HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z Minutes 3.03.22_exppdf1
City Staff and Others:
Alan Parkinson – P&Z Administrator
Tawnya Grover – P&Z Administrative Assistant
Kyle Baldwin – Planner 1
Natalie Powell – Compliance Officer
Spencer Rammell – Commissioner Attorney
Chairperson Smith opened the meeting at 5:12 PM.
5:00 PM – Work Meeting:
Roll Call of Planning and Zoning Commissioners: Roll Call.
Present: Jim Lawrence, Randall Kempton, Sally Smith (Chairperson), Todd Marx, Vince
Haley (Vice Chair), Eric Erickson, Brad Wolfe.
Absent: Aaron Richards, Bruce Casper, David Pulsipher.
Minutes:
Planning & Zoning Meeting February 17, 2022 (action)
Motion: Motion to approve the Planning & Zoning minutes as recorded for February 17, 2022.,
Action: Approve, Moved by Todd Marx, Seconded by Vince Haley (Vice Chair).
Vote: Motion passed (summary: Yes = 6, No = 0, Abstain = 1).
Yes: Eric Erickson, Jim Lawrence, Randall Kempton, Sally Smith (Chairperson), Todd Marx, Vince
Haley (Vice Chair).
Abstain: Brad Wolfe.
Commissioner Training – Attorney Spencer Rammell, Alan Parkinson
Alan wants to let the Commission know what Staff does to prepare the information that the
Commissioners see on the Staff Report.
Keith Davidson, Public Works Director, is responsible for the comments for sewer, water, and
traffic. Keith says every five to ten years, Master Plans like the Water Master Plan is updated. We
look at the areas we are going to grow into in the Impact Area. We are rubbing a crystal ball,
sometimes we get it right, and sometimes we do not. For example, Walmart landed on the north end
of town, and we anticipated growth there, but we have not seen the amount of growth we had
anticipated.
• Water & Sewer Lines - We ask what size of lines are needed to service these areas? As
the growth occurs, the developer is putting in the lines. The minimum size we require is
an 8” line, but in certain areas the city knows we will need a 16” line to service an area
that is larger than the developer’s parcel. The City pays for the upsize in the line and
establishes area charges. As that area develops, the city receives that cost back as a claw
35 North 1st East
Rexburg, ID 83440
Phone: 208.359.3020
Fax: 208.359.3022
www.rexburg.org
Planning & Zoning Minutes
March 3, 2022
2
back. In sewer we have a similar situation, there are front footage fees that are
reimbursed as the land fills in.
• System Capacity - When we look at our system, we look at capacity fees and the impact a
development will put on our system. We look at the peak gallons per day to determine
increases. A fee is determined for the peak gallons per day to be paid by the developer.
Those fees goes back in to purchase capacity like reservoirs, pumps, and additional wells
as our city grows. In Burton, another well is being built. Surface water rights must be
recharged into the ground to percolate down to be drawn out of our wells to eliminate
the need to treat that water. The idea is to avoid chlorination in the system.
• Roads – The City has a Transportation Plan. In fact, we are currently in the process of
amending the Transportation Plan. An engineering company goes out and takes counts
on the roads which are then entered into a model with the number of people who live in
an area. The model projects what will happen to our streets. The Transportation Plan
anticipates the roads needing attention based on the model.
• Funding - How do we fund all these improvements? We have Street Impact Fees based
on the trip generation we anticipate will put on the streets for a business or a home. The
Impact Fees are one-time fees, like capacity fees. The whole idea is development pays
their way into our city, instead of putting the burden on the residents. Street, Parks,
Police, and Fire are Impact Fees. Park Impact Fees are only for residential.
o Grants: For example, the East Parkway Corridor, the first phase of grant
money has been obtained for Barney Dairy Rd to E 7th N. $6 million dollars
is anticipated cost for this section, $3 million received from LTAC Grant for
a new street.
o Current Budget: Repair on existing streets.
o Local Improvement District (LID): Go back into an area to improve the
roads and sidewalk systems.
o Urban Renewal: Sometimes Urban Renewal will help fund items that are
above the normal cost of development.
• Brad confirmed some of that money will come back to the city as the lines infill. Keith
said sometimes the city has to say, we do not have the funds to connect your
development, you are going to have to front the cost, and we will allow you to claw that
back.
Example: Pine Brook is an example. A 14” line was pulled from Main Street to Pine
Brook in 2007, and they paid the full cost of that line, because it was needed for their
fire suppression system. Housing construction shut down and no more development
filled in. Keith had to open the line to dump water into a canal to keep the water
fresh, because there was only one house in that subdivision. Then, the sewer line had
to come all the way back to the treatment plant.
The Street Impact Fees are built up to help cover some of this cost.
• Traffic Impact Study - For individual projects, you may see a Traffic Impact Study may
be needed for a local area. For these intersections, I am looking at several factors: Do I
need a turn lane? Deacceleration lane? Traffic Signal? If during the peak hour, the count
is 100 trips or greater, a Traffic Impact Study is required based on potential uses.
Example: For example, Iron Horse is going in at S 12th W and University Blvd. The
Traffic Impact Study indicated a signal would be needed. A signal must meet a series
of eight warrants, because a signal increases the severity of accidents. The number of
3
accidents may decrease, but their severity increases. People look more at the lights to
determine their turn and less at how people are behaving at the intersection;
sometimes people come through those lights at a high rate of speed. A signal costs
about $400,000. A developer pays their proportionate share of that signal in their
Development Agreement based on the trips they would generate. Eric said the
traffic is not driven by the signal; the high school drives the signal. Keith said the
high school had a demand, but this development put them over a specified number.
The school district has paid their proportionate share of that signal as well.
Chairperson Smith asked who determines the warrants for the traffic signal. Keith
answered this is all done at the city.
A Traffic Impact Study looks at the little nuances that can occur; the cost for this study
can be $15,000 or more. Sometimes, the city will do a Traffic Impact Study ahead of
time, when we know a lot of growth is going to happen, so we can allocate out the
improvements ahead of time, on a bigger area.
Example: Urban Renewal helped with 7th S and Yellowstone, because a roundabout
is going in, a railroad crossing is being widened, etc. Another example would be N
2nd E and 7th N, when the traffic signal was put in, so one developer is not burdened
with the cost, and we already know what the allocation is.
Todd identified the RV Park sign on the south end of town. There was some confusion
about whether the land was in the city or county. The project is in the city limits. Keith
answered there is no mechanism outside of the city limits and the Area of Impact. As we
annex further and further out without infill, it is more expensive. Some developers are
looking for the cheapest ground that they can get city services to. For Infrastructure, the
cheapest is for everyone to live in a high-rise where the services exist. We are going to
have a mixing of zones and a wide variety of development. These are all the things he is
looking at as applications come in.
• Development Agreements - The agreements with the developer are all put in a
Development Agreement signed by the city and the developer and recorded. In this
agreement, the fees are all laid out that the developer is going to have. Right-of-way for
roads is determined. Whether or not a Traffic Impact Study is needed is noted. It will
also say something like, “based on the findings of the Traffic Impact Study additional
fees may by needed”. Attorney Zollinger said the goal is to get the developer to pay for
anything the developer is driving.
• Lift Stations – Keith said sometimes the City drives the issues. It is better to have one
main large lift station sunk deeper to service as big of an area as possible than a bunch of
little lift stations to be the most cost effective. The city pays the additional upsize fee and
claws that back as development occurs. Then those funds are used to expand.
Example 1: When he first started, one of his tasks was to design the lift station by
Willow Brook Subdivision and take that sewer line up to Main Street and south. We put
that line in twenty years ago, knowing development was going to occur in this area.
Example 2: The lift station by Barney Dairy was put in deeper due to flooding in
Stonebridge. The stormwater system backs up into the lift stations. In Stonebridge, the
existing lift station was overwhelmed. Now the deeper lift station will service almost all
the way to Moody and out east to the bench.
4
Chairperson Smith confirmed those things are already looked at by Staff before the
Commissioners see the application requests. Eric asked if the Commission is involved in the long-
range and master planning. The Commission is involved when they make the Comprehensive Plan
Map. The City Council does more of the master planning. Attorney Zollinger said Keith looks at
the Comprehensive Plan Map to determine what the likely build out will be, according to the areas
the group has designated. If time changes that build out, Keith adapts. The Commissioners’
influence is before the infrastructure is put in. Keith continued if there are drastic changes, he will
have to circle back around and review. Alan said Keith is looking at both the city limits and the
impact area. Attorney Rammell asked if Keith does an initial observation prior to a request? Keith
said the Master Plans would drive the decisions. Jim said the studies are initially based on the
Comprehensive Plan Map, but when we get a rezone, even if it goes against the Plan, has Keith
looked at this already? Keith answered, he has. Brad said when Alan gets up and says, “Staff has
looked at this and…”, everything talked about today has already happened. Attorney Zollinger said
we do not want the Commissioners getting into, because it creates a liability we do not want the
defend, is getting into the engineering of the project. We want to rely on a statement from Keith
that determines the actual situation, verses how people perceive the situation to be. When it comes
down to does something have the capacity,
• Model Conclusions from Traffic Study: Keith said there is a higher volume on US 20 and N
2nd E has maintained a similar volume based on average daily counts. Eric asked where the
counts were taken. Keith answered from 2nd N up to the old Walmart in our highest traffic
area on N 2nd E. From 2015 until now, the average counts on N 2nd E are relatively the same.
The model predicted we should be seeing 29,000 cars, but we are seeing 23,000, a slight
decrease. The counts are showing the same amounts as 2015. Keith’s prediction is that more
traffic will be seen on US20 as the diverging diamonds are built. Eric said from his
perspective he sees more traffic on N 2nd E now than there used to be. Attorney Zollinger
said it may be the times you are hitting the road. The actual counts support the current
traffic numbers. Keith said there may be a worse hour on N 2nd E like 5p.m. or 5:30p.m., but
the overall averages have been maintained. Attorney Zollinger explained the model can
show peak times, but an average daily total is the count for these comparisons. The city
recognizes there are bad moments on 2nd E. Jim confirmed there could be fluctuation
between 2015 and Fall 2021. Keith said it would be interesting to see a monthly comparison.
Many times, people change their routes when they know a road is going to be busy. Brad
said even when the population grows, we will have people take additional routes. Keith said
additional routes are in planning, including the East Parkway Corridor and 5th West. He
concluded fiber will help the signals time better. Another solution would be islands that limit
left turn movements to help the flow of traffic. Businesses will complain about less access to
customers. At certain times, the volume will be so great that the customers will not be able
to make the turn.
Alan said the key he takes away, his team is consistently reviewing not only when an application
comes in but reviewing the Master Plans to plan for the future five to ten years down the road.
Keith said one of his concerns is the sewer line on the north end of town coming in from Sugar
City. Alan asked Keith if he will state when a request is over the capacity, and something will fail.
Keith said if he states something is not going to work, he will not support it. Vince confirmed the
Commissioners do not have to worry about the water, sewer, or road capacities. Keith said they do
not have to worry about the engineering, the Commissioners need to look at if the request fits the
5
community. Public Works, Keith’s department, will identify in his notes if there are problems. If
Keith’s analysis exceeds capacity, if current capacity is not available, he will identify requirements
needed to make the development work. For example, a line by Smith Park had to be upsized to
make the development work at the developer’s expense. Vince confirmed if the Commission moves
for approval, the developer will have to make the accommodations for the development in the
Development Agreement. Attorney Zollinger clarified, if the analysis’ conclusion is this request
exceeds capacity, that should be the end of the discussion. If he says current capacity isn’t available,
he will further elaborate on what is needed. Or he will say the city has adequate capacity. Jim said he
is going to be correct because Keith’s license is on the line. Chairperson Smith confirmed the
Commissions’ job is more about interaction with the community. Attorney Zollinger will always be
nervous if the Commissions start talking about traffic, sewer, and those items the engineer is
responsible for. Understand and trust the engineer knows better than we do about these systems.
Attorney Rammell knows there is an apprehension when it comes to making a motion. He has
spoken often about the reasoned statement. The Commission and City Council rely on Staff.
Reasoned statements and a clear record are what the City Council and Staff rely on. There have been
problems when there is disconnect when two groups disagree with the third. The problem arises
when the two groups cannot not understand why there is a disagreement. He read:
Idaho Code 67-6535(2) – “ The approval or denial of any application required or
authorized pursuant to this chapter shall be in writing and accompanied by a reasoned
statement that explains the criteria and standards considered relevant, states the relevant
contested facts relied upon, and explains the rationale for the decisions based on the applicable
provisions of the comprehensive plan, relevant ordinance and statutory provisions, pertinent
constitutional principles and factual information contained in a record.”
He asked Alan if Alan has a set of criteria and standards which are relevant, he reviews for each
application. Alan has a checklist on each application. Attorney Rammell said we are going to make
this easier and provide a checklist that may help you lay a better record.
Jim asked if he could come back to the engineering report, sometimes what the public talks about it,
is it ok to say, based on the engineering study and the staff report, this is met, this is met, this is met.
Attorney Zollinger said if you have a string of citizens get up to talk about lack of desirability with
the road regarding traffic. We look at it and think about it, but the lawsuits across the state are based
on engineering reasons, like traffic. The reasoned decision is stated as denial, based on there is too
much traffic on the road. The applicant pays for a Traffic Study and the study shows the road is at
20% capacity. Either we approve the request, because our basis is wrong, or we go to court.
The checklist will encourage you to articulate more than one reason. Jim said you acknowledge the
concern, there are perceived problems, but based on the Staff’s report…. Attorney Rammell said
when a Staff Report is neutral, you may have to ask probing questions. More specifics may be
needed from Staff to help the Commission make their decisions on applications. However, we get to
a decision, Staff needs to be in a position to articulate the issues that were discussed by the
Commission to the City Council. Staff includes Planning & Zoning, Public Works, GIS, and Fire.
Vince understands the Commission is land-use based, and this is what the Commission is making
their decision on. Attorney Zollinger said in a perfect world, this is what the Commission would
focus on, but he has not been in such a meeting. Implicitly, the Commissioners call into question
Keith’s capability to do his job, when you say this might be a good place for apartments, but I hate
the traffic on 12th W, so I am going to vote to deny it, because there is just too much traffic on 12th
W. It is tough to convince a judge that this cross-section of the community knows more about
6
traffic, then the analytical engineer. Eric made the comment that the Commissioners checklist
should not be as detailed as Staff’s. Attorney Zollinger said evaluate whether the applicant’s request
is creating an anomalous activity. At that point, you approve or deny based on consistent reasons.
Jim confirmed we are trying to articulate the reasons clearly. Attorney Rammell reiterated, your
evaluation would be identifying specific reasons the request would be compatible or incompatible.
You use the principles of the Comprehensive Plan, which guides the designations on the
Comprehensive Plan Map to be used as a planning document. One of the first principles listed is the
rights of a property owner. Attorney Zollinger said you do not want to build yourself out of
options for potential roads. Some changes will cause drastic changes in the growth mode, and you
may have to reevaluate your Comprehensive Plan Map. We have reason to believe there will be a
growth generator on the north side of town. This summer you will be looking at the Comprehensive
Plan text.
Brad said over the years, please do not look at a particular project; look at the overall use and
capacity of the zone. Jim said he is thinking: 1) we should trust staff but verify and 2) the discussion
portion should be building the motion, talking in specifics, taking notes to articulate in the motion.
Attorney Zollinger said this makes the rationale part of the minutes. Even if the motion isn’t
articulated, he can go back to the minutes of the meeting. Attorney Rammell said open meetings
are open because we want to hear the public’s input. The public’s input should be acknowledged and
evaluated against the larger community concepts and values identified in the Comprehensive Plan.
Also, there are rights of the private property owner. When a private property owner is paying the
application fees, and we deny their request, we need to articulate specific reasons why the application
was denied. Tawnya said the Commissioners role is to see a broader view to the city. The citizens,
oftentimes, can only see the impact on them. The values in the Comprehensive Plan need to be
evaluated with the applicant’s request. Eric said the people who come with problems and concerns,
usually have not been to learn the background. Attorney Zollinger said the property owner has the
right to take advantage of the infrastructure in front of their property. Sometimes 100% of the
crowd will come and speak against an application. Your perception changes based on your
expectations. Eric said the people cannot think the Commissioners are rubber stamping the Staff’s
recommendation. Attorney Rammell reminded everyone the focus is on land use for most types of
land use. An exception would be a Planned Unit Development (PUD).
Chairperson Smith said Quick Sheets are easy for reference during the meeting. Attorney
Rammell said there will be some things that will come back to this board on confusion with
procedure. The ultimate issue deals more with a failure to lay an adequate reasoning or clear record.
Vince asked what the next steps are after the Commissioners’ decision. Attorney Zollinger
answered, the meeting is reduced to minutes, and the City Council reviews the minutes. Sometimes
the City Council members have questions and will come ask Staff or legal counsel. When the
Commission denies a request, the application goes to City Council as an appeal. The City Council
can accept the denial and the request is finished, they can reverse the Commissions’ decision, or they
can remand it back to the Commission. Essentially, the Council is asking the Commission to take
another look at it. If the Council reverses the Commissions’ decision, it is a substantial change, and
the application automatically comes back to the Commission for review. Then, whatever the
Commission decides, the City Council makes their decision. Eric confirmed there is no interim Staff
reviews. Attorney Rammell confirmed disagreements will happen, but there should be a clear
understanding of the specific reasons for a decision.
7
Vince confirmed some items we were going to discuss tonight will be pushed to a later meeting.
Alan said as we have light agendas, we will do as much as we can. Attorney Zollinger said to think
of plats as two-dimensional. Where do the houses fall? Where do the roads fall? Not does it drain,
not sewer access, not engineering. Feel comfortable asking any questions you would like.
6:30 PM Planning & Zoning Meeting: CANCELED
No Public Hearings or Plats
Tabled Items: None
Report on Projects: None
Heads Up for March 17th :
1. (22-00072) Glen Muir DIV1 subdivision (1 parcel) Rezone
2. (22-00100) S of Hidden Valley (4 parcels) Rezone
Adjournment