Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05.04.17 P&Z Minutes 1 Commissioners Attending; City Staff and Others: Rory Kunz – Acting Chairman Mark Rudd Val Christensen – Community Development Director Greg Blacker Natalie Powell - Community Development Compliance Officer Darrik Farmer Colton Murdock – Community Development Intern John Bowen Elaine McFerrin – P&Z Coordinator Steve Oakey Gil Shirley Chairman Heidi Christensen was excused. Commissioner Rory Kunz acted as chairman, and opened the meeting at 6:32 pm. City Council Liaison Brad Wolfe was excused. Roll Call of Planning and Zoning Commissioners: Attending: Steve Oakey, Darrik Farmer, Mark Rudd, Rory Kunz, Greg Blacker, John Bowen, Gil Shirley Heidi Christensen, Melanie Davenport, and Bruce Sutherland were excused. Minutes: 1. From Planning and Zoning meeting – April 20, 2017 Steve Oakey motioned to approve the Planning & Zoning minutes of April 20, 2017. Greg Blacker seconded the motion. John Bowen abstained for having not been present. None opposed. Motion carried. Public Hearings: 1. 6:35 pm – Annexation & Rezone – Approximately 950 Barney Dairy Road – Rural Residential 1 (RR1) and Transitional Agriculture 1 (TAG1) to Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2) – WR Holdings LLC - in the City of Rexburg Impact Area Chairman Kunz explained the procedure for a public hearing. The applicant or a representative will come forward to explain the proposal to the Commission. The Commissioners will be given the opportunity to ask clarifying questions. The public will also be given the opportunity to ask clarifying questions in order to better understand the proposal. If one wishes to give public testimony to the Commission in favor, neutral to, or against the proposal, please come forward and state your name and address for the record, and your affiliation, such as neighbor, interested citizen, etc. The Commission will not interact with anyone during the public testimony. As a courtesy to the Commission, please do not repeat any like testimony, but rather say you agree with what has been stated. The applicant will have the opportunity of rebuttal if opposing testimony has been given. 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Phone: 208.359.3020 Fax: 208.359.3022 www.rexburg.org Planning & Zoning Minutes May 4, 2017 2 After public input is closed, staff evaluation and recommendations will be given. The Commission will then discuss and deliberate the matter. The P&Z Commission is a recommending body to the City Council. The City Council will make the final decision. Darrik Farmer asked to be excused and stepped down from the dais. Johnny Watson, 1152 Bond Ave., representing Brian Ball, WR Holdings LLC. A PowerPoint was shown. A map of the area requested for annexation into the City of Rexburg and a rezone to Low Density Residential 2 was shown on the overhead screen. The area is 55 acres, on the eastern boundary of the City’s impact area. Why are they proposing development in this area? Mr. Watson stated that Rexburg’s largest employers are the University and the hospital. He pointed out the city center. Goods and services are beginning to move out to the north, and residents will want to live closer to this. Regarding the transportation plan, the parcel lies at future minor and major arterials. The exact locations are schematic, but the land is very near the future transportation and infrastructure. Why is LDR2 zoning being requested rather than LDR1 or RR1? TheLDR2 zoning gives the applicant the most flexibility in designing his proposal. No plats have been laid out yet. The LDR2 allows for transitions from larger to smaller lots. LDR2 is compatible with the surrounding area zones. From City of Rexburg Vision 2020 Comprehensive Plan: Low Density Residential This designation includes residential areas of low-density, detached, single-family homes. These areas provide the opportunity for quiet residential neighborhoods, a short drive away from neighborhood service centers. These areas form the edge or transition area between various neighborhood districts. Residential densities in this area should range from three (3) to seven ( 7) dwelling units per acre. (per Mr. Watson, that is .14 to .33 per acre) Rexburg is becoming short on varied sizes of lots. It is hard to get financing for the bigger lots. The most efficient are .22 to .23 range size lots. People want smaller lots, which are also more affordable. There are a number of reasons why larger lots within the city are inefficient, including water usage and septic use. Mr. Watson referred to one written input letter that said there could be 100 homes here. That is not a reality. Only 35 acres are actually being developed – that would be 40 to 60 lots at best. Steve Oakey asked about water and sewer extending into this area. Johnny Watson said right now there are water and sewer at different points along Barney Dairy Road, so they would have to be extending those into the subject area. The applicant would work with the city. Mr. Watson said regarding traffic mitigation, they are working with the city’s Public Works Department. It is a rough area for traffic at this time. There is much work to do. A question would be how to better move people north and south. Greg Blacker asked about access points. 3 Johnny Watson pointed out the possible accesses from Barney Dairy Road. Chairman Kunz asked if the audience had any clarifying questions. Jay Fred Smith, 910 Barney Dairy Road. He said he did not want his whole property included in this annexation and rezone. He just wanted the field and not the home included. Doug Ladle, 1029 Barney Dairy Rd. He asked when there would be an idea of how soon the city and the state would come to decisions on the proposed roads, including the road that would continue down from 7th South. Johnny Watson said the City’s Public Works Director has not given any specifics. Demand would likely drive the issue. He was told that possibly in 5 years they may see the Teton River crossing. Community Development Director Val Christensen clarified that grants would be involved for the building of roads. The City does not have the monies to consider it at this time. Doug Ladle asked if the subject development would precede the building of those roads or if the roads would come first. Johnny Watson guessed that the development would likely come first. Kevin Bell, 1074 Barney Dairy Road asked about clarification of the 3 points of access. Johnny Watson said these are not a for sure thing. The city will look at these. Doyle Barney, 759 Barney Dairy Road. He said regarding the access that would go across the canal – he represents the Madison Ditch, and it is their desire not to see an access across the canal at the corner because of safety issues. Brian Ball, 547 Partridge Lane, the applicant. He clarified the accesses. No access would go over the canal. There are only two accesses at this time. Jay Fred Smith said the only good place for a north/south road is from University Blvd. to the Sugar City Cemetary and down. Chairman Kunz clarified that is not part of tonight’s topic of discussion. It is a discussion for a later date. He thanked Mr. Smith for his view. Johnny Watson reiterated in response to John Bowen’s request for clarification that the subject area could possibly have an estimated 30 to 60 lots on about 35 developed acres (because of infrastructure and other requirements). Val Christensen said for the future, the Commission should keep in mind that the projected roads are part of engineering studies that have been paid for by the city and the county and adopted by both. It is another issue. Chairman Kunz clarified that the proposal before the Commission tonight is regarding the annexation and rezoning of the specified property, and not the plans for the roadways. Carol Ladle, 1029 Barney Dairy Rd, said her calculations indicate that there could be about 190 homes in the LDR2 zone on the approximately 35 acres, with .184 lots. Johnny Watson said that LDR2 would allow such lots, but the reality is regarding what is most marketable in the city of Rexburg - a quarter acre to half acre lots. The developer can lose 30 to 40 percent of overall space because of right of ways and accesses to each lot, etc. 4 Steve Oakey asked if Director Christensen could explain to the audience about traffic management and bringing in water and sewer to the subject area. Director Christensen clarified this is an annexation and zone change. It is not project specific. There will have to be plats that will be submitted. The plats will come before the Commission and will have to meet the requirements of the Rexburg Development Code and the engineering standards of the City of Rexburg. Public Works would address water and sewer. Mr. Christensen is confident that all issues will be handled by Public Works, including traffic considerations and the necessary lift stations. Regarding water and sewer, it would be the responsibility of the developer to bring those in, and the developer would work with the Public Works Department of the city. It is too preliminary for any detail at this time. Mark Rudd asked for clarification on the subject annexation and rezone properties. The area was pointed out on the overhead screen map including the connecting point to the city. Chairman Kunz opened the public input portion of the hearing and stated that the Commission welcomes any and all comments. There cannot be any back and forth between the Commission and others at this time. This is the public’s time to express their opinions. Please try to keep comments as short as possible, but long enough for opinions to be stated. In Favor: Brian Ball, 547 Partridge Lane. He is the applicant. This is his neighborhood. He remembers back in the 1980s when Barney Dairy Road was developed and the farmers were expressing their worries. The City fathers were correct because there were not a lot of issues at the time. That being said, he lives in this area and knows development is going to eventually happen. He wants to make sure he has a say in that development to develop in such a way that he still wants to live here. He wants to keep the great personality of the area. He understands the safety issues and traffic concerns. That is why he decided to work with Charlotte Walker to buy this property and develop it, to alleviate a lot of those problems and produce a product that is needed in Rexburg. Jack Fuller, 1028 Barney Dairy Road. He has been a developer. He is concerned that there is a higher density project going in next to a lower density project. He is concerned about traffic flow, and safety regarding ingress and egress and roads. The zoning change makes sense with this particular development and with respect to the growth of Rexburg. Neutral: Carlos Aponte 355 Partridge Lane. His concern is the road that would come behind his home, but also the traffic and safety of the area. Comments were made that this project would be coming first, with proposed roads and traffic to be looked at later. His desire would be that the traffic and safety gets looked at and discussed. He feels it is a positive to have someone who lives in this neighborhood as the developer. It would be in the best interest of the area to discuss these traffic issues now and not say we will deal with it later. Dwayne Hansen, 1140 Barney Dairy Road. He considers himself neutral to the request. He wanted to raise some awareness of water run-off problems. He lives next to the vacant lot on Barney Dairy Road that is part of this request. During a low snow year, the area becomes a little lake; during a heavy snow year, it becomes a river through the vacant lot and across the front of several lots. He is concerned about the development, both during and after. He is concerned with the run-off and 5 wants make sure it is handled appropriately. He would like to be sure the neighborhood is safe with respect to the runoff and the water. Bob Canning, 360 Partridge Lane. He is neutral on the development. His concerns are for the safety of the roads. He has children who play outside in their yard. He is also concerned regarding where his farmer friends will go with their trucks. The back side of his back yard has large trees, but trucks came through there at one time. He is mostly concerned with safety and how things will flow when the area is all done. Jay Fred Smith 910 Barney Dairy Road. He really does not want his home included in the annexation, just the farm ground part of the property. Bruce Ard. He does not live here. He was the mayor of Ammon for 24 years, so he understands development and he understands dealing with developers. His encouragement would be that it is much more of a benefit to have local developers. He has known the Ball family for almost 50 years. It is always much better to deal with the issues and not ignore them so there can be input from the area residents. Doyle Barney, 759 Barney Dairy Road. Of course there will be change, and sometimes it is hard to deal with it. There has been a lot of change over the years – some good, some bad. He has lived there 54 years and has seen a lot of change. He wants the landowners there to understand - did we ever throw a fit that you were coming in? No, we did not. You were entitled to come in. We accepted that. We need to extend the same courtesy to Brian Ball. We need to still be friends. The last thing that he wants to see happen is to see this thing tear neighborhoods apart. He likes his neighbors. He does not want to be enemies with anyone. He asked the P&Z Commission and the City Council to think this through. He knows Brian Ball will present the best plan he can and that he will satisfy the neighbors the best way he can. Be careful on your planning, and address all issues. Some of the property may end up as green space, so there might be fewer houses. This is not something that is all gloom and doom. This can actually be nice for their neighborhood. Before everybody pulls the trigger, let’s hear it through to the end. Bert Summers, 1500 South 3000 East, Sugar City. He runs the farm property just to the south of the subject property. He would like to see the City do the best they can. It is a beautiful place for residential development. As the City grows, BYU-I has affected growth so much on the west side of the City. On this side of the City, as development comes in, as long as the planning is well done he is for it. Opposed: Gerald Williams, 1212 Barney Dairy Rd. He appreciates what Doyle Barney said. He is not adamantly against this but is against the principle. We need to look at adjacent development and be somewhat compatible with it. The density is too much of an abrupt change. It is a 3-step zone change. There could be postage-stamp lots. He gave the following statement: 6 7 Fred Woolley, 258 North Hill Rd. He is neutral to the annexation but he is against the rezone. The current plan does not include safe ingress or egress strategy. The rezoning change from RR1 to LDR2 is premature. There is no guarantee that the developer would limit the plan to 30-60 homes. Carol Ladle 1029 Barney Dairy Rd. No one has mentioned the baseball diamond at the bottom of Barney Dairy Road. It is currently very dangerous. There are many young children and lots of cars backing out on to the street. This would increase with added development. She spoke with Team Green Real Estate regarding the amount of lots available for building of about .25 acre in size in Rexburg (Summerfield, Sky Meadows, Stonebridge). Pine Brook has a little larger lots. There is not a shortage of small building lots in Rexburg. She is not opposed to the annexation. She is opposed to small lots. She appreciates Doyle Barney’s comment about not having any ill feelings towards anyone; she does not. She agrees with Gerald Williams’ comments on the 3-step zone change being too many next to the existing RR1 properties. Gerald Williams wanted to add that Jay Fred Smith, as Mr. Smith said earlier, does not want his house annexed or rezoned but only the farmland next to the house; the property is the connection to the city. Brian Ball responded in order to clarify. If there was something shady going on he would be against it, too. He has met with Jay Fred Smith several times. Mr. Smith had shared his desire to hook up to city services. Mr. Ball explained to him at that time that if he wanted to be hooked up, the property would need to be in the city. That is when the affidavit of legal interest was signed by Mr. Smith. Steve Oakey said there will be time for rebuttal after public input, but that time is not now. Boyd Berry, 1116 Barney Dairy Road. His main concerns are the Barney Dairy Road access into the subdivision, and the traffic, and safety. Kevin Bell, 1074 Barney Dairy Road. He seconds what everyone has said. He quoted from the Rexburg Development Code regarding the RR1 zone and why it was established - “ The RR1 zone is established to protect stable neighborhoods of detached family dwellings on lots of one acre or more up to five (5) acres…” . It is to protect those stable homes that are already here. He does not see a reason that the land needs to be rezoned away from RR1. Nancy Prescott, 1176 Barney Dairy Road. The planned entrance to the subdivision is right next to her house. She feels it is an odd place, between two houses, for an entry into a large subdivision. It is zoned for a house. It was not zoned for that when she purchased her lot. There are flooding issues, traffic issues, and safety issues. She spoke with Charlotte Walker before tonight’s meeting; Mrs. Walker told her she does not want an access near her home. Melissa Bell, 1074 Barney Dairy Road. They are second generation owners of the house. They specifically purchased their property because they wanted a quiet lifestyle. They have 2 children with disabilities. They have lived in townhouses and higher density neighborhoods. Their son has autism, and he wanders into homes and also across the road. It concerns her to have that many more homes behind them. They try their best to keep him in their property and are worried about increased traffic, with more neighbors. She seconds the comments of her husband Kevin Bell, Doyle Barney, and Gerald Williams. Written Input: All written input letters are part of the official record of the Public Hearing : 1. Letter from Brent and Suzan Mendanhall – opposed to the proposal, read by Commissioner Steve Oakey 8 2. Letter from Terry and Kristi Anderson - opposed to the proposal, read by Commissioner Greg Blacker 9 10 Rebuttal: Johnny Watson said he appreciates the neighbors’ comments and concerns. He reiterated that the reason for the LDR2 rezone request is it would allow flexibility for development. He did not say there would be postage-stamp size lots over the entire property. You cannot compare county zoning to city zoning. One goal stated in the Rexburg Comprehensive Plan is to provide housing for all stages of life. Developers need to provide lots of varying sizes that people can afford. Very few of us have the means or ability to buy 1-acre city lots. The average lot size in Rexburg is under .3 of an acre. LDR2 can transition from a little larger to smaller lots. There will be required circulation east and west and other requirements. It would be a far cry from what Gerald Williams has calculated. It is planning for future housing needs – smaller lots and smaller homes. He reiterated that LDR2 allows three to seven lots per acre. Mr. Watson quoted from the City of Rexburg Vision 2020 Comprehensive Plan: …Developing attractive, efficient, and affordable housing is always one of Rexburg’s central concerns. Planning for future housing needs, while maintaining a reasonable level of affordability, will help the City develop a vibrant and sustainable economy – allowing families to enjoy the many amenities of the surrounding region. Chairman Kunz closed the public input portion of the hearing. He asked for staff review comments. Director Christensen said staff has looked at the Comprehensive Plan and the City as a whole. The zoning would allow the same use and the same heights. Neighbors are concerned about larger lots versus smaller lots. Rural Residential versus LDR2 was carefully looked at. The subject property would be backyards to backyards. Both are single family uses. There is use compatibility. Plats for a project on this land would come before the Commission in the future. Community Development Staff Report Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Commission take public testimony, and determine if the proposed annexation can be approved, denied, or approved with conditions. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the use as Single family and Agriculture/Rural Cluster. The current zoning is compatible with the Comp Plan. Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council to approve the annexation of this property. Chairman Kunz asked if any of the Commissioners wished to declare a conflict of interest or perceived conflict of interest with this request. There were none. John Bowen asked if annexation and rezone had to be done at the same time, or can annexation be done on its own. Director Christensen said typically when a property wants annexation, zoning is decided at the same time. There are avenues to do it differently. Steve Oakey said staff reviews have mentioned streets, water, and sewer. It is the City’s primary responsibility that there be safe and efficient traffic flow and management. The City of Rexburg has done well with that. The City is supposed to provide equal access to water, sewer and other utilities. Though these are challenges at times, they are the responsibility of the City, and the City has the talent to be able to head these issues off. While they are a concern for the actual project, they are typically not a concern at this time for him. Johnny Watson hit the nail on head – housing is necessary for all stages of life. We need to be able to provide that. As the City grows, with the interior of the City having very dense housing, many residents were against it and have expressed that such housing should be built outside of the city center, which would put that into your neighborhoods here. The responsibility he takes on his 11 shoulders is to provide access to people’s private property to develop as they see fit to accommodate their customer base. The customer base in this case is future home builders, home buyers, and home sellers. How they see fit to make that development is up to them as long as they adhere to the standards of health and safety and nuisance. The City’s responsibility then becomes providing for water, sewer and utilities, and the traffic and easements associated with it. He is in favor of this request. He thinks it is inevitable. Greg Blacker said he appreciates all of the people who have come to the meeting tonight. The Commission likes to hear everybody’s story. He was in the same situation years ago with a large parcel behind his home that was to be developed, and lived through it. Change can be difficult and is not good for everybody. He feels that everything will be ok in the end. He feels the developer will have the neighbors’ interest at heart. He is in favor of this request. John Bowen said he loves developments. They drive everything. In this case, the access roads and sewer and water are concerns. A lot of questions still exist. Jumping three zoning steps is too far for him. He is okay with the annexation but he is not okay with the rezone. He needs to know more about the size of the lots. Larger lots would be better. Chairman Kunz said it is important to note that this application is not for a particular project at this point, nor can it be until the applicant knows what the zoning will be. That is why the applicant needs to apply for the zoning also at this time. Gil Shirley said he is in favor of annexation, but feels RR2 zoning may be better. He is torn and has not yet made a decision. Mark Rudd agreed. Chairman Kunz said if there are not adequate water rights for a property that is a half-acre or larger, the larger lots could only have a portion of landscaping, and the rest would be weeds. Steve Oakey said he wonders if we are trying to make decisions that the developer should make for himself - that is how to optimize the value of his property. He prefers not to force his preferences on the developer. Steve Oakey motioned to recommend approval to City Council of an Annexation and Rezone for property at approximately 950 Barney Dairy Road as specified, with the Zone change to be from Rural Residential 1 (RR1) and Transitional Agriculture 1 (TAG1) to Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2) for the specified property. Greg Blacker seconded the motion. There was discussion about possibly adding conditions. It was clarified that a future development would come before the Commission when it is at the plat stage. Mark Rudd said at this point we are giving the developer the opportunity to take the next step. Steve Oakey said his motion stands. The Chairman clarified the motion. Those in Favor Those Opposed: Steve Oakey John Bowen Greg Blacker Rory Kunz Mark Rudd Gil Shirley 12 Motion Carried. Unfinished/Old Business: None New Business: 1. Final Plat – Stonebridge Subdivision Division No.2– Approximately south of Woodbridge Street – Harper Leavitt Engineers Kevin Allcott, 533 West 2600 South, Bountiful UT, representing the property owner. The preliminary plat was before the Commission and City Council a couple of months ago. There are not any large changes from the preliminary plat. They have addressed staff comments regarding the land the river. They have solved the issue – it is not part of this plat. Mark Rudd asked for clarification of the flood plain area. Kevin Allcott pointed the area out on the overhead screen. The back sides of a few lots are in the flood plain, but the building footprints are out of the flood plain. This plat is on the west half of the subject property. A sewer lift station will be put in. The east half will follow later with development. Director Christensen did not have any clarifications to add. Gil Shirley motioned to recommend to the City Council approval of the Final Plat for the Stonebridge Subdivision Division 2 (located approximately south of Woodbridge Street). John Bowen seconded the motion. None opposed. Motion carried. Break called. 2. Final Plat – Juniper Sands – Approximately 801 West 7th South – Bron Leatham Bron Leatham , 1272 North Yellowstone Highway, the applicant. The Commission has seen this project a couple of times. They are breaking into a couple lots and dedicating the right-of-way for the streets. The Cook property (703 West 7th South) is going through the process of Comprehensive Plan change and a Rezone change. It is not part of this plat. The west side of the plat will be phase one. A development agreement with the City of Rexburg will specify that in phase 2, a road if necessary would be developed to the Cook property. Steve Oakey asked if Mr. Leatham has a continuous and ongoing relationship with the City to address any issues such as traffic and roads that may come up. Bron Leatham said he continues to communicate with and meet with City staff. Steve Oakey motioned to recommend to the City Council approval of the Final Plat for Juniper Sands (located at approximately 801 West 7th South). Mark Rudd seconded the motion. None opposed. Motion carried. Compliance: None Non-controversial Items Added to the Agenda: None 13 Report on Projects: None Tabled Requests: 1. Cantemere Planned Unit Development (PUD) – Preliminary Master Plan/Preliminary Plat - Approximately 630 South Yellowstone Hwy - To be taken off the Table and addressed at this meeting Steve Oakey motioned to take off of the table the Cantemere Planned Unit Development (PUD) Preliminary Master Plan/Preliminary Plat. Mark Rudd seconded the motion. None opposed. Motion carried. Kelly McCandless, 223 Jill Drive, gave the proposal. He thanked the Commission for tabling the request so that some issues could be addressed. His partners and he own property on Handcart Lane that is to the west of the subject property. The subject property is challenging given its geometry. They have reached out to potential buyers of the planned 4-plexes. In essence, these are sold (reservation agreements). He has come before the Commission in the past on several projects in the community, and he has a strong track record of building what he has stated would be built. He showed a rendering of the 4-plexes that have been presold. They lost 2 units due to certain requirements including parking. There are going to be nineteen 4-plexes. They worked with the owner of the Bettenhausen property regarding connectivity, but this did not go forward. They needed to create access to the property and will be providing a street for this subject project through the property that they own to the west . They have asked to be considered as a PUD and have taken advantage of some setbacks. They have provided the city with a rough draft of CC&Rs (Covenants, Conditions, & Restrictions) for staff review. They will be establishing a Home Owners Association which will oversee the maintenance and upkeep of the parking lot, snow removal, all of the landscaping, etc. They exceed the minimum 10% requirement for green space, with about 33% green space. There will be playground and exercise areas. Single ownership will be under Cantamere LLC. The project will not be done in phases but will be built out from start to finish. Mr. McCandless stated that all requirements are met. They feel strongly that they have taken a really difficult site and a very ugly piece of property that potentially will be greatly beautified, so much so that as its neighbor to the west, they feel comfortable and confident. It was clarified that the size of property is 3.35 acres. Mark Rudd stated that he likes the project. It is a great use for the property. Gil Shirley asked about snow storage. Kelly McCandless said the snow storage would be in the area of the playground. It was clarified that the developer cannot use the access at the south of the property. Mr. McCandless said the city will no longer allow that. It was clarified that the railroad crossings are not for the use of the applicant. There were no further clarifications from staff. Chairman Kunz opened the public input portion of the hearing. In Favor: None Neutral: None 14 Opposed: None Written Input: 1. Letter from Mitch Loveland of Stone’s Town and Country – in favor of the proposal, read by Chairman Kunz. 15 Chairman Kunz closed the public input portion of the hearing. There were no declarations of conflict of interest from the Commissioners. The Chairman asked for the staff report. Director Christensen said “….A Planned Unit Development established under the provisions of this ordinance shall conform to the standards and requirements….” as stated in the Rexburg Development Code. He stated that staff felt this presentation is much better than what was originally proposed. The City is backing off of setback requirements so that clustering can be taken into account to achieve a better product. The buffer along the railroad track would need to meet staff approval. The Commission could add a condition that the developer hold to what was shown tonight regarding the buildings. The staff recommendation would be to recommend approval to the City Council with the eleven proposed conditions of approval stated in the staff report. Steve Oakey motioned to recommend approval to the City Council of the Cantamere PUD Preliminary Master Plan/Preliminary Plat, to include that the 11 proposed conditions as stated in the Community Development staff report be met. Gil Shirley seconded the motion. None opposed. Motion carried. Proposed Conditions of Approval Cantamere Planned Unit Development (PUD) - Preliminary Master Plan/Preliminary Plat - #17 00141 General 1. The final master plan/final plat application shall include all required submittal standards and incorporate all conditions of approval. 2. Language shall be clear in the CC&Rs that no approval granted by the HOA or Architectural Committee shall violate City Code (e.g. accessory structures, building heights, fencing, location of building on lot, etc.). 3. The final CC&Rs shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director p rior the recordation of a plat. 4. Requirement of the underlying zoning prevails where no specific requested variation has been considered and granted in this PUD request. Performance Standards 5. Utilities- All new utilities must be placed underground. 6. Water Conservation- The final master plan for each phase shall show, in sufficient detail, how the proposal will incorporate low volume irrigation systems throughout the landscaped areas of the development. 7. Refuse Bins- Individual trash bins shall be kept in garage or screened from the public right-of-way on days of no trash service in the neighborhood. . 8. Glare Reduction- The proposal must adhere to the City’s lighting standards, details shall be provided with the final master plan/final plat for each phase. Common Open Space 9. Maintenance- As the common area is proposed to be private rather than public, the homeowners association shall be responsible for common space maintenance. Until such time as a homeowners association is established, the applicant or owner of record shall be responsible for all maintenance of common areas and all unsold lots. 16 10. Hardscape- In order to determine hardscape percentages the final landscape plan, submitted with the final master plan, shall provide detailed information on ha rdscape percentages. 11. Landscaping Plan- The applicant has not fully addressed this requirement during the preliminary master plan/preliminary plat application process; therefore the final master plan shall reflect this on the landscape plan. In addition, the final CC&Rs shall have the PUD ordinance requirement written into the CC&Rs. The final landscape plan shall consider amount of trees and bushes, landscaping buffer for parking lot and solar access as required by the PUD ordinance in the placement of deciduous and evergreen trees. _________________________________________ Heads Up: May 18, 2017 P&Z meeting: 1. Recognition of Service for P&Z Commissioner Richard Smith 2. State of Idaho House Bill No. 216 relating to Short-term/Vacation Rentals – Discussion The meeting was adjourned at 9:22 pm (Greg Blacker motioned to adjourn the May 4, 2017 Rexburg P& Z meeting. John Bowen seconded the motion. None opposed. Motion carried.)