not included.


A. Work with SITLA and private landowners to identify in the general plan public landssuitable for land exchange or other forms of conservation.Not included.

156

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

Summary of Checklist FindingsTown of Springdale

November 24, 20081�%�� D��

��K!�79**��1��!��B��'�%��?��/��


Yes, the town of Springdale passed a resolution in 2008 endorsing the Vision Dixie principles.


a. Incompatible land-uses across boundariesb. Spacing of centers too close or too far apart

c. Discontinuous road systemsd. Overlapping annexations

� /��(�� (��


a. Reserving corridors for regional transit and arterial roads��3#)#7��sections listed under D for information regarding the reservation of SR 9 for ��#� ��!��=��to SR 9 will be developed, see section 9.1.b. !�� Transit systems within the town of Springdale appear to be driven by tourism; Section 2.1.1. notes availability of transit as a key priority for the community; general plan also discusses need to continue working with Zion National Park to maintain the shuttle systemc. !��%��%�� Notes need for connectivity, section 3.3.2.c, but is not explicit about connectivity between jurisdictions; Section 3.3.2.a notes the need for a cohesive open space pland. Adapting highway designs when they pass through downtowns and developed areas��The town of Springdale consistently refers to UDOT throughout its plan (e.g. 3#9#4��3#9#4#)��3#)#)#��F�3#)#)��3#)#7��+#4#6��3#)#+#�"��1-3��highway designs.

1.3 Closely follow general plans-��P��Q��-��0E��%��#"�� #�� that if there is a potential inconsistency, it must be resolved beforehand, rather than be ignored.

Section 12-3 “Development Approvals” and Section 12 “Moving the Plan >�� Q�� %��

157

App

endi

ces

��-�� <��#�

!1BA/B!�K�)��/LA�K1&K�D�$K1��A'�@�BA$�BA��B1��A'�D�$K1�QUALITY

� )#9�'��:�� a. In the general plan, identify natural hazardous conditions (erosion, ��H��"#

� � ��6#4��E��b. In making land-use decisions in the general plan, consider pollution from non-point sources, i.e. storm water facilitiesSections 3.4.4 and 3.4.4.a suggest the need for a stormwater plan; Sections 6#9#9#��6#9#9#��%�� c. In the general plan, adopt policies and designate buffer zones around water �� Section 7.1 does not address buffers; Section 8.1.3.d indicates the town will ensure ground water source protection, but does not mention buffers�#��0��"#�/��(��:�� %��0�� "#��6#)#��%��#��-��0��E��"��community accessibility and pedestrian, bicycle, and transit travel opportunity.Section 3.3.1.c new subdivision are encouraged to provide access to open space and trails; Pedestrians are mentioned throughout the document (section 8.3.1 public restrooms, section 8.4.1. trash, section 8.7.1 sidewalks, section 9, ��"


consumption.Noted in section 3.1. regarding desert landscape and limited water availability; ��2#9#9��%�� %��per capita water consumption, but does not state goals or limitsb. Adopt policies that encourage water conservation (such as the use of (�� "Section 8.1.1 promotes water education and section 8.1.3 e & f indicate the need for education on water conservation. Section 8.1.2 illustrates the desire to conserve water at the municipal level. c. Eliminate barriers to water conservation (such as zoning that precludes small

��"��Section 8.1.3.c – looking at economic methods to encourage water conservation

!1BA/B!�K�+�� .�1'�L.1��B A�$.1K��/KAB/��A'�/�!K�+#9�!��

�#�/��%��

158

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

�� H��habitat, drainages, and any other features that are important to the community.

� ��H��%��#�

b. Identify and adopt policies necessary to restrict visible development impacts �� %��local character.Sections 2.2.1.b., 2.2.3.c., 2.3.1.e., 3.2.4.c., and 5.1.2.d. suggest the restructuring of local ordinances to address these issues.

3.2 Preserve our agriculture and ranching heritagea. Identify valuable agricultural lands within the communityHas not been done. b. In developing the general plan, consider agricultural preservation within the context of economic development (both preservation of local character and ��"#Sections 2.1.4.g and 3.3.1.g encourage preservation of agricultural lands, but not in the context of economic development. �#��'��P��-��Q��0�"#�0B��E��#"There aren’t “farm-friendly” areas in the map, though they are agricultural zones 0�� "�� &��1��Zone.d. In the general plan, include a policy to maintain agricultural zoning until development is cost-effective from a long-range perspective (such as when �� %��"#See Section 3.1. Managing Growthe. Be sure that city statutes permit clustering of development.Section 3.3.1.f allows buildings to be cluster for landscaping; clustering is allowed within the Planned Development Zonef. Adopt a policy that conditions annexation and up-zoning upon clustering or use of aTransfer of Development Rights program.General Plan notes that annexation is unlikely and that the town does not have a formal annexation plan; section 3.3.g. Consider the possibility of land exchanges to preserve prime agricultural lands.

Was not found within the document


4.1 Preserve and Connect open spaces and trailsA. Identify on the general plan priority conservation areas within city limits and ��(��0��&��:��"#The zoning map includes a zone for public lands; priority conservation areas do ��#

B. Adopt a policy to ensure all development proposals address open space,

159

App

endi

ces

agriculture and trail elements of Vision Dixie and the general plan.

C. Work with the BLM to identify in or near your community public lands suitable ��%��(��1��!��!��01F!!"#A=�

D. Coordinate your trails plan with adjacent jurisdictions’ and Washington County.The town of Springdale does not currently have a trails plan.

K#�/��0��"� �� planning, including Washington County, Vision Dixie, and the DIXIE MPO.The trails element does not appear to be coordinated with these entities.

F. Where appropriate, be sure the general plan extends and connects areas that are valuable for natural recreation and habitat (e.g. – surface waters, riparian areas, wetlands, forests, grasslands, wildlife habitat, other environmentally ��%��"#It appears the town of Springdale is in the process of identifying these areas; see section 7 of the general plan.

G. Designate in the general plan any hazardous areas in which development is ��0��H��"#Sections 2.2.1.b., 2.2.3.c., 2.3.1.e., 3.2.4.c., and 5.1.2.d. suggest the restructuring of local ordinances to address these issues.

H. Designate a rich, connected natural recreation system to encourage physical and aesthetic enjoyment of the outdoors.The town of Springdale does not currently have a trails plan, though they have ��+#+��(��#�


5.1 Build a system of public transportation�#�B��0�"��(in�� '�(��@!L"#?��(�� #B. Make sure that land-uses and transportation plans are appropriately aligned (e.g. do not locate low density development and other development that is not ��%��"��"#Low density development is currently allowed in designated zones along SR 9. Shuttle stations and low density development are typically not aligned to each other within the zoning map.

160

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

C. If there are planned station areas in your community, designate in the general plan a��-��%��E��0��E��%��"#A=�D. Be sure the general plan encourages intermodal connections throughout the transportation system.Section 9.1.3.b indicates the need to connect sidewalks throughout the town, effectively accomplishing intermodal transportation; 9.1.4.a discusses bike lanes along SR 9

5.2 Reserve major road and transit corridorsA. Provide to the Dixie MPO an opportunity to comment on the transportation element of the general plan.Unable to ascertain. B. Coordinate with the Dixie MPO to appropriately designate in the general plan right-of-way needs for future road and transit corridors.Unable to ascertain. C. Provide to the Dixie MPO general plan conditions and policies that may affect areas of��0�#�#��and��"#

Unable to ascertain.

5.3 Connect the StreetsA. Include in the general plan and in the transportation plan, policies to ensure connectivity between developments (eventually implement the policy in the ��%��"#See Section 9.1.5.c of the general plan. It appears the town of Springdale will have a more detailed grasp on this policy after they complete a town trails plan. B. If necessary to provide coordination to multiple smaller land owners, through detailed subarea planning, determine the location of connected streets.

� A=�

5.4 Build community-friendly streets.A. Designate in the general plan locations for collectors and arterial street segments that pass through existing and planned pedestrian-oriented areas and centers and that should, therefore, have context-sensitive design.$��(�-��%��#�

B. Work with UDOT and others to adopt appropriate context-sensitive road ��0��P��Q��"#$��%��#�

!1BA/B!�K�7�� K$�P/KA$K1K'Q�?U�>L/.�BA � 1LDJ$�LA�D��M�?�K��@BYK'-USE CENTERS

161

App

endi

ces


�#�'��(��0��(��"�centers using criteria suggested by the Vision Dixie Tools.

Not explicit within the plan. B. Include policies and land-use criteria for centers to provide guidance for developers and review agencies.Could not be ascertained.C. For centers that will occupy more than a single property, undertake more detailed sub-area planning to enable multiple land owners to coordinate their efforts over time.Could not be ascertained.

6.2 Provide all the ingredients of mixed-use centers�#�B��o Minimum housing densities that will assure a critical mass in centers. Was not found.��@��H��-��-��%��#�Was not found. o Desirable levels of land-use mixing in centers. See Section 5.1o Street connectivity standards for centers Was not found. ��'��0��"��%��groundH��#�D��#��1��#�D��#�o Parking policies that recognize shared use and locate parking so as to createpedestrian-friendly streets. Section 9.2 addresses the need; Section 9.2.5 addresses this via objectives. o Guidelines for centers that encourage buildings close to, and fronting on, the street. Would need to look at the town’s architectural guidelines. o Policies that support context-sensitive streets or “complete streets” in centers.Was not found��1�� #��)#)#,�suggests the Town of Springdale has a street trees plan. o Sign guidelines and polices such that new signs are oriented and scaled topedestrians. See sections 2.1, 2.1.1 and 9.1.6

!1BA/B!�K�6��'B1K/$� 1LD$J�BAD�1'� 6#9�>�� -��%��#

�#��%��-frog,hopscotch development outward.See Section 3.1. “Managing Growth”

B. Analyze and consult with local developers to identify regulatory barriers to ��%�� 0�"��#�$��(��%��-�� -��0�#�#��

162

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

��"�� #Unable to ascertain.

/#�.��-��0��E��"��%��barriers while ensuring design compatibility.Unable to ascertain.

D. In the general plan, map priority areas for land re-use in your city, such as areas for a new or expanded downtown and centers.K(��E��<��(��#

E. In the general plan, establish policies to charge fees for leap-frog development that are consistent with its higher level of impacts (e.g., longer ��"#Objective 3.1.1 appears to indicate the town is going through the process to ascertain the need and feasibility of such a policy.


8.1 Enable the housing market to meet housing wants and needs.A. In addition to the low densities found in most Dixie communities, be sure the ��0��%��E��"��of housing than isotherwise typical in your city.Objective 5.1.4 calls for increased density allowances when housing is incorporated into mixed uses within the city. Section 5.2.1.b calls for density bonuses when affordable housing is incorporated into a project. ?#��E��-��0��"��

��1�� #Mostly an issue within the residential zones. ��1��0!.'�E��"��anduncertainty the permitting process.��1��(��%��-��#��1��(��%��#��1��(��%��0��"#$��general plan.

8.2 Provide housing for our workforce.�#��?��-��0��E��"��designated for�� #�� proportionate to your projected share of the county’s workforce population. The Dixie Area Workforce Housing Advisory Committee can help you identify appropriate affordability targets, your proportional share, and ways to meet the

163

App

endi

ces

targets.See Section 5.2?#��homesaffordable to the typical workforce.Section 5.2.1.b calls for density bonuses when affordable housing is incorporated into a project.

8.3 Provide most compact housing types in centers.A. Especially for areas where centers are desired, develop policies and regulations that will reduce the barriers to well-designed projects at higher-than-typical densities.Was not found within the general plan.

8.4 Design makes a difference.A. Adopt a basic design review procedure to ensure that areas of higher-than-typical��community.Was not found within the general planB. Include in the general plan basic design standards for appropriate areas, such as�� 0��"��#�/��

o Building height. See Sections 2.2.1.e, 2.2.3.h, 2.3.1.i, 3.2.4.g, and 5.1.2.1 for a discussion on this issue.o Maximum and minimum setbacks from sidewalks. See Springdale’s streetscape plan. o Placement of the garage and parking to maintain a welcome street character. Was not found in the general plan. o Limited repetition of models and colors. The Town of Springdale indicates the need for a materials list in their general plan, see sections 2.2.3.g, 2.3.1.h, 3.2.4.f, and 5.1.2 h.


9.1 Keep areas of prime transportation access for employment and not just for retail.A. Identify in your general plan priority areas or sites for basic employment.Allowed in the Central and Village Commercial Zones

?#��0��"��%��%��-��0�(��"#Was not found within the general plan.

!1BA/B!�K�9*��>L/.�K'�!.?�B/��A'�/LA&K1�BLA��JL.�'��.�$�BA�/L@@.AB$U�GOALS AND PRESERVE CRITICAL LANDS

164

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces


A. Coordinate with the BLM to identify adjacent public lands suitable and �%��(��1��!��!��01F!!"#This is discussed in section 3.3.?#�B�� -��

(contiguous toexisting development or servicesThis is discussed in section 3.3, but it does not appear to identify lands that are P�� -��#Q


A. Coordinate with the BLM to identify adjacent public lands suitable and �%��(��1��!��!��01F!!"#This is discussed in section 3.3.

?#��B�� -��0��(��%��%��"��future development.This is discussed in section 3.3, but it does not appear to identify lands that are P�� -��#Q


A. Work with SITLA and private landowners to identify in the general plan public landssuitable for land exchange or other forms of conservation.Was not found within the general plan.

165

App

endi

ces

Summary of Checklist FindingsWashington County

November 24, 20081�%�� ?��

��K!�79**��1��!��B��'�%��?��/��


No mention of this in the general plan or ordinances; contact Virgin representatives to ��


a. Incompatible land-uses across boundaries No

b. Spacing of centers too close or too far apartNo

c. Discontinuous road systemsSomewhat – 11-5-3 N and O talk about exceptions and it discourages cul-de-sacs and encourages connecting principal streets. The wording on dead-end streets could be stronger

d. Overlapping annexations No


a. Reserving corridors for regional transit and arterial roads�� No

b. !�� No

c. !��%��%�� No

d. Adapting highway designs when they pass through downtowns and developed areas�� A�

1.3 Closely follow general plans-��P��Q��-��0E��%��#"�� #�� that if there is a potential inconsistency, it must be resolved beforehand, rather than be ignored.

!1BA/B!�K�)��/LA�K1&K�D�$K1��A'�@�BA$�BA��B1��A'�D�$K1�R.��B$U)#9�'��:��

a. In the general plan, identify natural hazardous conditions (erosion, ��H��"#

166

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

11-5-5 B1 – says county has general policy of water conservation “where reasonable and appropriate”

b. In making land-use decisions in the general plan, consider pollution from non-point sources, i.e. storm water facilities

c. In the general plan, adopt policies and designate buffer zones around water ��

�#��0��"#�/��(��:�� %��0�� "#

No�#��-��0��E��"��community accessibility and pedestrian, bicycle, and transit travel opportunity.

No2.2 We all need to take actions to use less water

a. Include in the general plan community-wide goals for per capita water consumption.

b. Adopt policies that encourage water conservation (such as the use of (�� "

c. Eliminate barriers to water conservation (such as zoning that precludes small ��"��??

20,000 SF lots for duplex, SFR – 10,000 sf or 12,000 sf minimum, mobile ��7�'.=��

!1BA/B!�K�+�� .�1'�L.1��B A�$.1K��/KAB/��A'�/�!K�+#9�!��

�#�/��%�� H��habitat, drainages, and any other features that are important to the community.

Crude map existsb. Identify and adopt policies necessary to restrict visible development impacts �� %��local character.

3.2 Preserve our agriculture and ranching heritagea. Identify valuable agricultural lands within the communityIdentify valuable agricultural lands within the community

Yes, ag conservation zoneb. In developing the general plan, consider agricultural preservation within the context of economic development (both preservation of local character and ��"#

Yes, ag conservation zone�#��'��P��-��Q��0�"#�0B��E��#"

Yes, ag conservation zoned. In the general plan, include a policy to maintain agricultural zoning until

167

App

endi

ces

development is cost-effective from a long-range perspective (such as when �� %��"#

Yes, ag conservation zonee. Be sure that city statutes permit clustering of development.

Is permitted, but process does not appear clearf. Adopt a policy that conditions annexation and up-zoning upon clustering or use of aTransfer of Development Rights program.

Nog. Consider the possibility of land exchanges to preserve prime agricultural lands.

� � � A=�

!1BA/B!�K�4�-�9*��/��:�� &��'�(��!��#�

168

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

Appendix G:Survey Charts

169

App

endi

ces

170

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

171

App

endi

ces

172

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

173

App

endi

ces

174

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

175

App

endi

ces

176

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

177

App

endi

ces

178

ntr

uti

nu

arAl

ten

lusi

nA

ppen

dice

s

Appendix H:Alternative Future Illustrations

La VerkinBuild out diagrams

rrir

esri

tin

��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

Status Quo Vision Dixie

Balanced Tourism

179

App

endi

ces

Vision Dixie Balanced Tourism

Alternative Plans

180

Status Quo A: Current Development Den-sities Alternative Plan of La Verkin

Status Quo B: Community Zoning Visions Alternative Plan of La Verkin

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

181

App

endi

ces

182

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

183

App

endi

ces

184

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces


La Verkin - 2035 view of the Twist under Vision Dixie Alternative.

185

App

endi

ces

La Verkin - 2035 view of the Twist under Status Quo Alternative.

La Verkin - 2035 view of the Twist under Balanced Tourism Alternative.

186

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

VirginBuild out diagrams


Balanced Tourism

187

App

endi

ces


Alternative Plans

188

Status Quo A: Current Development Den-sities Alternative Plan of Virgin

Status Quo B: Community Zoning Visions Alternative Plan of Virgin

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

Virgin - Present-day view looking northeast.

Virgin - 2035 view looking northeast under Vision Dixie Alternative.

189

App

endi

ces

Virgin - 2035 view looking northeast under Status Quo Alternative.

Virgin - 2035 view looking northeast under Balanced Tourism Alternative.

190

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces


Virgin - 2035 view looking southeast under Vision Dixie Alternative.

191

App

endi

ces

Virgin - 2035 view looking southeast under Status Quo Alternative.

Virgin - 2035 view looking southeast under Balanced Tourism Alternative.

192

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

RockvilleBuild out diagrams


Balanced Tourism

193

App

endi

ces


Alternative Plans

194

Status Quo A: Current Development Den-sities Alternative Plan of Rockville

Status Quo B: Community Zoning Visions Alternative Plan of Rockville

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces


Rockville - 2035 view looking west under Vision Dixie Alternative.

195

App

endi

ces

Rockville - 2035 view looking west under Status Quo Alternative.

Rockville - 2035 view looking west under Balanced Tourism Alternative.

196

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces


Rockville - 2035 view looking east under Vision Dixie Alternative.

197

App

endi

ces

Rockville - 2035 view looking east under Status Quo Alternative.

Rockville - 2035 view looking east under Balanced Tourism Alternative.

198

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

SpringdaleBuild out diagrams


Balanced Tourism

199

App

endi

ces


Alternative Plans

200

Status Quo A: Current Development Den-sities Alternative Plan of Springdale

Status Quo B: Community Zoning Visions Alternative Plan of Springdale

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces


Springdale - 2035 view looking southwest under Vision Dixie Alternative.

201

App

endi

ces

Springdale - 2035 view looking southwest under Status Quo Alternative.

Springdale - 2035 view looking southwest under Balanced Tourism Alternative.

202

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

Springdale and Rockville - Present-day view looking west.

Springdale and Rockville - 2035 view looking west under Vision Dixie Alternative.

203

App

endi

ces

Springdale and Rockville - 2035 view looking west under Status Quo Alternative.

Springdale and Rockville - 2035 view looking west under Balanced Tourism Alternative.

204

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

Appendix I:��

2"&3"�� 0�3��

205

App

endi

ces

2"&3"�� 0�3��

206

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

=� �� 0�3��

207

App

endi

ces

=� �� 0�3��

208

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

�� 0�3��

209

App

endi

ces

�� 0�3��

210

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

'�� "�� 0�3��

211

App

endi

ces

'�� "�� 0�3��

212

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

2 � �� 0�3��

213

App

endi

ces

2 � �� 0�3��

214

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

AN ANALYSIS OF STATE ROUTE 9 FROM LA VERKIN TO SPRINGDALE

The entry roadway into Zion National Park is State Route 9. Zion National Park falls approximately in the middle of this roadway and Route 9 is the end portion ��from surrounding areas. Primary access to Route 9 is from Interstate 15 on the west side of the park, and secondary access comes from U.S. Highway 89 on the east side.

There are six communities along 1��3#�>�� @��Carmel Junction, Springdale, Rockville, Virgin, LaVerkin, and Hurricane. Four communities are of interest in this ��1��%��&��LaVerkin which are all part of the west

entryway into the park. Route 9 links these communities together and brings visitors from I-15 into the corridor. The roadway is one of the few amenities the communities have in common and since the road must serve both visitors and residents it is important to examine how the state of the highway might enhance ��%��towns as well as augment the experience of the visitor.

The issues related to the roadway that ��load, road widening, speed limits, the character of each town, pull-offs for viewing and interpretation, trail head access, road alignment, landscape, view corridors, land use and scenic byway designation.

Appendix J:Highway Analysis

215

App

endi

ces

From LaVerkin to Mt. Carmel Junction, Route 9 traverses some incredibly scenic landscapes with one of the world’s most beautiful national parks in the center. Questions currently facing the community and land managers �� 1��3�0��"�should be designated as a scenic byway. The issues discussed above must be addressed regardless of the decision that is made in relation to scenic byway designation.

The four communities adds to the interest and character of the highway �(��#�K��and offers “local color” visually and through various services and places to eat, visit and shop.

� � ��'"��Route 9 is predominantly comprised of one lane in each direction. During ��H� ��hampered by slow moving recreation %��#�D��0��"� ��%��sensitively. This means minimizing the disruption to the existing landscape by ��and blending proposed grades into the existing landscape in a natural and gentle way. However, within the communities of Virgin, Rockville and

Springdale the highway should be limited to two lanes (one lane in each ��"��%�� (� ��#

RealignmentIn addition to pull-offs and additional lanes, realigning the roadway in some locations would enhance the aesthetic ��#�$��adding curves that will augment views ��#�$��addition of a median, when possible, to �� a more aesthetically pleasing road and will reduce the visual impact of four lanes of paving. Adding color to the asphalt paving that compliments the existing colors in the landscape also adds a level �� visitor know they are in a special place.

Making Route 9 a Journey and a Destination. Within the undeveloped areas there are many opportunities for pull-offsto accommodate locations for special views, access to trails, interpretation of geography, history, and the landscape. However, most of these opportunities have not been developed and the existing stopping points are not safe for pulling off and back onto the highway. If

216

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

the arrival to Zion National Park is to be memorable, facilities must be developed that provide these opportunities, and the facilities must designed to be safe, comfortable and appealing.

There may be times when trail systems for pedestrians and bikes need to be incorporated near or adjacent to the roadway. In such cases the trail should be separate from the edge of road if possible and the space in between should be landscaped if it has been disturbed. See sketch below.

Informal walkway alignments (long, ��%��"�� %��possible along with informal native landscape treatment. Provide for stormwater in drainage swales on each side of the road unless there are existing, historic rock canals or existing codes that ��#�

Areas where the existing landscape has been disturbed along the roadway should be re-vegetated using native, drought tolerant plants.

Entry signs to communities should blend ��0��F��"�� unobtrusive. Community entry areas and entry signs should be landscaped with ��%��=��%��(��landscape. Springdale’s entry sign is a good example.

SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVES

There are many possibilities for changing the roadway, but these changes can be ��E��

C� $�� 0��"�� the landscape and the right-of-way will allow.

C� Secondly, four lanes could be incorporated on a limited basis, widening the road only in areas outside of the communities and where it could be seamlessly incorporated into the environment (minimization of ��"��

C� Third, four lanes would only be implemented outside of communities �� %��#�These four lane sections would be divided with a landscaped median.

217

App

endi

ces

ALTERNATIVE AC� 4 Lanes Where PossibleC� 4 lanes through undeveloped

landscape unless natural features prevent

C� 4 lanes through communities when ROW exists

C� wide shoulder for pull-offsC� shoulder bike lanes where possible ��=�� 1LD

C� native landscape in disturbed areas and enhanced native landscape along roadsides

ALTERNATIVE BC� 4 Lanes Limited4 lanes through

undeveloped landscape unless natural features prevent

C� 2 lanes through communitiesC� pull-outs for view stops, interpretation

and trail headsC� wide shoulders for pull-offs where a

pull-out cannot be accommodated C� bike lanes within ROW detached

where possibleC� native landscape in disturbed areas

and enhanced native landscape along roadsides

ALTERNATIVE CC� 4 Lanes Limited and Re-alignedC� ��-��

and to add visual interest where possible

C� 4 lanes with a median through undeveloped landscape where possible

C� pull-outs and pull offs for view locations, interpretation, and trail heads

C� bike lanes within ROW detached where possible.

218

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

219

App

endi

ces

220

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

221

App

endi

ces

222

ntr

uti

nu

arrri

res

riti

n��

��

Alte

rnat

ive

Futu

res

nlu

sin

App

endi

ces

223

App

endi

ces

224

Utah State UniversityDepartment of Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning

Old Main Hill 4005, Logan UT 84322

Zion Canyon Corridor Futures Study - Five County AOG Canyon Corridor Futures Study ... students to...

Documents

Transcript of Zion Canyon Corridor Futures Study - Five County AOG Canyon Corridor Futures Study ... students to...