HomeMy WebLinkAboutRFD - 20-00851 - PUD - Amend & Add to Sub. Chapter - Dev. Code Amendment
#20 00851
Ordinance Amendment for Development Code
Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.)
October 22, 2020, An application was received for an Ordinance Amendment to the Development Code for the Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.).
October 27, 2020, Staff Reviews were completed.
November 3, 2020, Notice was sent to the newspaper to be published on November 17th and November 24th.
December 3, 2020, Alan Parkinson presented the application to the Planning & Zoning Commission.
6:35PM – (20-00851) – Development Code Ordinance Amendment – Planned Unit Development. A Planned Unit Development is a type of subdivision and has been amended to match the approved
subdivision ordinance changes. (action) – Alan, City of Rexburg
Applicant Presentation – Alan Parkinson – This presentation tonight is for a Planned Unit Development (PUD). A PUD is a Master Plan of an area. The process for a PUD is similar to
the plat process in the Development Code approved recently. The goal for the Planned Unit Development is to make the process more efficient, more streamlined, to meet the needs of
the client and to define what the City Council and Planning & Zoning bodies need to approve, with a focus on the plan the Planning & Zoning Commission and the City Council need to review.
In the current process for a Planned Unit Development, an application comes in to us, Staff reviews the application for a Preliminary PUD Plat, then it is reviewed by the Planning
& Zoning and moves on to City Council. Part of the review process includes the Commissioners looking at a possible increase in density, if they request it. Submittal includes a project
narration describing the applicant’s plans and a phase plan. Next, the applicant submits a Final PUD Plat and that plat is reviewed for conformance to the Preliminary PUD by Staff
and the applicant records the Final PUD. We expect phases to come in to follow the approved plat process.
The Plat comes in, and Staff reviews it. The Commissioners review the plat and in addition with a PUD, you are reviewing the requirements approved for the PUD. The Plat moves forward
to the City Council. Planning & Zoning will now see the individual phases for approval. The requirements for plat submittal remain the same.
Commissioner Questions: Sally Smith asked if we are looking at this for the hearing process on just the final plat level. Alan said for a Plat, preliminary and final have been
removed; there is only a single Plat and an Infrastructure Plan. This is a subdivision, but on a higher level. She is apprehensive. The night City Council approved the plat process,
Chris Mann said the change in the process would make it more difficult to make changes to a Final Plat. She has done a little bit more research. Sometimes in a Preliminary Plat, she
hears Councilmembers ask about the water lines and the sewer lines. To her, those are not the things we care about. We have experts that know where the infrastructure needs to be.
The governing bodies do not have to worry about that. The Preliminary Plat was the main communication piece for the Infrastructure.
The governing bodies want to see where the buildings are; we want to know how it affects the neighbors. We want to know about the landscaping. The Barney Dairy situation was brought
up and there was some good input from Council about going from acre lots to 0.14 lots. What if a Preliminary Report was required?
Chairman Rory Kunz said landscaping and those other items listed are about design. Sally Smith said she is worried about the public. There was a hearing on a Final Plat. The neighbors
out there on their one and two-acre lots came to the hearing. Sally said they suggested LDR1 against the one-acre lots; it was a good discussion. Sally is not opposed to streamlining
by any means. We rely on Staff for many things. She is nervous about the public not knowing a subdivision is going in beside them until the Final Plat.
(The Barney Dairy meetings Sally Smith and Chairman Rory Kunz are speaking about were for an annexation and rezone of the Barney Dairy property at 950 Barney Dairy Rd (17-00147). The
application was deliberated before Planning & Zoning on May 4, 2017, and before City Council on February 15, June 7 & 14, July 5 & 19, August 16 and September 6, 2017.)
Chairman Rory Kunz remembered the Barney Dairy hearing. The neighbors were allowed to say some things in the Planning & Zoning meeting. None of the objections were about the land use
and whether or not the use fit the area. This is what the Commissions’ job is to decide: Does the change make sense in this area of our community? Mr. Barney rebutted most of the
comments. He said your subdivision would not have been built if my family had the same objections at the time, when there was a request to change your neighborhood from Trans Ag to
a higher density. He does not think changing the process and making it more labor intensive and more time intensive is the answer nor would have actually benefitted them. The people
had an opportunity to voice their opinions. Sally Smith noted the changes were made.
Alan said for a PUD, only LDR or MDR zones are affected. When you look at a plat, you base your decision on the density and maximum build outs, not what the person is proposing. Sally
Smith understands there are many conditions on a PUD. Alan believes by adding the Planning & Zoning back in, when it comes to phasing, it will give the Planning & Zoning and City Council
another look. The PUD will be the general plan and the individual plats for the phasing will come back to both Planning & Zoning and City Council.
Chairman Rory Kunz was excited early on, when we were simplifying and taking things out to make it easier for the public. He is disappointed to see pages added back in to the
simplified process. Alan answered; there is a glitch in Municode. Not all the green highlighted text is new. The language moved around turns green; at this time, we cannot get those
kind of changes to show the way we need them to. Little was added; a lot was taken out. Chairman Rory Kunz confirmed the changes Alan outlined. Alan said phases have always had to
come back to the city. Summerfield is an example. Summerfield did a Master Plan, also called a Planned Unit Development. Last year, they brought plats through the process for phases
6, 7 & 8. The Plats were presented to the City Council for approval. Chairman Rory Kunz asked, how does this benefit the developer, community and the city. Alan said this gives a
second look at the Plat. You can determine if the standards of the PUD are being met. Alan said most of this was written by Tawnya.
Tawnya explained prior to our previous approved changes for the Plat process, you had two preliminary meetings, which focused on the Infrastructure, one was Planning & Zoning and one
was City Council. The Plat itself was only seen by City Council. The Infrastructure Plan now is reviewed only by Staff. The Plat will now be the focus of the Planning & Zoning Commission
and City Council; this is the focus of the governing bodies, the land. The Commission did not have the opportunity to see the Plat itself.
Vince Haley said if I understand this correctly, with Summerfield, when they added the increased density for the townhomes, the change went only to City Council. The Commission will
be able to look at those proposed changes going forward. Alan confirmed this is correct. The Commission will be determining if the phase meets the intent of the approved PUD. Townhomes
were approved at this location, but the density and the layout changed. Vince confirmed even if the PUD is approved, the Commission would have to approve the phases. Alan said in
most phasing, there is a general idea. Now, when it comes in, it will come in the platting process. Building footprints will not be shown. Vince said to generalize it even further;
the phases are a zone of the PUD. Alan said we cannot be caught up in any buildings presented; the buildings are not part of the recorded record; they can build based on the requirements
we give them. We are focused on the type of lots we want in this area. Vince asked what is the advantage of following this process versus the old platting process. Alan answered
we become distracted in the weeds. Alan has spent the last two days going through the Thomson Farms record; the most recent approved PUD. His desktop is covered with minutes from
Planning & Zoning and City Council from the start of that process until the end. The groups did well, but there was a lack of direction. Questions were about sidewalk, water lines,
ITD; these are questions for our engineers. Staff wants to come to the Commission with a clean package that meets the requirements of the Development Code for the two groups to review.
When Infrastructure is not determined earlier in the process, the Applicant’s system is prolonged due to requirements with DEQ and the Health Departments’ processes, as well as the
needs of the power company. The proposed process will adapt to these requirements for streamlining. The process is started with an Economic Development Team meeting; internally this
is called a “Ready Team” meeting with Public Works, Building, Planning & Zoning, legal, and Economic Development. A Plan is brought to this meeting and this group can ask them defining
questions so Staff can give complete and accurate information to the Applicant. This initial meeting allows a focus, so a correct plan can be submitted, allowing the Applicant to move
forward.
Kristi Anderson asked if density bonus points were being removed. Chairman Rory Kunz said he recalled with Val or Craig, you could get a certain number of points if you added two more
shrubs along a roadway, if you created more green space, if you added some walking paths, etc. you could increase density. Alan said bonus points for added density in a PUD is still
in the ordinance. Staff will prepare a general bonus point assignment, present it to the group, and fine tune those points; he has created a spreadsheet to determine the overall calculation.
Alan clarified Rory is looking more for how the points are determined. This comes back to Staff looking at it, preparing it, and bringing it to the Commissioners. Building will be
the ones to tell us the value of upgrades for density bonus points above the building construction standards required in our area. Chairman Rory Kunz asked for research regarding removal
of the density bonus points. Aaron Richards said, in his experience, typically, the Plat is approved at the Planning & Zoning Commission level. The Plat typically would not go to
Council. He also found some typos. Alan clarified the typos can be cleaned up, but the content cannot change. In Rexburg, Planning & Zoning can recommend a plat to City Council,
but the City Council has to approve the roads for dedicated right of ways. Staff will complete reviews prior to the presentation to the Commission. Alan talked about DigEplan working
with Cityworks allowing notations and stamping directly on the digital plans to communicate to the developers.
Conflict of Interest? - Chairman Rory Kunz asked the Commissioners if they have a conflict of interest or if they have been approached by any parties relative to this particular subject.
If you believe your prior contact with respect to this subject has created a bias, you should recuse yourself, otherwise at this time please indicate the nature of your conversation
or contact. None.
Chairman Rory Kunz reviewed the public hearing procedures.
(Jim Lawrence is the only attendee on line.)
Favor: None
Neutral: None
Opposed: None
Written Correspondence: None
Rebuttal: None
Chairman Rory Kunz asked if anyone else would like to speak. He closed the public input portion of the hearing at 7:03p.m.
Commissioners Discussion: Vince Haley asked Sally to fully express her concern regarding this proposal. This is a lot of information to review. Alan has gone over the major changes;
she is not sure everyone is comfortable with everything right now. With PUDs, the problem is streamlining so much that we forget about public input. Kristi recalled Aaron Richards
saying the initial plan does come before the Commission. Is it necessary for the phases to come before the Commission? She is interested to see what people think. Vince Haley said
the latest phase of Summerfield is a great example. A phase of townhomes was approved in the PUD. The density was revised and a significant number of more townhomes were put in.
He would like to see the individual phases. Density increases deal with land use. Even though the initial density was approved and we have a general idea of what it is going to be,
there were a significant number of additional
townhomes platted. He would like to be able to approve those changes or not. Kristi Anderson clarified the change was within the zone requirement. Vince said Summerfield does have
a higher density, but the townhome section is a much higher density than the rest of the subdivision. Chairman Rory Kunz asked Alan how much more dense was the change from the original
proposal. Did the density change or did they change the way they had the density? His philosophy is you have to look at the maximum use for the neighborhood. (Original 92 townhomes,
12 units/acre; amendment 114 townhomes, just less than 14 units/acre with maximum density bonus points for LDR2.) Tawnya responded the density has just been moved around, because a
density has been approved for the entire development. Kristi Anderson clarified the Commission will see the phases at City Council. As long as they are staying under the perameters
at the beginning, she does not feel the decision needs to be made. Aaron Richards does like what Sally said about some kind of Land Use Study coming in with the PUD. A developer could
spin it; you could have 200 high-density units and 300 single-family, but it would be helpful to have a Land Use Study coming in with the initial zoning since the Preliminary Plat stage
is now gone. He thought it was neat that the Zoning Administrator has a point system to negotiate with the developer on. Because the existence of the bonus density point system is
in question, perhaps we should consider tabling this until more information could come together. Randall Kempton believes there is a lot of wisdom in what Aaron is saying; he has not
had enough time to read it and absorb the implications on it. He does not want to make a decision until his questions are answered. Tawnya confirmed the Commissioners are given two
links; one of the links had all of the documents, the other had some due to the large file size. David Pulsipher would like greater time spent on this; especially now that he knows
all the green highlighted text does not represent new text. David would like a document that outlines what is being added and what is being taken away. He would be in favor of tabling
the issue. Greg Blacker can see it both ways. He remembers when they focused on the number of shrubs. He thinks what the Commission is trying to do is good. Greg would like a little
more time to figure it out. He wants to make sure; there are many things he does not need to see. He does not want everything left up to City Staff, because he has seen problems with
that. The reason we have code is so that there is one set of rules for everyone to follow. Todd Marx agrees with Greg.
MOTION: Motion to table the PUD Development Code changes until January 7, 2020, for further clarification on the bonus density points and to give everyone time to review the proposal,
Action: Table, Moved by Kristi Anderson, Seconded by Sally Smith.
Vince Haley asked for a document without the green masses. Tawnya clarified there is a word document in the Commissioners’ packet for their review.
Commission Discusses the Motion: Chairman Rory Kunz suggested Vince talk to his fellow Commissioners rather than Tawnya. Vince Haley talked about the pages and pages of green. If
it is moved, he does not really care; if it is new, then he wants to see it. Kristi Anderson said there are three documents that have been submitted to the Commissioners for their
review. The original is there with notes. The second PUD document does not have the green text and includes annotations telling what she is doing with each section. The third is
the MuniCode. Tawnya identified each document: “MuniCode” prints the changes;
anything moved turns green, along with any additions to the text. “PUD Rewrite Documentation” is a word perfect document with annotations, which indicates where it came from. This
document identifies from those green sections what was actually changed and its previous location in the code. Chairman Rory Kunz asked, knowing these documents are available, would
the Commissioners be ready to vote.
VOTE: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 10).
Yes: Aaron Richards, Chairman Rory Kunz, David Pulsipher, Greg Blacker, Jim Lawrence, Kristi Anderson, Randall Kempton, Sally Smith, Todd Marx, Vince Haley.
January 7, 2021, the Planning & Zoning Commissioners voted to remove the item from the table and consider the application.
(20-00851) – Development Code Ordinance Amendment – Planned Unit Development. A Planned Unit Development is a type of subdivision and has been amended to match the approved subdivision
ordinance changes. (action) – Alan, City of Rexburg
Chairman Rory Kunz said the item was tabled, because it appeared more was added and removed than the Commission was prepared to discuss. After the item was reviewed, it was determined
more language was moved to a new location in the document, showing it was removed at the previous location. He asked if the Commissioners were prepared to discuss the item this evening
or if it should be prepared for another meeting.
Motion: Motion to remove the item from the table and discuss the item tonight, Action: Approve, Moved by Sally Smith, Seconded by Kristi Anderson.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 11).
Yes: Aaron Richards, Chairman Rory Kunz, David Pulsipher, Greg Blacker, Jim Lawrence, John Bowen, Kristi Anderson, Randall Kempton, Sally Smith, Todd Marx, Vince Haley.
Commissioner Discussion: Alan brought the proposal to the Commission. The Commission found it difficult to determine what had been removed, what had been changed and what had been
moved. He thanked the Commissioners for reviewing the proposal.
The proposal began with changes to the Plat process, simplifying a preliminary and final plat to a single plat process. Alan explained a preliminary plat is designed to show what is
being built, the developer puts in the infrastructure and a final plat is submitted to show what has been built. The city has not been following this procedure and the preliminary/final
plat procedure is not required by state law. The process was being used in repetition, two drawing prior to the commencement of any construction. The developer comes in and presents
the plan for development, then can move forward on construction. The City will retain the ability to accept the built infrastructure. The Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) has the
same situation, requiring a preliminary and final, a duplication in the process. The process has been combined to match the approved subdivision process. One of the concerns with
these changes was the ability for the Planning & Zoning Commission to see what is happening. Did we have a chance to make sure it is correct before we move on? Staff’s job is to check
the engineering standards. The Commission decides if the Plat matches what we want to see in the city and answer the question, does the proposal match
our Development Code? In a Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.), a few things are different from a regular subdivision. Usually, an applicant is coming in for a P.U.D. to increase their
density above what is stated in the Development Code. The P.U.D. requires them to do certain things to meet a higher standard to increase density to a certain point. The Commission
will review these higher standards; this part of the Development Code has not changed. The Commission will look at the type of buildings, the lights, the landscaping, which are these
higher standards. The only thing changing is the actual plat process. Where do those lots lay? What could potentially be built on these lots according to the code and the Density
Standards? The proposal can change from what the Commissioners are presented, as long as they still follow the approved or set requirements. To change those requirements, the Applicant
comes back to the governing bodies. Kristi Anderson recalled last time we had a question about the density bonus points. Point criteria were removed from the Infill/Redevelopment
Area and this is what members of the Commission were remembering. The amendment allows the Commission to see the request twice, once with the Planned Unit Development, and a second
time with the phasing. Alan confirmed the Commission did not have the opportunity to review the phases in the previous written process. The minutes were reviewed and the ordinances;
Staff found the infill requirements were removed, not the density bonus points requirements. Sally Smith looked at the definitions page and asked how it will read. It was dependent
on the copy printing. Sally’s and Kristi’s were different. Page 4 of the P.U.D. rewrite, plat definition will read:
“Plat: A map of a subdivision including supporting data, indicating a proposed subdivision development, prepared in accordance with this ordinance and the Idaho Code.
Recorded Plat: A Plat bearing all of the certificates of approval required in this ordinance and duly recorded in the Madison County Recorder’s Office.
Short Plat: A platting process for small subdivisions, five (5) lots or less, that allows for a shortened, quicker process for subdividing land that is approved by city staff only.
The Zoning Administrator and City Engineer can consider other simple plats on a case-by-case basis.”
Kristi Anderson read it thoroughly last night and felt a lot better about it. Sally Smith agreed that it makes more sense now they know how to read it. Aaron Richards feels there are
a lot of moving parts, but he feels better. Jim Lawrence liked having the extra time.
MOTION: Motion to recommend City Council approve these amendments for the Planned Unit Development section of the Development Code, because the changes simplify the process for the developer
and allow the P&Z Commission to be more involved., Action: Approve, Moved by Vince Haley, Seconded by Kristi Anderson.
Commissioner Discussion regarding the Motion: None.
VOTE: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 11).
Yes: Aaron Richards, Chairman Rory Kunz, David Pulsipher, Greg Blacker, Jim Lawrence, John Bowen, Kristi Anderson, Randall Kempton, Sally Smith, Todd Marx, Vince Haley.
Chairman Rory Kunz continued, there are no hearings scheduled for January 21, 2021. Vince Haley asked if any applications could still be received in time. Alan Parkinson answered there
is not sufficient time to make the January 21st meeting.
City Staff are working with Municode. The Planned Unit Development proposal in Municode has shown us there are some major glitches in Municode’s system. We are trying to resolve a
way, when code is moved, the program recognizes moved, rather than new and strikeout. Code actually disappeared from our live site. The proposed and live sites are supposed to stay
separate, but at this time, they are not working accordingly. Staff is working with Municode to try to make the situation better for all of us.
For the January 21st meeting, do we want to hold that meeting? There are no work meeting items at this time.
Vince asked about the Comprehensive Plan rewrite. Staff is working on the Comprehensive Plan draft; there have been some setbacks due to COVID. Kristi asked about form-based code.
Alan anticipates, best-case scenario, the Commission will see the form-based code at their first meeting in March. Staff is trying to reduce potential problems. The form-based code
was turned over to some architecture students at BYU-I to see what they could design. They were assigned different streets. The result was amazing and an aerial-view video was created.
This was awesome to see some things they created, but also revealed some flaws. Rory Kunz said he would be interested to see those things Staff did not want, so the whole group could
decide if that is true. Alan said, to put it very simply, one of the flaws was a city-block long, constant brick wall with a window every so often. No pedestrian features were used.
They called it Goolog, using the old-style Ricks College brick colors. Brett Sampson, with BYU-I, confirmed no offense was taken for the color of their brick. Alan is working on
the Mixed Use section, due to a mandate from both governing bodies, which stated they no longer want to see a Mixed Use proposal without a commercial component. He is also working
on some refinement, consolidation and streamlining of the uses in our zones. There are duplications, with just a little bit different wording. Then, these uses can be consistently
defined. An example would be the listing of different types of offices, with one that says, “miscellaneous offices.” None of these will be ready by the January 21st meeting.
MOTION: Vince Haley motioned the January 21, 2021, meeting be canceled. Sally Smith seconded the motion.
VOTE: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 11).
Yes: Aaron Richards, Chairman Rory Kunz, David Pulsipher, Greg Blacker, Jim Lawrence, John Bowen, Kristi Anderson, Randall Kempton, Sally Smith, Todd Marx, Vince Haley.
January 20, 2021, Alan Parkinson presented the application to City Council.
Ordinance No 1248 Amend Development Code Ordinance 1200 Planned Unit Development (PUD) Requirements #20-00851 – Alan Parkinson
Planning and Zoning Administrator Parkinson explained the proposed changes to the Planned Unit Development (PUD). They were part of the subdivision changes with the preliminary and final
plat process. The PUD changes are a continuation of those amendments. The PUD’s will be going through a higher level of the same type of process because specific requirements need to
be met. In the previous process the preliminary plat would go before the Planning and Zoning Commission for recommendation and then before City Council for consideration. The final
plat would go through the same process as the preliminary plat. In order to avoid redundancy in the process, the amendment called for only the final plat to go before the Planning and
Zoning Commission for recommendation and then before City Council for consideration.
Planning and Zoning Administrator Parkinson said he understands City Council’s concern with only having to consider the final plat; however, if City Council needs additional time to
make a decision on the final plat, they can table the item to have additional time to review the request.
Council Member Flora moved to approve Ordinance No 1248 Amend Development Code Ordinance 1200 Planned Unit Development (PUD) Requirements and consider first read; Council Member Walker
seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote:
Those voting aye Those voting nay
Council Member Flora None
Council Member Johnson
Council Member Mann
Council Member Walker
Council Member Wolfe
Council President Busby
The motion carried
February 3, 2021, the application was 2nd Read at City Council.
Ordinance No 1248 Amend Development Code Ordinance 1200 Planned Unit Development (PUD) Requirements #20-00851 – Alan Parkinson
Council Member Johnson moved to approve Ordinance No 1248 Amend Development Code Ordinance 1200 Planned Unit Development (PUD) Requirements and consider second read; Council President
Busby seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote:
Those voting aye Those voting nay
Council Member Flora None
Council Member Johnson
Council Member Mann
Council Member Walker
Council Member Wolfe
Council President Busby
The motion carried
February 17, 2021, the application was 3rd Read before City Council.
Ordinance No 1248 Amend Development Code Ordinance 1200 Planned Unit Development (PUD) Requirements #20-00851 – Alan Parkinson
Council Member Walker moved to approve Ordinance No 1248 Amend Development Code Ordinance 1200 Planned Unit Development (PUD) Requirements and consider third read; Council Member Flora
seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote:
Those voting aye Those voting nay
Council Member Flora None
Council Member Johnson
Council Member Mann
Council Member Walker
Council Member Wolfe
Council President Busby
The motion carried