Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07.19.18 P&Z Minutes_exppdf 1 City Staff and Others: Craig Rindlisbacher – Zoning Administrator Scott Johnson – Economic Development Stephen Zollinger – City Attorney Natalie Powell – Compliance Officer Tawnya Grover – P&Z Administrative Assistant/Plan Review Tracker Chairman Heidi Christensen has asked Rory Kunz to chair the meeting tonight. Commissioner Rory Kunz opened the meeting at 6:35 p.m. Roll Call of Planning and Zoning Commissioners: Roll Call. Present: Melanie Davenport, Mark Rudd, Greg Blacker, Steve Oakey, Gil Shirley, Kristi Anderson and Rory Kunz, Council Liaison Brad Wolfe (Not voting). Absent: Chairman Heidi Christensen, Bruce Sutherland, John Bowen, and Darrik Farmer. Minutes: From Planning and Zoning meeting – June 21, 2018 Motion: Motion to pass the minutes as recorded., Action: Adjourn, Moved by Steve Oakey, Seconded by Kristi Anderson. VOTE: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 6). Yes: Gil Shirley, Greg Blacker, Mark Rudd, Melanie Davenport, Steve Oakey, Kristi Anderson and Rory Kunz. Commissioner Rory Kunz went over the process and general decorum. The applicant will first present the proposal, then the public hearing will be opened in the order of for, neutral, then against. Please keep your time to about 3 minutes. If you agree with previous testimony, then just state that and add new testimony. Public Hearings: 1. 6:35PM – (18-00311) Approx. 411 S. Harvard Ave. –Rezone from Low Density Residential 1 to Low Density Residential 3. Blake Willis – 1343 Morningside Drive – He has lived in Rexburg for 27 years. He and his wife own several properties of community housing near the campus or surrounding properties. They take pride in their properties and take good care of them. One of his properties has been used by the Rexburg Beautification website. His proposal is to change the zoning of the property at 411 S. Harvard. The property was identified on the map next to campus. Apartments are built currently on 2 or 3 of the sides of the proposed property: northeast is Buena Vista, to the north is Camelot, University Place, and Hillcrest Apartments to the southwest. Currently, the lot is a weed patch. There has been concerns about weeds, insects, garbage, rodents, etc. The current 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Phone: 208.359.3020 Fax: 208.359.3022 www.rexburg.org Planning & Zoning Minutes July 19, 2018 2 zoning fur surrounding parcels in the neighborhood were identified. The proposal is to change the parcel from LDR1 to LDR3. Commissioner Rory Kunz asked, what kind of buildings surround the parcel? 4-plexes are to the North. Camelot has 4-8 unit apartments. To the northeast is the Alternative High School and community housing, University Place, is straight west. To the southwest is Hillcrest Apartments and single-family homes are to the east. The landowner wanted a big apartment complex put in here, but the zoning and neighborhood would not allow this kind of development. The zoning in LDR3 would only allow duplex apartments. The proposal will probably be 4-duplex apartments. The possible buildings would be about 1,000 square feet per unit. An elevation plan was displayed to show the general idea for a building. Steve Oakey asked if Blake Willis planned on building taller than one level. Blake Willis answered, the current plan would be to go down, not up. Mark Rudd asked if the parcel was a piece of the Sherwood Hills Subdivision nad this was confirmed. Steve Oakey said, there are homes in the neighborhood that are currently taller than this development and there is an elevation change at the property. Commissioner Rory Kunz asked for any other clarifying questions. Gil Shirley asked about the history to the east of the vacant lot. The vacant lot is LDR1 and is a buildable lot. Greg Blacker asked, “Are there any covenants in the neighborhood?” Blake will work with the subdivision as a duplex development is currently against the covenants. Mark Rudd asked, “Is there an active association?” This was confirmed. Steve Oakey asked, “Are any adjacent homes that are renting their basements?” Planner Craig Rindlisbacher answered, if there are, they would be grandfathered. Blake answered, he thinks the home on the corner has a basement apartment. Melanie Davenport asked about the difference between a twin home and a duplex. She thinks there are some twin homes in this neighborhood. The Commissioners answered her question. Commissioner Rory Kunz opened the public input portion of the hearing at 6:46 p.m. Favor: Val Christensen – 430 S 3rd E – He is acting as a homeowner and not as staff. He showed a picture viewed from the back door of his house. The picture shows an apartment complex beyond the parcel on 411 S Harvard. He and his wife have lived in their home for 21 years. The Hepworth’s vacant lot is currently a bike park to the north of him. Big holes are dug in the dirt. Garbage has been dumped on the 411 S. Harvard property in the past. As a City employee, he has probably heard 30 requests over the years for an apartment on the land. He has had to tell them no because of various reasons. This is the first time someone has actually wanted to build; it has mostly been an investment property. A large home will not want to build next to the apartments. The proposal is a step-down from the apartments to the single-family homes. He would be happy to have the backyards of the duplexes against his backyard. He has talked to many neighbors about the good sense the proposal makes. The property will access onto Harvard, so the traffic probably won’t affect his neighborhood. He would like to see the land built on and he and his wife are for the proposal. David Brown – 371 S 3rd E – He has lived in this home for 21 years. The neighbors have met twice in the past few days to discuss this proposal. He would like to see something done on the 3 property, but the neighborhood association has some concerns, which will be addressed by David Peck. Neutral: None Opposed: David Peck – 323 S 3rd E – He is the President of the neighborhood association. He identified his home and where the neighborhood association members live. He does not think they are against the proposed changes as an association. The zoning change is more permanent than the building plan that requires permits.  They would like to see a transition. They would like to keep in mind the definition for the LDR zoning which is to protect stable neighborhoods.  They would like to see less units, rather than more on the property staying closer to 2 units on the parcel.  There is a concern about traffic, the width of the street changes and the road narrows. Traffic off of 3rd South is an issue; it is more of an arterial road with heavier traffic. They would like the road widened with car parking on both sides of the street. It essentially becomes a one-lane road. Can something be done with the street?  Cutting through already occurs through the lots; jaywalking. They would like to see people using the established crosswalks.  Make sure the aesthetics are addressed, green space for property values and the look of the neighborhood.  In their neighborhood, they know there is a lot of lava rock, which makes it difficult to dig down for a basement.  Please make sure the structures are adequate for garbage, water and sewer. Buena Vista has a challenge with their dumpsters; they come out into the road. The dumpster does not go back into the area set aside for it. 4  The association is unsure about how the zoning affects the neighborhood. Nikki Hepworth – 407 S 3rd E – He has lived in Rexburg all of his life. His family owns the vacant lot to the north of Val Christensen and they currently live across the street with his family. The reason they haven’t built on the vacant lot is they are waiting to see what will be done with the proposed property. The family has been interested in purchasing the lot, but the people who owned it wanted a lot of money for the lot. Children in the neighborhood play on the lot. He grew up playing on lot and the bike park that is on their building lot. They would like the bike park to stay. The traffic is in a challenge; he gets tickets for parking on the street; there are already too many people parking on the street. He does not want to see deterioration in the neighborhood, possibly with apartments and if the people take care of the location. The following letter was submitted by Nikki’s parents: 5 Rebuttal: Blake Willis understands some of the concerns as a resident of Rexburg. When land is bought and built upon, the aesthetics and value improve. All of his current properties are well-maintained. This should be a minimum concern regarding upkeep. The property is 0.8 acre. The normal size of a residential lot is 0.2 to 0.3 acres in the City. The lots proposed would be around 0.2 acres. There would be adequate parking for residents and visitors off of the road. The reason the land has not been developed is people who want to build a residential home are not interested in building next to the high-density apartments. There would not be any high-rise apartments on the proposed land; this is not allowed in the zoning. The zone would only allow a smaller-residential-feeling development. Commissioner Rory Kunz closed the public input portion of the hearing at 7:08 PM. He invited staff to report. Planner Craig Rindlisbacher stated single-family residential on the Comprehensive Plan Map allows LDR1, LDR2 and LDR3. The zone change fits the intention of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff feels this proposal represents the type of transition they would like to see next to high-density apartments. Staff recommends approval of this request. Rory Kunz asked, what is the highest density that an LDR3 could have? Densities in the LDR zones are by lot size: 8,000 square feet for a duplex, 6,000 for single family home. Can apartments be built in LDR3? No. Steve Oakey asked, does the City have the right to confiscate private property if the lot that is being used by local residents as a play field? Craig Rindlisbacher answered, no. Steve Oakey asked the City’s policy on traffic for bicycle and car parking? The Staff Review does not address traffic. As we plan, we are constantly upgrading our streets. We do not plan solely for the impact of traffic. The street of Harvard does not come under any special consideration over others. As traffic increases, you widen, maintain, etc. Harvard is a narrow street; more traffic could impact the neighborhood to function as a single-family neighborhood. Brad Wolfe talked about the rezone not being affected until a project is submitted, at which time the traffic and everything else would be looked at. Greg Blacker asked, can the property be rezoned against the covenants? What takes precedence? The covenants or the zoning? The covenants are a private contract matter. The City doesn’t enforce covenants either. If they build a project that 6 doesn’t meet the covenants, that would be a private matter that would be sorted out between individuals or in the courts. The association would have to hire an attorney. Gil Shirley asked, what are the height restrictions? Height restrictions are the same in both LDR1 and LDR3. He was concerned if the property would be sold, someone else might have a different idea. Compliance Officer Natalie Powell asks the Commission to just consider the zoning and not the project. Kristi Anderson told attendees a review is needed by the Community Development Director for compatibility with the neighborhood before building. Commission Discussion: Mark Rudd used to live in this neighborhood. If in the past, the land was changed to duplexes it was approved back then. He thinks it is a nice fit and a good transition. Greg Blacker thinks it will be a nice fit. Weeds devalue the neighborhood. This is what he would like to see in the area. Melanie Davenport said the elevation change fits for single-family residential. Gil Shirley commented about how long the parcel has been a vacant lot. On the staff report, it says the lot has been vacant for 20 years. He has been in Rexburg for 60 years and it has been vacant the entire time. Rexburg was established in 1883, so the lot has been vacant for 135 years. He would like to something happen here and a plan has to go through plan review, perhaps 3 or 4 units. He is in favor. 7 Motion: Motioned to recommend to City Council to approve the proposal as suggested on the basis of the age of the lot, the difficult nature of maintaining the lot and the good transition for the neighborhood., Action: Adjourn, Moved by Steve Oakey, Seconded by Kristi Anderson. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 7). Yes: Gil Shirley, Greg Blacker, Mark Rudd, Melanie Davenport, Steve Oakey, Kristi Anderson and Rory Kunz. 2. 6:40PM - (18-00350) Cornell Block/Block 4 Parker Addition – from Neighborhood Commercial Mixed Use and Low to Moderate Density Residential to Medium to High Density Residential. Amending Chapter 6 to add policy goals. Steve Oakey asked if he and Melanie Davenport recuse themselves, will there be a quorum? Rory answered, there will not be enough. Craig talked to the City Attorney. The Attorney felt there are enough properties involved in the proposal, that stating your interest is sufficient to continue. Planner Craig Rindlisbacher There are 2 parts to this request: 1) a map change and 2) a proposed addition to policy in the Comprehensive Plan document in the land use chapter. The area for the proposal was identified on the map. Cornell Street runs through the middle of the block. The recommendation is to re-designate the preferred land use in the Comprehensive Plan for both sides of Cornell to moderate to high density residential. It is currently Neighborhood Commercial/Mixed Use on the west side of the block and low to moderate on the east side of the block. The whole block will be changed to medium to high density residential. Because of the location of this block and the proximity to academic buildings on BYU-I campus, staff is recommending this change. One of the questions, Craig hears often is, how far will this extend? What are you going to do to protect the neighborhood? Is this trend going to continue up the hill? Currently the following goal is in the Comprehensive Plan: Goal 1: Preserve the high quality of Life that currently exists in Rexburg, and strengthen the image of the City as “America’s Family Community”. He recommends adding the objective with four (4) policy points. The policy points were read aloud. The previous request follows the last policy point. Scale and density is important to single-family homes. At times, we have struggled with the step- down. He showed several pictures. One or the other is going to win out in the long-term. A request was proposed to put in townhomes as a step-down in one of the pictures shown as a step- down from high-density apartments, but the townhomes were never built. In another community, an example was shown for the step-down approach. Kensington does this; it steps down from 3 stories as it approaches the single-family homes. The proposal creates a policy statement to work towards. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Chapter Change: Goal 1: Preserve the high quality of Life that currently exists in Rexburg, and strengthen the image of the City as “America’s Family Community” 8 Objective 1.5 Preserve the character of single family districts through the arrangement of appropriately scaled multi-family housing • Cluster dormitory-style housing in areas that are adjacent to the campus and away from single family homes. • Separate development that creates conflicting building scales and heights • Create transitions that step down heights as development moves away from higher density buildings. • Use non-dormitory medium density development as a transition between high density dormitory style housing and single family homes. Commissioner Rory Kunz asked for any other clarifying questions. Steve Oakey thinks the two parts should be separate actions. Kristi Anderson said these items are for the Comprehensive Plan which gives us guidelines; these items are not regulatory. Melanie Davenport also thinks the items should be two separate issues. Craig thinks this is the Commissioners decision. Rory Kunz says both are submitted on the same application. Steve Oakey reiterated, whoever makes the motion, please take this into consideration and separate the two issues. Commissioner Rory Kunz asked for any other clarifying questions. None. Commissioner Rory Kunz opened the public input portion of the hearing at 7:31p.m. Favor: Sharon Oakey – 251 Cornell – She identified the University and the island cut out of the northeast corner, which is the Cornell block. She is in favor of the proposal for the following reasons:  The proximity to the University.  The density has increased substantially. She identified densities of apartments around the proposal. Homes on the block have changed from single-family homes to dormitory-style housing. Also, property on 2nd E has changed hands several times recently.  Approximately 10 years ago, the city of Rexburg suggested the same change. Timing is everything. Most of the residents 10 years ago were opposed. She was not a homeowner, but happened to be at the meeting as a citizen of the City. The Neighborhood Commercial/Mixed Use changed at this time if she remembers correctly.  This year, about 2 months ago, she and her husband canvased the neighborhood, visiting just the people who own their home and lives in that home on this block. There are 16 homes out of 43 homes approximately. Of the 16 they spoke to, 11 were immediately in favor and they signed Affidavits of Legal Interest and notarized them. These Affidavits were presented to the City as evidence of the desires of the neighborhood for the majority of the homeowners. Others: 2 were against, 1 was neutral, and 2 were not against but they wanted more information. The sentiment in the neighborhood has changed. The proximity hasn’t changed, but the consequences have. The density has changed all around them. The time is right. The University and the City are changing and evolving and growing. This proposed change would allow the property owners more options for the best use of their property. Randy Rhead - 224 Cornell – He lives in the Mixed Use section. He is in favor of the change. He has also has spoken with neighbors on the west side of Cornell to change the City zoning to fit the Comprehensive Plan. He would like the area to stay as Commercial Mixed Use, in place of high- density. The land has already been before the Commissioners and decided the half-block was Mixed Use. He is an apartment owner and manager. He knows the amenities provide good strategies for marketing to draw students to the properties. It would help developers have more flexibility. The 9 Commercial/Mixed Use would allow high-density residential without a commercial component. He thinks a variance would be needed to put in a commercial component. On the west side of campus, North Pointe and Hemming both have a commercial component in their complexes. To be competitive with those on the West side, developers could also have a commercial component. This might even help with the traffic problem. The convenience attracts students to like providing the opportunity to get quick food. Porter Wilkins – 300 N 2nd W – He is speaking as a property owner, not an employee of the City. He owns land on the south side of the Cornell block. About 2 years ago, he came in for a rezone to MDR to rent for dormitory-style housing. The proposal makes sense due to the proximity to the University. Timothy Steel – Crestwood on 235 S – He is currently a student in BYU-I. He lived there with his brother near to the Smith building. A lot of his neighbors appreciate housing near campus. He sees this proposal as a good opportunity to take advantage of the property for this purpose. Neutral: None Opposed: None Rebuttal: Craig Rindlisbacher reminded the Commission that this is a Comprehensive Plan Map change and not a rezone. Based on the comments made tonight, he recommends the policy be separated as part of the motion if proposed and he suggests a work meeting on the policy change. Commissioner Rory Kunz closed the public input portion of the hearing at 7:48 p.m. Rory Kunz agrees the two items will be separated. Commission discussion: Melanie Davenport – 235 W – They have been approached many times. They have waited for someone to come in and do something better than what the Davenports are currently able to do. She thinks the property values will stay or increase. She thinks it is a good change. 10 11 Motion: Recommend approval by the City Council to change the Comprehensive Plan Map designation from Low to Moderate Density Residential and Neighborhood Commercial/Mixed Use to Medium to High Density Residential because the properties are close to campus; this is the City’s objective to keep high-density close to campus, so people can walk to their destination and don’t have to drive and excluding the proposed Comprehensive Plan Policy update., Action: Adjourn, Moved by Kristi Anderson, Seconded by Gil Shirley. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 7). Yes: Gil Shirley, Greg Blacker, Mark Rudd, Melanie Davenport, Steve Oakey, Kristi Anderson and Rory Kunz. 3. 6:45PM - (18-00349) HDR2 Development Code Amendment – Increased density and reduced setbacks. Amendment to Pedestrian Emphasis District Map. Planner Craig Rindlisbacher presented this proposal is a 2-fold action: 1) A recommended change to the Development Code to streamline the density requirement for HDR2 and allow reduced setbacks that are found in the Mixed Use zone to the Infill/Redevelopment area based on the current criteria and 2) To include the block from the previous hearing in the Pedestrian Emphasis District (PED). Part of the Cornell block is already in the PED, but the entire block would be in the PED. The Infill/Redevelopment area is largely the Original Town site of Rexburg. The expansion is from the PED to the Infill/Redevelopment Line only on the Cornell block. The Commissioners commented this is a fairly large area: from 7th S to 3rd N, from 5th W to 2nd E. Scott Johnson clarified the PED would only be increased to encompass the Cornell block. The first action is to change the HDR2 zone to allow for decreased setback in the Infill/Redevelopment. The current density limits are based on the number of bedrooms, but now will be based on the number of people. This would allow increased density in the Infill/Redevelopment area. There is currently a 25’ setback in the HDR2. It can be reduced up to 15’ based on the street-present features in the code. A development would be able to build to 5’ if you have the sidewalk and boulevard strip. Melanie Davenport said this allows the developer to maximize the space. Craig stated, the way the code is currently written, it is thinking of a suburban setting where there is a common front yard. In the Infill/Redevelopment area, the density would increase including the current requirements to encourage good sidewalks, entrances to the street and pedestrian elements already in place. 12 Commissioner Rory Kunz asked for any other clarifying questions. None. Commissioner Rory Kunz opened the public input portion of the hearing at 8:00 p.m. Favor: None Neutral: None Opposed: None Written Input: None Rebuttal: None 13 Commissioner Rory Kunz closed the public input portion of the hearing at 8:00 p.m. He invited staff to report. Commission Discussion: Rory Kunz thinks this allows a developer to do what he wants with the property. With land costs being as high as they are, this would allow developers to recoup more of their money a little quicker by increasing densities. Steve Oakey stated this action has a direct bearing on the previous hearing and the pictures Craig showed us. We are allowing the drastic densities between each other with the HDR2 change. Change happens. In order to create wealth, we have to generate density. Some of the wealthiest and most prosperous countries in the world are built on small slivers of land. In Hong Kong, people live in high densities, with smaller streets. As long as we prosper, we have to allow people to conduct these transactions with as minimal interference as we can generate. Gil Shirley does not see someone coming in and buying the house next to the high-rise apartments. Kristi Anderson liked the other objectives proposed. If we allow this proposal, how do we feel about this proposal verses the other objectives. The objectives were based on the edges of the Infill/Redevelopment area and the transition to the single-family homes. Craig suggest we continue the discussion to find a language all can agree to. Melanie Davenport supports the proposal, because it does improve the developer’s ability to maximize the property and build a better project, while obtaining the items the City values allows the process of change to take time; those who aren’t ready to sell just won’t sell. The beauty is in the choice. Greg Blacker’s concern is this is such a large area, abutting across the street from his house. He suggests we continue to look at this area on an individual basis instead of changing the entire area. Rory Kunz clarified this change will apply to the HDR2 zoned parcels in the Infill/Redevelopment area. People outside the Infill/Redevelopment Area who have HDR2 will have to come before the Commission to try and change densities or setbacks. Do we need to require step-downs? The Commissioners can decide to include step-downs without a requirement. Motion: Motion to recommend to City Council to change the density and setback sections of the HDR2 zone to allow increased densities in the Infill/Redevelopment area or core of the City and allow buildings closer to the street including pedestrian elements based on conditions currently in the Code and include the Cornell block in the PED., Action: Adjourn, Moved by Steve Oakey, Seconded by Kristi Anderson. VOTE: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 7). Yes: Gil Shirley, Greg Blacker, Mark Rudd, Melanie Davenport, Steve Oakey, Kristi Anderson and Rory Kunz. Unfinished/Old Business: None New Business: None Report on Projects: Tabled Requests: None Building Permit Application Report: None Heads Up: August 2, 2018: 1. (18-00305) Thomson Farms: The Grove – Final Plat (Phases 1, 2, & 3) Move August 16, 2018 meeting to August 23, 2018? August 23rd meeting will be held if applications come in. Meeting Adjourned at 8:10p.m.