Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7.01.2021 P&Z Minutes_exppdf 1 City Staff and Others: Alan Parkinson – P&Z Administrator Tawnya Grover – P&Z Administrative Assistant Natalie Powell – Compliance Officer Spencer Rammell – City Attorney Chairman Rory Kunz opened the meeting at 6:30 p.m. Roll Call of Planning and Zoning Commissioners: Present: Chairman Rory Kunz, John Bowen, Vince Haley, David Pulsipher, Todd Marx, Randall Kempton, Sally Smith, Jim Lawrence. Absent: Greg Blacker, Kristi Anderson, Aaron Richards. Minutes: Planning & Zoning Meeting June 24, 2021 (action) MOTION: Motion to approve the minutes as recorded for the Planning & Zoning meeting on June 24, 2021, Action: Approve, Moved by Sally Smith, Seconded by Todd Marx. Commissioner Discussion on the Motion: None VOTE: Motion passed (summary: Yes = 5, No = 0, Abstain = 3). Yes: Chairman Rory Kunz, John Bowen, Sally Smith, Todd Marx, Vince Haley. Abstain: Jim Lawrence, Randall Kempton, David Pulsipher. Public Hearings: 1. 6:30PM (21-00377) 525 E 7th N Parcel #RPR6N40E176600 – Rezone from Low-Density Residential 2 (LDR2) to Low- Density Residential 3 (LDR3). A previous rezone request (21- 00063) of Medium-Density Residential 1 (MDR1) for this property was tabled April 7, 2021 and denied on May 5, 2021. There is an issue with a water ditch in this area. (action) – Jeff Freiberg Applicant Presentation – Jeff Freiberg – 946 Ox Bow Lane, Idaho Falls – Jeff asked that the application be put on hold until the next Planning & Zoning meeting. There are some ditch water issues that have not been resolved. MOTION: Motion to table this rezone application until the next available Planning & Zoning meeting in an effort to make sure the water issues are resolved., Action: Table, Moved by Vince Haley, Seconded by Todd Marx. 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Phone: 208.359.3020 Fax: 208.359.3022 www.rexburg.org Planning & Zoning Minutes July 1, 2021 2 Commissioner Discussion of Motion: David asked why a water issue would affect the zoning. How does this change the application? Chairman Kunz said that is a good comment. He does not believe the application would change as long as it would not be part of our decision. If some of the peoples’ concerns are there will be water issues, then we would have to consider those and they would need opportunity to resolve them. Vince attended the City Council meeting about a month ago, when this application was initially presented. He attended the city council meeting where the Council voted against the application, because the water issues were not settled. If they are not settled, they need to be resolved prior to the Planning & Zoning Commission moving forward. Vince understand the Commission is a recommending body to City Council, but he feels the Commission also needs to take Council’s recommendations and figure out the water issues before we move forward. Sally asked the applicant if anything has been done toward the water issue. Jeff Freiberg answered. Centennial Townhomes is built immediately to the West of this property. This is a sister project, if you will. They are working towards a solution, but Jeff has not received the solution, so we can better talk about them. Public Works has not received the solution either; Jeff called up to talk to them today. Sally asked what will happen if there is no solution. Jeff said if there is no solution, he does not know the answer to develop this piece of property. Right now, he believes it is a good idea to wait on it as the Commission has suggested. Staff Report: Planning & Zoning – Kyle Baldwin – Kyle spoke with Alan about this issue. It is Staff’s recommendation to table the application. Vince understood there was some flooding in this location within the last week. This is a public hearing and it does need to be published. If we do table this application, how long will it be until the application could be heard again? In addition, would the Applicant have to pay those republishing fees? Sally asked if we go forward with the public hearing, and we did not have sufficient information, could the vote be tabled? Moreover, the vote could come sometime in the future? Attorney Rammell said you could adjourn prior to voting. A separate notice would be needed and hearing at that time. Vince explained at least three weeks to a month would be required prior to a second hearing. Tawnya said, if tabled, August 10th, would be the next public hearing. The cost would be about $300 to republish. Randall said since is the applicant’ request, he thinks we should honor the request. David said he sees no reason not to table the request until the application is ready to be presented. Chairman Kunz explained to the audience that he is not taking public comment, because the meeting is not progressing to the public input portion of the meeting. If you cannot make the next meeting, he encouraged attendees to write a letter or email to express your voice to be read into public hearing. Reuben Miller said he would still like to express to the Commission the Idaho State Statute that is not being followed. VOTE: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8). Yes: Chairman Rory Kunz, David Pulsipher, Jim Lawrence, John Bowen, Randall Kempton, Sally Smith, Todd Marx, Vince Haley. Reuben Miller – 547 E 7th N - He owns the three acres just north of the proposed subdivision and rezoning. Reuben has made the City Planner, City Attorney, and City Council aware of this statute. In 2018, Idaho’s Legislature amended Idaho Code 67-6519 paragraph 4. Whenever a county or city considers a proposed subdivision or any other site -specific land development application authorized by this chapter, it shall provide written notice concerning the development proposal by mail, or electronically by mutual agreement, to all irrigation districts, 3 ground water districts, Carey act operating companies, nonp rofit irrigation entities, lateral ditch associations and drainage districts , that have requested, in writing, to receive notice . Any irrigation districts, ground water districts, Carey act operating companies, nonprofit irrigation entities, lateral ditch associations and drainage districts requesting notice shall continue to provide updated and current contact information to the county or city in order to receive notice . Any notice provided under this subsection shall be provided no less than fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing date concerning the development proposal as required by this chapter or local ordinance. The reason we have a drainage problem is the City is not following through with notifying the Madison/Fremont Irrigation District or the Teton Island Canal Company. There is a private ditch, with right-of-way, that goes to where the City now has Stonebridge Street, Hope Street, and Love Street. There is no place for the water to go. Just last week, instead of it getting to my house, the water was diverted onto fields with hay bales still on them and flooded some storage units at All American Storage. People now have their property wet. Farmers cannot flood irrigate. His basement is there. The City explained to him when he came to the meetings at City Hall, the proper signatures were not on the Centennial Plat. The City said they would resolve this issue, and they would not approve anything until this was resolved. Yet, here we are again with another zone change. This is not showing good faith on the part of the City. This is not good faith for the owners, who have yet to come to him to apologize, and do some mitigation to resolve this issue. On the five acres, there could be development of a pond to create a place for the water to go instead of it flooding his house or someone’s storage or the church or the new buildings. We have to choose whom this issue will affect. This is not right. The application should have been heard, so we can vote this down. This is going to take a lawsuit to go. Chairman Kunz said if I understand your concern correctly, it is that the City itself is not abiding by Idaho Codes 67-6519, which states we as a City need to identify all projects and communicate them to the irrigation districts prior to development occurring or before zoning change? Reuben answered before any changes. Any plan needs to go to the irrigation districts. The City is no longer in ignorance; this is blatant disregard for the law. This is all in the name of a sidewalk to get to a park? Are we serious about this? We do not care about the residents that are already there? Or the farmers that have been farming this land for how many decades? He apologized for his emotion on this topic. He wants to stick to just the facts. It is hard to stick to the facts when you are shut down before given the chance to speak. Farmers have been irrigating hundreds of acres around him and have been for a while. A month ago, Dan Hanna’s barn burned in due to ditch maintenance. The fire killed three goats and his stud. Can you imagine as we start to stack all of these people next to farmland, what will happen? The farmers have had many years of burning ditches and flood irrigating the land, and now we are pushing people next to them. Now we want to make the farmers the problem? Many people attending the hearing have left their fields to come and support Mr. Miller. Chairman Kunz said these are good items to bring up in the public hearing. Reuben said we were here today to bring them up. Chairman Kunz said unfortunately we cannot apply those comments to the hearing today. Reuben said there is still daylight outside. He had to beg people to come out to the meeting tonight to help him, who should be out tending their hay, branding their cattle, and doing the things they have always been doing. We have to keep coming back. Reuben said he went to four City Council meetings. Now, this application has been tabled. This is not fair. This would all be avoided if the City would follow the state statute. They would have sent it to the irrigation district, who would have said we do not have a lateral right there. However, Mr. Munns, Mr. Miller, Mr. Muir, and Mr. Davenport all use this right-of-way to get their drainage to the river. Then, they would have said you could not build a road there. He appreciated the Commissioners’ time and asked for questions. No questions. 4 Attorney Rammell asked Reuben Miller to state for the record the dates Reuben Miller. Reuben said on March 18, 2021, he attended the Planning & Zoning meeting. This application was originally requested for a zoning of Medium-Density Residential 2 (MDR2). City Council voted no, but it got pushed down three or four times. Chairman Kunz clarified April 7, 2021 and May 5, 2021 are the dates when Mr. Miller is saying the state statute was not followed. Attorney Rammell asked, was there a previous discussion in 2018 with City Council? Reuben answered, yes. It is those dates; we have hired an attorney. We had Lance Schuster here addressing City Council. Attorney Rammell clarified the state statute was revised in 2018. Chairman Kunz confirmed. Mr. Miller is saying the statute was revised in 2018, and we are not abiding by that statute now, because the City did not notify the irrigation company prior to the April 7th and May 5th meetings. Reuben said if you pull those minutes, you would find it is not up to the City to notify the water districts, it is up to the developer. This is against that statute. Then, they quickly reversed and said since it is an irrigation district; they do not have to tell them anything. Three different answer were given in the same meeting. Before this meeting, you should be notifying the irrigation district and the Teton Island Canal Company, so they can put down on there who has a private ditch in your way. Attorney Rammell said we would pull those minutes and talk to City Council. Vince asked to question Staff. Last week, there was an application at the June 24th meeting and the Applicant spoke about having to have the canal district sign off on the Plat. Is this standard for all applications moving forward? Was it specific to that application? Chairman Kunz referred to Mr. Leatham’s application. Mr. Leatham stated he was under the impression he has to put in a diversion ditch. Someone from the audience spoke about meetings in 2019 with the engineer on the Centennial project claiming the requests were not included. The canal company has not signed off on the Plat. Chairman Kunz asked are you speaking about Mr. Leatham’s property? The man from the audience has been in contact with the canal company. Vince said we might have taken someone’s word. Attorney Rammell said there are some distinguishing words in the statute and he will defer to Attorney Zollinger, making the appropriate communications. We will proceed after gathering more information. He was not in attendance for the March meeting. He is in favor of following statutes and the law. Vince asked when the next scheduled meeting would be. Tawnya explained the group would have a work meeting on July 15th for the form-based code. The groups’ feedback is due to Scott Johnson and Alan Parkinson on July 8th. Vince asked if there are any public hearing agenda items for the second meeting in July. Tawnya said there is not. David Pulsipher asked for a report on July 15th on this statute. Attorney Spencer Rammell will report to the group on that night. The audience can come to any open public meeting, but the audience only speaks to the group during the public input portion of the hearing. A man spoke from the audience. Heads Up: July 15th Hearings: NONE Adjournment at 7:02PM