Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z WRITTEN PUBLIC INPUT APRIL 27, 1994Rexburg/Madison County Planning and Zoning Commission Rexburg City Hall 12 N Center Rexburg, ID 83440 Commission Members: First of all we are very glad to see the city and county taking an active part in planning for the future. We only wish it could have happened a few years ago. We live in the two story house that borders on the north side of the property Mr. Rammell would like to have zoned "Light Industrial". If this Zoning request is granted it would be devastating to my family as well as Mr. Ceja who has purchased the property on the north side of our home. He plans on building a house in the near future. When we purchased this ground over nine years ago, we were told by the seller they would sell the remaining ground three and one half acres to put in more housing. Years later when the seller got back the five acres on the south of us and they hadn't sold the other three and one half acres, they told us there would be at least three more houses on the frontage. So we feel that this area that we live in should be made "Rural Residential" as you have already shown in your map of the Impact Zone. By granting to Mr. Rammell his property be zoned "Light Industrial" it would also affect the many people who have homes also in this area. A banker told us if we ever wanted to sell our home, it would be very difficult for someone to get a loan. We ask the commission to deny the request for "Light Industrial" zoning throughout our area in adopting the Impact Zone. If someone wants to put an industrial facility in our area, we feel that they should go through the variance procedures necessary and a public hearing should be held on their request. We would like our area to be zoned "Rural Residential". We trust the commission will accept our request in this matter. Thank you, April 9, 1994 To: Nile Boyle, Mayor City of Rexburg Dell Barney, Chairman Madison County Commission Gentlemen: M This letter is in response to your letter addressed to County Residents, dated April 4, 1994, regarding the Rexburg Impact Zone. The undersigned either reside or own property being considered in the Area of the Rexburg City Impact Zone, hereafter referred to as the Impact Zone. Specifically, the area we are addressing is located north of the Rexburg Cemetery Road (1500 North), south of the Hegsted corner (2000 North), on the west side of the Salem Road for approximately one half (1/2) mile. The "Rexburg Impact Zone Boundary" map reflects that the east half of our farm is being impacted and zoned Agriculture - 1 while the west half is not being impacted or zoned. Our property would be subject to two different governing bodies and two sets of regulations. It would be better to have ALL our property governed by Madison County regulations. There appears to be an inconsistency in the proposed Impact Zone as property owners to the west, south, and southwest of our property, which border or nearer to the City of Rexburg, are NOT included in the Impact Zone. Our land does not border the City of Rexburg and is over one half (1/2) mile to a mile from the Rexburg City limits. There is a definite inconsistency. We would like to go on record that our land as outlined above should NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE IMPACT ZONE at this time. We are only asking to be fair and consistent with other property owners in the area. We are not asking for special consideration but only that which we feel to be fair and consistent. Sincerely, Marie Sakota Kenneth T. Sakota EPA ou as K. Sak to Lorraine Naneko Kazuo akota ka8�tA , 5;4� Darwin Sakota �., • ■Yi •11 �- Holden )vid an D. Eleanor Sakota Wen Sa to ALId rey 441 den a a - ° a a /SHE NILE NILE L. BOYLE MAYOR ROSE BAGLEY, CITY CLERK RICHARD HORNER, TREASURER 8 FINANCIAL OFFICER Dear County Resident, 0/ .1 exlag°y STATE OF IDAHO P.O. BOX 280 12 NORTH CENTER STREET REXBURG, IDAHO 83440 PHONE (208) 3593020 April 4, 1994 FAX (208) 3593022 County records indicate that you either reside or own property in an area surrounding the city of Rexburg that is presently being considered to be included in an Area of City Impact, more commonly refered to in recent public meetings and by the news services as the Rexburg Impact Zone. The impact zone is a geographical description of lands in Madison County which lie adjacent to the city limits of Rexburg and which are considered by the Rexburg City Council and the Madison County Commissioners as having a definite influence and impact on the future of the City of Rexburg. Pursuant to Idaho Code 67-6526, the governing board of each county and each city located within the county is required to adopt by ordinance a map identifying an area of city impact within the unincorporated area of the county. Adoption of the map is to occur prior to October 1, 1994. Enclosed herewith is a copy of a proposed impact zone map which has been developed as a result of comments, suggestions and requests of both city and county residents, many of whom reside in the proposed impact zone boundaries. The Commissioners and the City Council intend to present this proposed impact zone map at public hearings for the purpose of obtaining public comment and opinion regarding possible approval and adoption of the impact zone map prior to the October 1, 1994 deadline. The statute also requires that an additional ordinance be adopted that will provide for the application of plans and ordinances in the impact zone. This ordinance is to be adopted no later than January 1, 1995. It is the intent of the Commissioners and the City Council to propose enactment of many of the provisions contained in the 1991 Rexburg Zoning Ordinance in the above described impact zone. In addition, new ordinances which address the very unique qualities as well as concerns of rural living close to city boundaries are also being considered. These ordinances will also be presented at the public hearings for the purpose of soliciting public comment and opinion regarding possible approval and adoption of proposed ordinances in the impact zone. Because of your particular interest in the impact zone, you are invited to attend a public information meeting to be held on April 21, 1994 between the hours of 2:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. at the Rexburg City Council Room, Rexburg City Hall. The information meeting will be open to all of the public. It will be informal and will allow those who participate to spend whatever time they may deem necessary in reviewing the impact zone map, reading the proposed ordinances and having questions answered regarding the proposed impact zone. Formal hearings wherein oral and written comments and testimony are invited and encouraged will be held on April 26, 1994 at 7:00 p.m. at the Madison County Library. We urge you to attend and participate in both the information meetings and the public hearings. Sincerely, Nile Bo lei a or Y Y City of Rexburg Dd 6'tfamey,Chairman v Madison County Commission J NOTICE OF INFORMATIONAL MEETING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that members of the joint Rexburg/Madison County Planning and Zoning Commission will be available to explain the proposed area of Rexburg city impact and zoning of said area within the unincorporated area of Madison County from 2:00 p.m. until 8:00 p.m. on Thursday, April 21, 1994, at the Rexburg City Council chambers, 12 North Center, Rexburg, Idaho. Maps, zoning classifications and copies of proposed ordinances will also be available to the public. All interested persons are invited to come in and discuss the proposals with Commission members. DATED this 24th day of March, 1994. ty ely Cir] Madison County Clerk NOTICE OF INFORMATIONAL MEETING -1- /lr DEFINITIONS OF AGRICULTURAL ZONES AGRICULTURAL ZONE "A-1" (aT This is intended to anticipate expansion of the city into agricultural areas (lands) and to preserve agricultural production on those areas. (b) Permitted uses in the "A-1" Zone include all primary agricultural production activities and their accessory uses and buildings, including farm homes. No more than ten (10) livestock are permitted in an "A-1" zone. However, this does not include such commercial enterprises or businesses as produce packing plants, fur farms, veterinary clinics, animal hospitals, feed lots, poultry and egg farms, hog farms, dog kennels,.honey processing, commercial breeding establishments and similar uses which would constitute a "business" as opposed to that of the raising of agricultural crops and/or pasture. (c) The minimum size parcel shall be five (5) acres or more. (d) Conditional uses in the "A-1" Zone include: 1. Public and quasi -public recreational facilities and/or buildings. 2. Home occupations. 3. Cemeteries. AGRICULTURAL ZONE "A-2" (a) This is intended to anticipate expansion of the city into agricultural areas (Lands) and to preserve agricultural production on those areas. (b) Permitted uses in the "A-2" Zone include all primary agricultural production activities and their accessory uses and buildings, including farm homes. Livestock is permitted in an "A-2" Zone. However, this does not include such commercial enterprises or businesses as produce packing plants, fur farms, veterinary clinics, animal hospitals, feed lots, poultry and egg farms, hog farms, dog kennels, honey processing, commercial breeding establishments and similar uses which would constitute a "business" as opposed to that of the raising of livestock, agricultural crops and/or pasture. (c) The minimum size parcel shall be five (5) acres or more. (d) Conditional uses in the "A-2" Zone include: 1. Public and quasi -public recreational facilities and/or buildings. 2. Home occupations. 3. Cemeteries. RURAL RESIDENTIAL ZONE (RR) The RR zone is established to protect stable neighborhoods of detached family dwellings on lots of one acre or more up to five (5) acres. The minimum width shall be 150 feet; the minimum front yard shall be 60 feet from the property line or 90 feet from the center line of the road, whichever is greater; the minimum rear yard shall be 30 feet from the property line; and the minimum side yard shall be six inches for every foot of building foot height with a 10 foot minimum. No structure shall be erected to a height greater than 30 feet to eave heighth, measured from natural grade at the building site. There can be only one single family dwelling per lot; there can be no animals nor fowl except for household pets unless the lot exceeds five (5) acres or more (then, two domestic livestock shall be permitted for each acre to be used solely for said livestock); and the lot owner must install curb and gutter or drainage facility approved in advance by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The maximum lot coverage by buildings, including the dwelling, shall be 50 percent. In the RR zone, on certain streets and county roads designated by the Citv of Rexburg and Madison County as major arterials, all such lots shall not have direct access to said major arterials. All lots adjoining a designated major arterial shall comply with the following requirements: 1. Such lots shall have reverse frontage on the designated major arterials. 2. Such lots shall be buffered from the major arterial by any effective combination of the following: lot depth, earth berms, vegetation, walls or fences, and structural soundproofing. 3. The minimum lot depth shall be two hundred (200) feet except where the use of berms, vegetation, and structures can be demonstrated to constitute an effective buffer for a dwelling on a lot less than two hundred (200) feet in depth. 4. Whenever practical, existing roadside trees shall be saved and used in the arterial buffer. 5. Site plans, subdivision requirements, annexation and development agreements shall include provisions for installation and continued maintenance of arterial buffers and compliance with all city and county ordinances applicable within the area of city impact. DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC LIVESTOCK: Cattle, horses, donkeys, mules, burros, pigs, goats, sheep, llamas, buffaloes and reindeer. Revised 2/24/94 Attention: Planning & Zoning Members I am requesting that the piece of property I own on HWY 33 West out by the Hibbard junction, on the north side of the road, be changed to HBD to allow me to build a clinic on the corner. G' 192 East 1000 North Rexburg, Idaho 83440 April 26, 1994 Dear Madison County and City of Rexburg; We met with you about zoning in the county on April 21, 1994. In visiting with you (Jerry Jeppesen and John Millar), you said our land would remain as requested. We realize that Madison County will have much growth in the next few years. We also realize that our land is a prime target for growth. We specified that we wanted our land to remain agricultural and residential at this time. This nsfarm ground and at the present time it is all pasture and alfalfa hay. We have had animals (horses and cows) up to 25 head,' for the last 25 years on this property. At present we have three horses. We have not replaced the cows since returning from a Mission. REQUEST: 1. All land to remain agricultural and residential at this time. 2. This includes the land labeled Heavy Industrial and business, just north of the WALMART property, and along the highway north of Rexburg. 3. We retain the right to have up to 25 head of cattle. 4. We have children who want to build in this area. Their names are on this property with us. We have told the LDS Church they could have land for a building. They have opportunity to use this at any time. 5. We want the privilege to sit down and talk with you about our land instead of you demanding what we do, as we still believe in a free land, not a dictatorship. We are just as interested in Madison County and the City of Rexburg as you are, but if we as citizens of Madison County and the City of Rexburg have no rights about what we want to do with our property then we are opposed to this zoning. Sincerely, ` Pax. ) �� Rexburg / Madison County Planning and Zoning Commission Rexburg City Hall 12 N Center Rexburg, Idaho 83440 Members; As residents of the Rexburg Acres Subdivisionand the Widdison Subdivision, in the proposed Rexburg City Impact Zone, we would like to take the opportunity to applaud the actions of the Rexburg City Planning and Zoning commission on their recent decision to enact an Impact Zone around the city. We join in support of the Impact Zone and the proposed plan as presented in your letter of April 4. As residential neighborhoods, we have been concerned with recent development in and around the proposed Impact Zone. As the city grows, we feel that one day we will be included in the expanded city limits, and are concerned, as you are, that the growth is managed in a manner beneficial to both the city and our neighborhoods. We recommend that the commission adopt the plan as outlined in the map included with Your recent letter. We have been particularly concerned about recent development between our two neighborhoods that we feel if left unchecked, could adversely affect our neighborhoods and future city planning. The development of storage buildings is not a nuisance as they exist, but our concern is that further expansion to adjoining properties could become a problem in the future. We strongly recommend that the rural residential zoning as outlined in your letter be adopted as shown on your map. We assume that the existing storage buildings will be grand- fathered, and we would definitely be against changing the zoning to anything other than rural residential. It has come to our attention that there has been a request to change zoning of some property in the area to "Light Industrial." We feel that this zoning classification is not in harmony with a residential area such as ours and others in our area and ask that the commission deny this request in adopting the Impact Zone. If there is a desire to place an industrial facility in our area, we feel that at this point, it would be only fair for those involved to go through the variance procedures and allow public hearing on that specific request. We trust that the commission will accept our request in the spirit it is intended. Our concern is that neighborhoods and subdivisions such as ours are not only allowed, but encouraged in the planning process. By placing the rural residential designation on our area, we feel that other neighborhoods such as ours will develop, providing the city with a natural growth path to the west. Signed; Attached list of residents of the Rexburg Acres and Widdison Addition subdivisions A G SI C�ilcirnn� ao-v„�-�� A Rexburg / Madison County Plamring and Zoning Commission Rexburg City Hall 12 N Center Rexburg, Idaho 83440 Members; As residents of the Rexburg Acres Subdivisionand the Widdison Subdivision, in the proposed Rexburg City Impact Zone, we would like to take the opportunity to applaud the actions of the Rexburg City Planning and Zoning commission on their recent decision to enact an Impact Zone around the city. We join in support of the Impact Zone and the proposed plan as presented in your letter of April 4. As residential neighborhoods, we have been concerned with recent development in and around the proposed Impact Zone. As the city grows, we feel that one day we will be included in the expanded city limits, and are concerned, as you are, that the growth is managed in a manner beneficial to both the city and our neighborhoods. We recommend that the commission adopt the plan as outlined in the map included with your recent letter. We have been particularly concerned about recent development between our two neighborhoods that we feel if left unchecked, could adversely affect our neighborhoods and future city planning. 'The development of storage buildings is not a nuisance as they exist, bill our concern is that further expansion to adjoining properties could become a problem in the future. We strongly recommend that the rural residential zoning as outlined in your letter be adopted as shown on your map. We assume that the existing storage buildings will be grand- fathered, and we would definitely be against changing the zoning to anything other than Waal residential. It has come to our attention that there has been a request to change zoning of some properly in the area to "Light Industrial." We feel that this zoning classification is not in harmony with a residential area such as ours and others in our area and ask that the commission deny this request in adopting the Iupact Zone. If there is a desire to place all industrial facility in our area, we feel that at this point, it would be only fair for those involved to go through the variance procedures and allow public hearing on that specific request. We trust that the commission will accept our request in the spirit it is intended. Our concern is that neighborhoods and subdivisions such as ours are not only allowed, but encouraged in the planning process. By placing the rural residential designation on our area, we feel that other neighborhoods such as ours will develop, providing the city with a natural growth path to the west. Signed; Attached list of residents of the Rexburg Acres and Widdison Addition subdivisions 231 S 1 "V coas' - 3S6 leo w ryo S. 3s�-S7Y� X356 381` t55owi Icf4D ZD S344a -2 Ifo S. 9- 3 YYa. 3 r6 IS -.35' w loos . -7�1. 9399 -O �.� 549 S ISDo w W 3 q -o cA•��M�x.aeaw -- wMM � nom nx v �-� CITY OF REXBURG MADISON COUNTY, IDAHO OI ��!7 ENE110"Im, ':I �■iuu - / WIN �■ �_y . ����■ r■fJ■■■IIIY111�1'1�'' . I �,,,� 111 �� ;,■7y■. -- ,, J:► FAA �eeei Rvlax •. . 9-- Planning & Zoning Public Hearing Impact Zone 4/26/94 7:00 P. M. Those Present: Planning & Zoning: John Millar, Richard Smith, Jerry Jeppesen, Mary Ann Mounts, Davawn Beattie, Jeff Walters. Mayor & City Council: Mayor Nile Boyle, Councilmembers- Bruce Sutherland, Jim Flamm, Nyle Fullmer, Kay Beck. County Commissioners: Dell Barney & Marlin Hill. Also Present: City Attorney- J. D. Hancock, City Clerk- Rose Bagley, County Clerk- Beth Reese, City Engineer- Joe Laird. Richard Smith welcomed everyone in attendance. He explained that a personal notice was sent to every land owner residing or owning land in the Impact Zone. A copy of the Impact Zone map was displayed. Many attended an Informational Hearing held last week. During the time frame that he had worked with the City Council, County Commissioners, Planning & Zoning, and County Planning Committee, I can guarantee you they have done everything in their power to try to obtain input from people living in the Impact Zone as well as people living outside of the proposed Impact Zone regarding what they want to have done, regarding what type of ordinances they want, regarding the size and shape of the Impact Zone. They have done everything in there power to try to as you notice on the map, we went through that map very clearly tried to maintain every existing use as it exists today. If the land is agricultural, it was zoned agricultural; if it was residential, it was zoned residential; if it was rural residential, we tried to make it rural residential. There was only one or two limited exceptions where zones were not as they are with the existing use today. Many of the people at this meeting had input as to how you wanted your property zoned. The committee was very responsive to those comments and suggestions. He wanted to assure the people that these bodies had done everything in their power to try to answer the questions with regard to the Impact Zone and to try to be responsive to all suggestions. This is first of two hearings with regard to the Impact Zone. This .hearing is to give input to the Planning & Zoning committee. The Planning & Zoning Committee has been authorized by the city and county to administer this Impact Zone. The reason and purpose we are here tonight is to seek input from the people regarding the feelings on this Impact Zone. We invite everyone here that has an opinion or suggest or comment. It is very important that if you make a comment or suggestion, that you give you name, sign up on the sheet and also when you first start give your name and address so we can get it for the record. As a matter of courtesy we would ask all those attending to allow those who live in Impact Zone to testify first. We will try to finish up with the hearing by 8:30 P. M. If you have individual questions regarding the Impact Zone and you feel uncomfortable about discussing it in front of this group, please know that every member of the Planning & Zoning, every member of the City Council, and every member of the county Commission are more than willing to answer those questions and listen to your comments individually as well as in this public hearing. He wanted to make it clear that this group is here for the purpose to take input and are trying to do what is right and what the community wants and not what is going to be implemented by the court. In his opinion we have no choice, we will have an Impact Zone in the near future. We hope this Impact Zone will be developed by the people and not arbitrarily by a party filing suit. This public hearing tonight is not a forum for debate and argument regarding the legality of the Impact Zone and the legality of what the Planning & Zoning is doing or what the city and county are doing nor should it address constitutional issues. It should not be debated here tonight. Those of you who feel very strongly about legality of these issues and the constitutionality of these issues, we invite you to stand and express your opinions but do not want to get into a a debate. Terrell R. Woodmansee- I am here tonight to request that the piece of property I have on Hwy 33 West out by the Hibbard junction, on the north side of the road, be changed to HBD. The reason for that is, he bought the property a long time ago hoping he could someday establish a clinic on that corner. It has taken a little longer than he had thought. He would like the board to give that consideration. He would submit this in writing. Richard Smith- Invited anyone that would like to submit written testimony to the Planning & Zoning. Eric Erickson- 1609 West 930 South- He read a letter signed by 39 of his neighbors. (attached) Letter in support of Impact Zone, Ray W Walker- 1270 Barney Dairy Road- (1) Why was the Walker family singled out and set aside on the Impact Zone all by its self? On the map on one side of the river they have R.R, 22 acres of that is water and river bottom pasture. Your Federal Rules Bays you cannot build a house within 300 feet of the river, because of the sewage and drainage. On the map they have R.R. right next to the river and in the river. Which on of you people would like to build a house in the river? All of the property next to Barney Dairy road is all agricultural. We have some new homes, but I have not had any increase in those new homes in the last four or five years. I could sell every acre I have within 30 days with people coming to me and asking to buy lots. We have been very particular with what we have been letting in on the property. We try to pick good neighbors and people who will build nice homes. The other day they planted about 150 trees along the Barney Dairy road to line the whole road back 20 feet from the road on each side. I would like to know if you let it go R.R. near the river bottom and is taken in by the city, the taxes will be higher because it is waste ground and pasture ground. I have no problem with the Impact Zone, but I -think every person Bhould be treated fairly. His neighbor came in and complained and he was taken off the Impact Zone and other neighbors complained and was taken off the Impact Zone. He wanted to know why they were singled out? (2) The Walker family has done more for Rexburg than any family in Rexburg. The road from Barney Dairy past the school was given to the county by the Walker family and wasn't even deeded to them until about four years ago. That road was built with matching funds. When his dad died, he told Ray to make sure that road got in. All there gravel pita after the flood, 60 acres 40 feet deep was dug out to fill Rexburg back up was donated by the Walker family. He felt they deserve a little bit of consideration for what they have done for the city. I want the Impact Zone to be fair. I want it zoned for the river bottoms where it should be, where the houses should be and the farming ground should be. He asked what High Industrial was because some of the agricultural ground was zoned High Industrial? He asked for consideration that it be zoned right. If you tie our hands and feet we are not going to do anything, it will completely stop everything that is going on. He wants it written in the ordinance somewhere that they can develops their ground and protect the small person that can't afford to buy an acre of ground. Give us a chance to break our ground in 1/2 acre lots. Don't try to enforce curb and gutter on us unless it is enforced in the City, make it fare for everyone. Richard Smith- Regarding your proposal to look at the Zoning on your property, We invite you to talk to a member of the Planning & Zoning and give your input, so we can work with you. If you will have this input in by May 11, we will have a work meeting to work out these problems. Keith Walker- He questioned the property that is exempt, everyone needs to be be treated alike. It needs to be enforced though the county. Look at the homes on Barney Dairy Road, they are a model for the community, they have 160 feet of frontage on one acre lots. We planted over 100 trees. You need to go look at it and see if we need planning. We are fussy about who builds there. He questioned that road being a Farm to Market road? It is not a Farm to Market road, the only trucks on there is Craig Smith's, you see more jogging and biking on that road, it is one of the few places you can do that. We meet all the health department regulations. He questioned the restrictions, some are too restrictive, not many people can't afford to buy 5 acres of ground and then afford to put a house on too. We are trying to encourage development in the community, that is not how you do it. Satisfy the state but make it flexible enough and solve the problems. Someone said there are sewage problems out there, he would like to know where? If there is a problem lets solve it, but don't create a problem. Lets help the community and help people find a place to live. You need to incorporate all the county with the same restrictions. We are too far out in the county for the city to come out and dictate rules. Ray Walker- Years ago the Barney Dairy road was sage brush and a wagon trail. The old deeds go to the middle of the road. Years ago the county only had a usage permit on the road. Doug Sakota- 1779 North Salem Road- Reading a letter signed by 11 of the property owners. (copy) To summarize what they are petitioning is simple. They are petitioning to have the Impact Zone go up the Rexburg Cemetery road and to exclude their property at this time. They are not against Zoning and are not saying they don't want to be included in the Impact Zone at a later date. They would like to watch the growth of the city to Bee how it does develope. They would like a set of County ordinances and regulations supplied to them so they could study they to see how the city wants to see it regulated and zoned that might apply to them at a later date. He asked when they would vote on any changes? Richard told him the next work meeting would be on May 11, at that meeting they will consider all comments and the Planning & Zoning will make a proposal to the County Commissioners and City Council. Any vote will be Public. (they would like a copy of the vote) Doug Btated that he would give his personal assurance that they would not develops in the near future and if they do they would keep in mind the pertinent city ordinances. They are asking that the city be consistent with their neighbors on all the rulings that are outlined. Bill Conway- 1550 West 190 South- He would like to express his agreement with Eric Erickson's comments. He had become very interested in zoning, his home is now adjacent to a motel and he is concerned about it. He feels he had a loss of property value right now. He would not have bought the property himself if there had been a motel there. He is concerned that there will be additional commercial type development in that area. He hates to see further storage sheds put in. He is in favor of R.R. requirements in that area. He did not get a notice. His neighbor Boyd Cardon was not notified. He understood there is a grandfather clause and wanted to know on the requirements on curb and gutter. He wants the R.R. zoning for his area. Richard stated that we searched records in the county to send out notices. If we missed anyone we apologize. We will also make themselves available to go through another information meeting to answer any questions, to answer any questions on curb and gutter and sidewalks. In R.R. there area none, in new sub divisions the probably will be. Anyone that was not sent a notice, please sign up on a sheet and we will be sure you are notified. Spencer Larson- 549 South 1500 West- I built a two story white house and a have a letter to read. (copy) William Klingler- 1776 South 1000 West- He is in the area of Impact and his property is zoned R.R. He was unable to attend the Information meeting last week. He understood there would be a Grandfather clause. He wanted to appeal, that they not be terribly specific on some of the regulations. The restrictions should be to protect the infrastructure without setbacks. He recognized that we need to protect drainage. His concern is that as it is written is not the intent. In R.R. no animals are permitted. In the Informational hearing it was stated that the intent was to have two domestic animals per acre beyond the acre that the house sets on, the proposed ordinance shows R.R. is five acres. We would like to make it nice, but not too difficult. We have had animals in our neighborhood inconsistently. He was appealing to not make restrictions to eliminate people and don't make restrictions unless they are important restrictions. Boyd Cardon- 1535 West 2900 South- I did not receive a mailing. He supported the letter by Eric Erickson. Keep it simple and make it easy and don't make regulations you can't enforce, it is not practical. He was concerned with the motel going in and they were not given an opportunity to have a say. He was concerned about the storage units. He would like his property zoned R.R.. He appreciated the intent for guidelines. Keep it Simple. Doug J. Smith- 1678 West 1600 North- He applauded the work of the committee. He was concerned about the traffic on every arterial road, being mobbed by traffic. He remembered the Barney Dairy Road, they use to race that road when he was in High School. There is a concern that road was originally a farm to market road, right now it isn't. We are impacting a great deal upon the Agricultural Community by not doing some planning, by not doing some earlier. The road down off the bench, the Millhollow road is a classic example of failure to plan. As sub divisions go in County Areas, he thought there should be some concern about pumping sewage in the ground. He had personally experienced his own well having problems for the past two winters. His well is deep, but he has concern about it. There should be wisdom in maintaining property owners rights to certain things as they plan and build a home, that can't be done if there isn't any rules or laws to protect them and a mobile home goes up in your back yard. He supported the Impact Zone. De Loy Ward- 1432 South 1000 West- He discussed a green belt in BRIGHAM City and they kept putting more restrictions on them. Farmers can't even sell property to their family. They can only put a house in a development. They have to have curb and gutter and it costs a lot of money. Because of this the youth is leaving the area. We will be doing the same thing. There are roads in the city without paving and curb and gutter. Be careful before you go too far. We will strangle the thing. You need to make room for our youth. In Bingham they have to get permission for the people to use the area. Let people make decisions in their own area. He wondered why for example if someone wanted to put in a trailer house, they would have to get permission from the neighbors around them and then if you have a problem, you have a hearing. Why can't we use some modernization and let the people in the area decide and we will make our own Impact Zone inside of a an Impact Zone? Why can't we let the people in a small area make their own decisions? Richard - He stated that he really did not want to get this into a debate, but in many respects, that is exactly what we are doing. A city like Salt Lake creates an Impact Zone, and a city the size of Rexburg is just having a few neighbors get together and talking about what they accomplish, just like you said. When you talk about having five or six neighbors agree on a development in the county, for example the arterial roads, every person in the county pays for roads. If you had six people who want to take a piece of property and convert an arterial road into a nice residential street, he suggests that possibly isn't fair for the rest of the tax payers who have paid for that asset. If six people agreed to put a small sub division in the county with sub standard roads, inadequate water system and do it very poorly and then say they want to sell lots to some people and these are now county roads and we want the county to take care of these roads. Who pays for these roads, it is the rest of the county residents. When you start talking about groups of people and you think you are only affecting them, when they start depending up county and city facilities, really they affect the entire body. There is no doubt whether you agree with it or not agree with it, we have a State mandate that the Impact Zone will be in effect by 1994- 1995. If we don't stand up to that issue and address it as a community, an individual will come in and start talking water quality and arterials and you will have an Impact Zone and plan that is not acceptable. We have tried to address the mandate that we have. We will go over the testimony tonight and address it. Dusty Cureton- 1575 West 930 South- He agrees with what Eric Erickson has said. There is Spence and the storage sheds and then his property. I would not like business or industry to go in next to me. Lee Warnick-231 South 1500 West- He would join with the neighbors in support of R.R. What are you going to have during now and when the Impact Zone is implemented, will we have time that people will try to meet the deadline? Richard- We discussed this issue and we have not declared any kind of an emergency. Lee stated then people seeing this coming up could do what they want and make some developments to their property that could be contradictory to what the board is trying to do? Richard that is correct. Boyd Cardon- Asked if it had been entertained to have a moratorium? Richard told him we talked about it and under the statue there area provisions where by a city and county can put a moratorium in effect. The county commissioners, city council and Planning & Zoning talked about it, and he can say without reservation that all of those bodies, although not unanimous, felt it would be a little burdensome. We need to move ahead and get this done. Boyd Cardon stated with regard to any development that will go in, he felt it was in the interest of the property owners that before they do something that they get permission of the property owners of the adjacent property. Richard said that is a good idea, but there is no provision by law. The Statue provides that unless the county has the Comprehensive Plan they can't go ahead. Dell Barney- We have had several come to the commission to approve a plat for what ever they wanted to put in, and the course they have taken is to ask them to go to our Planning Commission and see if it is compatible with the plans they are trying to put together and so far that has worked really well. Until we get a plan in effect, we don't even have the authority to tell them to do that. It is important that we do have a plan that we get something together, but we need to put it together us as a body. Not just the ones up on the stand but all of us and that is why we are here tonight is to get comments. There was a question when the vote will be taken? He assured them that vote will not be taken until all these concerns are addressed. He had some concerns of his own. All of these concerns will be addressed before the final vote. We ask for your help. Ray Walker- We are not against Planning & Zoning. We just don't want to be singled out. We had a lot of people on that road cleaning it up. We have good neighbors. Dell Barney- Thanked everyone for the good comments tonight. Don Donahoo- 366 West 2000 South -(1) On the Impact Zone it should be defined what an Arterial is and where it is? (2) That the Grandfather Clause be clear and distinct. That it lays out the right of the person that has already purchased and built on property that is in the Impact Zone. (3) There should be provisions for resolving an exception. There will be times someone will petition for an exception. Richard closed the Hearing and told everyone that they appreciated the tone of the meeting. Anyone that was not on the list, please leave your name. We have a mandate and we also have an opportunity between now and October to get together and develops an Impact Zone. He stated that he was convinced if we fail to do that, someone will file a Rite of Mandate and there will be greater regulations than any of us contemplate. We need to stand up and implement Zoning as we wan t it. Z 4-20-94 Rexburg City of P.O. Box Rexburg, Impact Zone Committee Rexburg/Madison County 280 Idaho 83440 Re: Impact Zone Proposals Dear Committee: We applaud your efforts to create an impact zone in our community. Wise planning is essential for progressive growth. We received your notice indicating that a small parcel of property of ours lies within the proposed boundaries. We own apx. 2 1/2 acres near the freeway. A copy of our legal description is attached for your review. We request that this land be zoned light industrial rather than rural residential as your map indicates. We feel that our area that borders the freeway, and that has recently constructed storage units both north and south of us would be more appropriately light industrial. There is a nice home that is north of our lot located at 549 S. 1500 W., but they lie in between the storage units as well. We purchased that property with the goal of possibly building a storage facility there. This would be a quiet, non-polluting facility, and in our mind wouldn't become a nuisance to the home next to us. Keep in mind that the freeway is noisy and constant. We purchased this land assuming that such an area would not be residential, considering the storage units in place. We respectfully request that you classify our lot as light industrial. We would come to your meetings scheduled for public input, but for necessary health reasons we must be in Salt Lake City for medical care on those dates. Please present and read this letter into your record or at the meetings in our absence. Thank you for your consideration, we appreciate it. Sincerely, 4� aGtG�"L erri 1 and Hobbi Rammel MR/attachment. rtrst+}�enca)(tO Q�J�ODeaY WARRANTY DEED Value Received John L. Steiner, Personal Representative of the Estate of LaVelle G. Parkinson, formerly known as LaVelle Steiner Hereinafter called the Grantor, hereby grants, bargains, sells and conveys unto Merrill R. Rummell and Roberta Rummell, husband and wife whose address is: 330 Yale Ave., Rexburg, ID, 83440 Hereinafter called the Grantee, the following described premises situated in Madison County, Idaho, to -wit: Commencing at a point which is North 89°48'35" East 1919.44 feet and South 0°09'10" East 329.92 feet from the Northwest corner of the Southwest Quarter of Section 25, Township 6 North, Range 39 East, Boise Meridian, Madison County, Idaho, said point being on the East right-of-way line of U.S. Highway 20, Project No. f-6471 (41) Highway Survey as shown on the plans thereof now on file in the office of the Idaho Transportation Department, Division of Highways, and running thence North 89°48'26" East 717.94 feet to the East line of said Section Quarter; thence South 0°16132" East 164.94 feet along said line; thence South 89°48120" West 718.53 feet to a point on the above said right-of- way; thence North 0°09'10" West 164.96 feet along said right-of-way line to the point of beginning. TOGETHER with 1/8 of a Water Share in the Rexburg Canal Company. SUBJECT TO all easements, right of ways, covenants, restrictions, reservations, applicable building and zoning ordinances and use regulations and restrictions of record, and payment of accruing present year taxes and assessments as agreed to by parties above. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises, with their appurtenances unto the said Grantee and to the Grantee's heirs and assigns forever. And the said Grantor does hereby covenant to and with the said Grantee, that the Grantor is the -owner in fee—` simple of said premises; that said premises are free from all encumbrance except U. S. Patent reservations restrictions I