Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRFD - 22-00072 - 1 parcel Muir Glen DIV1 - RP04MG1001004D - Impact Area - Rezone from TAG to MDR1 1 | Page #22 00072 Rezone from Transitional Agriculture (TAG) to Medium-Density Residential 1 (MDR1) Approx. 236 W Moody Rd (1 parcel in Muir Glen DIV1 subdivision) Area of Impact 1. February 3, 2022, An application was received for a Rezone from Transitional Agriculture (TAG) to Medium-Density Residential 1(MDR1) from Rachel Whoolery. 2. February 9, 2022, The legal description was received and fees were paid. 3. February 22, 2022, Staff Reviews were completed. 4. February 24, 2022, The Staff Report was written and attached to the permit. Notice was sent to the newspaper to be published on March 1st and March 8th, 2022. 5. February 28, 2022, Notice was mailed to all property owners within 350’. 6. March 9, 2022, Notice was posted on the property. 7. March 15, 2022, A petition against the proposal was received as a written response. 8. March 17, 2022, Alan Parkinson presented the application to the Planning & Zoning Commission. 6:30PM (22-00072) Glen Muir DIV1 (1 lot -RP04MG1001004D) – Rezone from Transitional Agriculture (TAG) to Medium-Density Residential 1 (MDR1) in the Area of Impact. This property is a flag lot adjacent to US Highway 20 on the north and a small strip connecting to W Moody Rd. The property is one parcel in the Muir Glen DIV1 subdivision. One parcel has been split from the original plat. The property is now 11.18 acres. Final approval will be the Madison County Commissioners. The property is actually at approximately 236 W Moody Rd. – Rachel Whoolery (action) Staff Report: Alan Parkinson – The property was shown on the overhead map. The property is in the Area of Impact, not in the city limits. The ground around the proposal is Transitional Agriculture. This parcel is currently also Transitional Agriculture (TAG) and the applicant is requesting to rezone to Medium-Density Residential 1 (MDR1). City water and sewer will need to be accessed at the intersection of N 2nd E 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Phone: 208.359.3020 Fax: 208.359.3022 www.rexburg.org Reason for Decision City of Rexburg 2 | Page and W Moody Rd. Roads will have to be built-out to the applicant’s property, complete with sidewalks. All storm drainage will have to be maintained on site. Staff is neutral on recommending this to the commissioners. Commissioner Questions: Vince asked about showing the zoning sheet and show the differences between the TAG and MDR1 zones. Alan said in Transitional Agriculture (TAG), the minimum size is one acre lots. In Medium-Density Residential 1 (MDR1) there is 16 units per acre allowed. David asked if the application would also be heard by the County Planning & Zoning Commission. Alan said no, we are holding the hearing, then the request will go to the Madison County Commissioners for final approval. Aaron asked if the property would need to be annexed prior to the city providing utilities. Alan answered if the applicant is allowed to connect to city water and sewer, the applicant will be charged 1.5 times the normal rate in the Area of Impact. Aaron clarified the request is not for annexation also. Alan confirmed the property is not contiguous to city limits and will not be annexed at this time. Applicant Presentation: Rachel Whoolery - 131 Charles Place – When we were looking at the best use of this land, we were looking at what was going on in our community. In March 2019, the median house was valued at $254,000. As of February 2022, the median house is $380,000. The average price to build a home ranges from $110 to $120 per square foot. Supplies are limited. Construction companies are overbooked. All of this has created a change for Rexburg. Madison County is the least affluent county in Idaho. Households in Madison County have a median income of $39,160. At this income level, the people cannot afford a home that is $380,000. Our community has expanded, doubling its size in the last ten years. Most of our community cannot afford a median house. People have to rent to live here. With eleven acres, it would be better to have a mix of housing. She mentioned different types of units. In an MDR1 zone at 16 units per acre, we are talking about a community feel. The housing would all be residential. Rachel owns a property management company here in Rexburg. As of this morning, she has 47 people on a waiting list for 9 units. She sees the need and demand; we need a place for low- and medium-income people to live. The number of single students in the community have gone up, while the number of married students has gone down. Married students are going to nearby communities instead of staying in Rexburg. A housing crisis is happening, which takes a while to build; the situation will continue for some time as we have more people moving into this area. Along the frontage of W Moody Rd, there are single-family homes. To change this property commercial, the Comprehensive Plan Map would have needed to be changed also. Also, there is already a residential feel in the neighborhood. Therefore, the residential zone is being sought. In this area, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints purchased 106 acres and announced a temple. Commercial entities are starting to come in and be built near Walmart. This area is becoming one where Rexburg will see development. People need to be able to walk to the commercial and residential will create the customers. She is asking to rezone to MDR1, which is an allowed zone in the Comprehensive Plan. Rachel also asks for permission to hook-up to city services – water and sewer. The property is not contiguous to city limits; there is a property between this one and city limits, whose owner is not interested in annexing at this time. 3 | Page Commissioner Questions: None Chairperson Smith opened the public input portion of the hearing at 6:54PM. Favor: Colby Hatton – 156 S 4th W – He is in favor of the new zoning, allowing housing to be built on this parcel. In Rexburg, there is a tight, housing crunch. It is very difficult to find affordable, livable housing. Housing near commercial amenities is desirable; it would be amazing to have a house so close to Walmart and a temple. The applicant’s land will become important land in the coming months and years. We need to be able to build the houses we need in Rexburg to strengthen our community. Neutral: Teton Island Canal Company – Roger Muir - 252 W Moran View Rd – The Teton Island Canal company needs adequate access to clean and maintain the canal that runs along US Highway 20. A trackhoe is needed to access the canal to maintain the canal banks and clean the canal out. A major headgate check in the canal at the northwest end of the property that may need cleaned or have concrete replaced. An irrigation ditch runs down the west of the property that also needs to be accessed at all times. No landscaping and trees can be put in here. Commissioner Questions: Bruce confirmed the canal is used all the time. Eric asked about the normal right-of-way. Roger answered, as per Jerry Rigby, there is no set footage right-of-way for irrigation and canals; it is the amount of land needed to maintain the canals and ditches. At this location, it is the width of a trackhoe. Wayne Neff – 232 Moody Rd – He does not disagree that Rexburg needs affordable housing. The plans for this property have changed every season. There is no commitment for the neighbors. Wayne’s impression is that this property will be resold. Anything the applicant says about what would be built here should not be considered. Wayne confirmed from Rachel – she will not be developing the property. He feels changing the property at this time would be premature. Wayne bought the property last fall. The Moody Rd is not well maintained. Snow removal is not consistent. This might change as sidewalks and such are put in that may mediate the existing conditions. Opposed: Neil Call – 320 W Moody Rd – Neil’s property is immediately west of this property. He has lived there for 47 years and has a lot of knowledge of what is going on in this area. The canal runs a major stream of water all summer long, irrigating thousands of acres. The water is deep and fast running. One of his concerns is the flooding. There are cross checks along the canal and when the canal is full, and it is a farmer’s turn to irrigate, he puts boards across the crosscheck to allow the canal to backup the water and raise the water over his headgate. Up the canal to its origin, the canal is lined with trees. When there is a wind that breaks the trees’ branches, sometimes those branches fall into the water and the ditch will raise the water higher than you anticipate. The same affect happens when garbage blows into the canal. These 4 | Page circumstances cause the water in the ditch to run over. He cannot remember a summer when the canal water has not run over its banks. While the land considered tonight has been maintained as farm ground, there has been no problem with this situation. A few years ago, someone purchased the ground and went in and leveled the ground. It was not long after that, there was a wind, debris in the canal, and the canal ran over. The land we are talking about was completely covered with about four inches of water. Several hours passed before the water soaked back in to the ground. It is not possible to raise the land at the checks. Neil and the Muirs flood irrigate. By June or July, the subwater rises in the summer up to ground level. Apartments with a septic system will be affected when the subwater rises. Neil has fought septic problems for a lot of years because of the high water table and he is farther from the canal. When the sewer backs up into the house, it does not make for a happy wife. Another concern he has if for safety. If you are going to have a lot of children there, you can say you will fence them in, but you can only fence so much. The water, ducks and geese nest there along the canal bank, will attract children. The request seems premature right now. Nicole Farnsworth – 278 W Moody Rd – Nicole owns Lot #2 of the Muir Glen DIV1 subdivision. She was responsible for platting the Muir Glen DIV1 subdivision. MDR1 allows 16 units per acre. This density on potentially 100 acres is a huge number. Those kind of numbers do not fit in a farming neighborhood. The Commissioners know the challenges better than anyone else that come with each different zone. To allow these challenges into a neighborhood that is not equipped to handle those challenges, in her opinion, undermines the whole idea of zoning. She is concerned for the need of sidewalks. Who will pay for the sidewalks? If the burden is placed on the residents, this would range from being a heavy financial burden to an impossibility for some to pay. With the recent changes in the TAG zone from two acres to one acre, there are a lot of single-family homes that could fit on the applicant’s piece of land and no zone change would be necessary. These comments would upset the way of life for the people who already live in this neighborhood. Mark Farnsworth – 278 W Moody Rd – Also lives at Lot #2 of Muir Glen DIV1. He shares his wife’s concerns. Compared to the land around it, the requested density is very different from the current one home per two acres, and recently, one-home- per-acre properties. At least two acres is lost along US Highway 20 with the canal. There would be a lot of change for the neighborhood and the community. The road access would need to be widened and better maintained. There is concern about how the impacts will be physically and financially to the residents currently living there. Already submitted to the Commission, is a petition the neighbors and residents all signed against this request. The businesses and purchase of land in this area is accurate, however, these reasons alone are not adequate to redesignate this land at this time; this is a decision we get to make as a community. This seems like the wrong decision to rezone at this time and the request is not compatible with the neighborhood. Roger Muir – 252 W Moran View Rd – He has grown up here and lived here all his life. The shortage of housing does not create an atmosphere of hopscotch to create a subdivision, especially since the sewer and water is three-quarters of a mile away. 5 | Page Without the density, putting in that sewer and water is impossible to do. Farnsworth’s made a subdivision with 2 acre lots and then the zoning ordinance changed to allow 1 acre lots. The change is a hindrance to the Farnsworths, because they could have done a lot more with their property. Roger does not like change in his backyard, but he understands change will happen. Change does not need to happen until resources are in place to make the development possible and make it flow. The church build-out on their property will determine much of the build-out in this area. He assumes there will be high-end housing around a temple, as this is a common pattern of development for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. He thinks it is a poor idea to change the zoning at this time. If they would like to put one acre lots as those that would be allowed in the current TAG zone, this would be a better fit for the area. Commissioner Questions: Vince confirmed Roger’s earlier comments were as the President of the Teton Island Canal Company, and his most recent comments are personal. Wendy Sakota – 78 W Moody Rd – For this proposed subdivision, the people would drive right by her house. Some of her concerns have already been mentioned like the road is not well-maintained. The road is not very wide. In the winter, the south wind comes right into her yard. When she drives down the road in the winter, she has to go as fast as she can to make it over the drifting snow. During the summer, there is a lot of farm equipment going up and down the road. Farm animals are moved down the road. The corner is not safe where the light is at the intersection of Walmart. She takes her life in her hands each time she goes straight to Walmart. Out of town people think they have the right-of-way to turn left; it is not a right-of- way, they have to yield. The width is not wide enough for two lanes. This make accidents more possible. Wendy does not want sidewalks in this area. Sixteen years ago, her father-in-law owned the land and let her and her husband build there. Her neighbors are all quiet and lovely and she is opposed to the zone change. Mack Shirley – 443 W Moran – He is representing his family. They own a homestead near the west end of the road. His family are neighbors to Neal Call. He is not opposed to expansion and helping with what the community needs. This request seems to be premature as Wayne mentioned. We really do not know what the development is going to be like on the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saint’s property. We need to approve something that is compatible with what is going on there. He is against this proposal for these reasons and lends his voice in opposition in agreement with his friends and neighbors. Richard Garner - 650 Palmer Circle – He is the principal of an elementary school in the Sugar-Salem School District. This area is in the Sugar-Salem School District. If this is the type of housing is brought into this area, more children may be brought into this district. Sugar-Salem School District just opened a new middle school and maxed out their bond at this time. The school district is bonded out for quite a while. As the Commissioners consider the decision, the school district cannot accommodate additional students at this time. 6 | Page Written Correspondence: Rebuttal: Rachel Whoolery - She understands this is change and she understands it is hard. She is trying to be aware of the needs and concerns of the neighborhood. Rachel would like to make a correction – she said Rexburg is the least affluent county and the truth is Rexburg is the third poorest county in Idaho. We have a poverty rate of 30.5%. People are already here and families are needing places to live. If they were young students, they would be living next to campus. Sidewalks are paid for by the developer. A lot of times developers are required to make sidewalk connections to commercial clusters. There is a way to make the area safer for pedestrians. The Comprehensive Plan was already voted on for the use of the land for the scope of this property. The land is farmland and very rural, but we are 3,000 feet from Walmart. Rachel spoke of an overpass going over Hwy 20 from Moody Rd. to 7 | Page Hibbard. She claimed funding was being obtained. Development means the infrastructure gets better. As far as the canal, that is really good information. The water level was tested. The canal already has an easement. US Highway 20 has a setback. 1 ½ to 2 acres of the 11 acres for this request is undevelopable land. Those areas will already need to be engineered with retention ponds. Build-up will need to happen to prevent flooding. She thinks there will be a lot more development. This is on the lower side of density for development near these anchor stores. You usually do not see single-family homes surrounding these commercial anchor stores. She may be the first, but she will not be the last who will come forward and make these kinds of requests. Medium-density is a buffer from the high-density that will come in later. Commissioner Questions: Chairperson Smith asked how wide is the access into this property. Rachel answered the access to W Moody is sixty (60’) feet. Either the road is a private road, or a land swap with a neighbor may be possible to get the sixty-six (66’) feet for a standard public road. Vince confirmed the measurement of the access strip. Chairperson Smith closed the public input portion of the hearing at 7:26PM. Commissioner Questions for Staff: Aaron asked for this type of density, is a single point of ingress/egress standard. Alan said he thinks 180 units or greater requires a second access. Number of accesses is based on the fire department’s review. (The Fire Department clarified 30 units of non-sprinklered units requires a second access. 200 sprinklered units would require a second access road.) Aaron asked if the city would accept a sixty (60’) feet right- of-way. Alan said this would be a private drive unless the road is built up to city standards. Bruce asked if crops were grown on the property last year or the year before. The answer from the audience was no. Aaron asked if a Traffic Study will be requested. Alan said one will be requested if it is required. Part of the car wash request on the corner of W Moody and N 2nd E would be to widen the road at the intersection. The widening of the road will happen regardless of whether this applicant’s request is approved or denied. Chairperson Smith asked about the overpass. Alan said it has been discussed, but the City is not moving forward with ITD on this overpass at this time. If the three interchanges fail, then alternative routes across the highway will be considered. Chairperson Smith asked about the sidewalk requirement and who would be responsible. Alan said for MDR and HDR zones, connectivity of the sidewalk needs to connect to the nearest commercial cluster by sidewalk. The applicant would be responsible for curb and gutter, sidewalk, and a landscape strip. Aaron confirmed this requirement is not only on the developer’s frontage, but all the way from the applicant’s property to the Walmart intersection. He asked if septic was an option. Alan answered septic is not an option, but for water, this development could have their own wells; the development would have to connect to city sewer. Chairperson Smith asked Alan to repeat how far the connection is from the applicant’s property. Alan answered the land is approximately 3,000 feet to the Walmart intersection. A study would probably have to be done, but the city anticipates the need for a lift station at this location. In preparation for growth, the city would upsize the lift station and the sewer line. The developer would pay for the required sizes and the city would pay the remaining cost to upgrade the lift station and lines. 8 | Page Jim confirmed Madison County would still be responsible for snow removal on this section of W Moody Rd until the properties along the road are annexed. Alan said the county and city work together to determine whose roads are whose for maintenance. He is not sure whose responsibility this road is. Vince said he knows the land is currently TAG or the Transitional Agricultural zone. He asked Alan to give a summary of what TAG is designed to be. Alan answered this kind of land is generally farm ground now, but we anticipate this land will move into city limits in the future. It all depends on this side of town and how it grows. TAG allows the size to be preserved, so when a developer comes in, those larger lots would be available. When we made changes to the minimum lot size in a TAG zone to one-acre lots, the size of the lot was a better fit for the city. Under the current conditions, the land can continue to be farmed or have some animals. Attorney Rammell asked Alan to explain why Staff is neutral. Alan replied; some of Staff is opposed and some are in favor. Some Staff do not feel this request fits the area at this time. It is a stretch for the sewer and water connection. It will be an expense for anyone who wants to develop this land. In the future, Staff thinks it might work, but for right now, some do not feel this is a good fit. Bruce was reminded he cannot interact with the public in the audience once the public input portion of the meeting is closed. Chairperson Smith asked about communication with canal companies. Alan said when a development starts, the canal company is contacted. We also inform the applicants to work with the canal companies to maintain those ditches and flows. The City understands the value of irrigation water. Vince asked Attorney Rammell about the definition of a spot zone. Attorney Rammell read, “Spot zoning commonly refers to the singling out of one lot or other small area for zoning classification that is different from that accorded to similar surrounding land, usually for the benefit of the owner and to the detriment of the community. The most widely accepted test for determining an illegal spot-zoning is sometimes stated in combination or sometimes separately as whether the zoning for the parcel in question is in accordance with the Comprehensive Zoning Plan, whether the zoning of the subject parcel is compatible with the uses in the surrounding area, and whether the zoning of the subject property serves the public welfare or merely confers the discriminatory benefit on the owner of the property.” Conflict of Interest? – Chairperson Smith 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. Commissioner Discussion: Aaron thinks ultimately this is what will play out with what is underway. The challenge that we are grappling with is timing. This development by itself is not feasible due to the costs. The amount of utilities required to build this density on this parcel makes it undevelopable on a cost per unit basis. The questions he is asking are: Is the request beyond our current utilities? Does this qualify as spot zoning? He is not opposed to the land use. This will be an important corridor to the city. But how far out will this be? 10 years? 5 years? Randall is also 9 | Page thinking about the timing? Will one person have to buy a bunch of the land? Or will it come in piece by piece? When do we say we are ready for this area to go to higher density? Jim said he was thinking the same thing. Do we want the city to grow out contiguously? Eric says Vince’s comment of spot zoning needs to be discussed. This zoning seems to be an island of MDR zoning out there by itself. He seems to have a problem with that, in that it is impossible to know the future on adjacent properties. We might pigeonhole ourselves into something that may or may not fit down the road. Chairperson Smith said two of the three elements in the spot zoning definition seem to apply to the applicant’s request. Randall said on the face of it, it seems this in the middle of nowhere. What is MDR doing here? Except in the Comprehensive Plan, we see this area building out as mostly residential. We envisioned more density in this area. Someone has to be the pioneer. Aaron said we also need to consider frontage on the highway. Single-family against the highway is not a good use either. David said he agrees with the conversation; he can see where this is going. So much of this is speculative. This feels natural for how we anticipate this area going; it fits with the Comprehensive Plan; this is a perfect use of the property as we imagine this area is going to happen. We anticipate things moving in certain directions, but events often take us in different directions, much like the high school reoriented focus in the city. It feels appropriate, but it seems like we are placing a flag out there and indicating we want everything back to N 2nd E to continue to develop. It feels premature, but on the face I would say yes. Aaron said the request is an appropriate step down from commercial to single-family detached residences. Chairperson Smith asked Alan about the business park of Bron Leatham. Alan is not aware of the business park moving forward. Chairperson Smith said she saw a shop under construction on one of the front lots of the Muir Glen DIV1 subdivision. Chairperson Smith asked would the sidewalk requirements be the same for the commercial business park? Alan said commercial and light industrial are different; they would be responsible for the portion in front of their property but would not have to connect sidewalks to the commercial cluster. With residential, more foot traffic is generated. Commercial has more car and truck traffic. David asked if the church property goes all the way down to the Moody Rd. The applicant may be assuming the church will help pay some of those infrastructure costs. Alan said there would be a clawback over a certain time frame to allow the developer to recoup the connection costs. Vince said we need to remember it is a slippery slope of what could be done in the near future. What we have before us is an application based on what is currently in place. He would make his decision based on utilities not being there and a large presence of agriculture in the area; there is nothing even remotely close to a higher-density of residential until a mile south of cemetery road. He agrees with comments before, but the timing is wrong. Vince’s vote will be based on this piece of property and how this property interacts with and affects the land around it. Brad said he has been listening; we are getting hung up on utilities and projects. Is this an area in which we want to see this zoning now or in the future? If it is, you vote accordingly. The applicant will have to work with the city on all the other details. MOTION: Motion to recommend to the Madison County Commissioners that the application (22-00072) Glen Muir DIV1 (1 lot -RP04MG1001004D) Rezone from Transitional Agriculture (TAG) to Medium-Density Residential 1 (MDR1) in the 10 | Page Area of Impact be denied, based on it not interacting well with the TAG zones around it and the inability for the Commission to see any of the property in this area moving to a higher density in the near future, Action: Deny, Moved by Vince Haley, Seconded by Jim Lawrence. Commissioner Discussion on the Motion: Attorney Rammell said there were some comments about spot zoning. Are there any issues or concerns that would be a part of the motion? Vince said because the request does match the designations of the Comprehensive Plan Map, allowing the ability to request Medium-Density Residential, would this request still be considered a spot zone. Attorney Rammell counseled spot zoning is up for debate and could be argued either way. Jim said part of the spot-zoning definition talked about compatibility with the surrounding area; I think this part of the definition fits in the context of this discussion. Eric said, yes, the Comprehensive Plan Map allows for the zoning, but this is a zoning issue, not a comprehensive plan issue. In the context of zoning, this in his opinion, appears to be a spot zoning, an island of MDR out there on its own. Vince asked if the Commissioners need to amend the motion to strengthen the motion and add wording about spot zoning. Randall asked about the terminology “inability for the Commission to see any of the property in this area moving to a higher density in the near future.” David said he would be willing to consider the motion if it did not have the language, “the inability for the Commission to see any of the property in this area moving to a higher density in the near future.” We have a murky crystal ball, but we are anticipating this area moving in that direction. Potentially, several zoning changes may be coming to the Commission in the next six months to a year. As far as the spot zoning aspect, that is a stronger argument. Attorney Rammell said the options procedurally are to vote on the motion that has been moved and seconded. Or Vince could retract his motion. Vince Haley retracted the motion. Motion: Motion to recommend the Madison County Commissioners that the application (22-00072) Glen Muir DIV1 (1 lot -RP04MG1001004D) – Rezone from Transitional Agriculture (TAG) to Medium-Density Residential 1 (MDR1) in the Area of Impact be denied, based on it not interacting well with the TAG zoned properties surrounding it and spot zone concerns based on the current land use surrounding this property., Action: Deny, Moved by Vince Haley, Seconded by Jim Lawrence. Commissioner Discussion on the Motion: None VOTE: Motion passed (summary: Yes = 7, No = 3, Abstain = 0). Yes: Bruce Casper, David Pulsipher, Eric Erickson, Jim Lawrence, Sally Smith (Chairperson), Todd Marx, Vince Haley (Vice Chair). No: Randall Kempton, Aaron Richards, Brad Wolfe. Bruce Casper and Todd Marx represent the Area of Impact. The applicant has a right to appeal the County Commissioners in writing. 9. April 13, 2022, Alan Parkinson presented the application to the Board of Appeals. 11 | Page 12 | Page 13 | Page 14 | Page 10. June 23, 2022, Publication fees were paid. 11. June 27, 2022, Notice was sent to the newspaper to be published on July 5th & July 12th, 2022. 12. June 29, 2022, Public Hearing Notice was mailed to all property owners within three hundred fifty (350’) feet. 13. July 14, 2022, Notice was posted on the property. 14. July 21, 2022, The application was presented to the Planning & Zoning Commission for a second hearing. (22-00072) - 1 Lot in the Muir Glen DIV1 subdivision –Rezone from Transitional Agriculture (TAG) to Medium-Density Residential 1 (MDR1) in the Impact Area. The original plat had four (4) lots. An additional lot was split from Lot 4 Block 1. The request is for the remaining land designated Lot 4 Clock 1. The Planning & Zoning Commission requested the County Commissioners deny the 15 | Page request on March 17, 2022. The request went before a Board of Appeals on April 13, 2022, which sent the request back to the Commission for reconsideration and a second hearing based on the applican’ts claim new information and testimony would be presented. A second hearing and notification was required. The applicant requested a delay for the hearing until the second meeting in July 2022. The Comprehensive Plan Map designates this parcel as LDR1-MDR1. The parcel for this request is 11.18 acres. – Rachel Whoolery (action) (Video 1:58:22) Applicant Presentation: Charlotte Erikson – 1121 S 5th W – Question #1: What is the best use of this land for the needs of the community? The eleven (11) acres lie in the county, but it is in the city’s impact area. What type of development would you rather annex into the City of Rexburg’s tax base? (The image seen at the right was shown on the overhead screen and reviewed.) The land is the same. What is the best use near the freeway and Walmart? The homes will not be required to hook up to city services until the land’s services fail. If the property is not rezoned and the eleven (11) homes are built, which are currently allowed, the eleven (11) homes will not be required to hook-up to city water and city sewer system until their new wells or septic systems fail. Those systems could fail fifteen (15) to twenty-five (25) years from now. Busing systems to pick up children from those eleven (11) homes uses the same amount of gas that could be used to pick up many more children at the same collection points. Road repair and snow removal have the same cost for the eleven (11) homes or for one hundred tax payers using the same land. Trash collection is more expensive. Question 2: Does this change fit within the planned growth of the county and the city? The answer is a resounding “yes”. Growth is happening in Rexburg. The housing crunch is causing problems with families that want to move to Rexburg. The question is not whether or not there will be population growth, but whether this growth is comprehensively planned. The Medium-Density Residential 1 (MDR1) zone is appropriate for the next stage of growth. Many Commissioners have realized this is a place for future growth. The Applicant is representing the second parcel on the same side of the street for a rezone. In 2018, White Owl Business park requested a rezone from Transitional 16 | Page Agriculture (TAG) to Light Industrial (LI) and their request was granted. In the Standard Journal, Mayor Merrill said on plans to expand and widen the roads, “it is kind of a chicken and the egg thing. Until we have developers that want to go in there, we really do not have the money to do the improvements. The city requires the developers to help with the improvements, so it is not the taxpayers paying for the new development.” Merrill said he looks forward to seeing the City of Rexburg grow. “We are excited to have some development work going on out there in that part of town.” Someone has to be the first to propose a rezone and be approved. Some members in our previous meeting felt like this was a barrier; they responded as if the applicant was the first to rezone. The approval we seek allows for future planning to begin. Question 3: Is this the right time? In the previous meeting for this request, many comments were made on the expense of development or the lack of infrastructure. Commissioners in previous meetings have been repeatedly warned that this is not a consideration of theirs when making their decisions; they are not to make their decision on staff issues, but whether the request is in line with the future plan of the city, which all acknowledged that it is. In reality, to develop this land right now would be too expensive – these are issues that the applicant needs time to address and are not rezoning issues. Rezoning the land in line with the Comprehensive Plan is the first step, not the last. The land in this area has been sold to different developers. The farmers in this area understood that the presence of Walmart forever changes the future of this area. The change of agriculture to developed land has already begun. The development of this land will be with Staff and this Commission, similar to the development Rachel Whoolery has done on previous projects. Housing is desperately needed, is best for the community and for the tax base. This is the right place and the right growth according to the Comprehensive Plan for our community. Now is the time for this change. Commissioner Questions: McKay asked if the request changed from the request in April. Chairperson Smith said the request is the same, but new evidence is being added. Eric asked what the new evidence presented is. Charlotte said the new information is the approval of a lot for a rezone near this one, The applicant is not the first requestor. Staff Report: Alan Parkinson – The property was identified, Walmart, Moody Rd, and the White Owl Business Park. White Owl Business Park is within city limits. The request is for a parcel in the Impact Area of the city. Staff has reviewed the request. Sewer and water are not available to service the property. The developer would pay to bring the sewer and water lines to the property. Additional improvements would be the requirement of a lift station to service the area. Roads and sidewalks would have to be built out to Moody to connect to N 2nd E. Annexation would be needed and the property is not contiguous to the city limits. The land between this parcel and city limits would also need to be annexed. The Comprehensive Plan Map designation is LDR1-MDR1, which allows for the applicant’s request of MDR1. 17 | Page Commissioner Questions: Chairperson Smith asked where the water and sewer are located. Alan identified water and sewer are on the northeast corner at the intersection of N 2nd E and W Moody Rd. Jim requested to see the zoning of the area. Randall confirmed Staff is still neutral on this request. McKay asked the Comprehensive Plan Map designations be shown. Alan showed to the east, there is land designated as Commercial/Mixed Use, which allows for zoning to Community Business Center (CBC), Regional Business Center (RBC), and Mixed Use (MU). Brad asked if anything has been submitted to the city for building. Alan answered nothing has been submitted. Aaron asked about the thought process for this area when the designations on the Comprehensive Plan Map were simplified. Alan said some of the MDR could buffer the Commercial/Mixed Use from the LDR zones. McKay asked if a large religious facility were to be built in this area, what would it need to be zoned? Alan answered it would be zoned Public Facilities or potentially, the land could be divided and parts could be rezoned to fit different uses. Brad asked what the city sees as a negative expense for development. Alan answered at this point, much of the costs would be to the developer. A lift station would be designed to service the area, the city would pay for the capacity above the developer’s needs. Aaron said the market is going to limit when the development is trigged due to the outside costs. McKay said three of the Commissioners were part of a meeting to increase the Impact Area. The residents in Madison County pushed back on expanding the footprint of the City of Rexburg, inhibiting development to go to the north of Hwy 20. By limiting the city impact area, developers will be forced to build up in the city boundaries. Chairperson Smith opened the public input portion of the hearing at 8:55PM. Favor: Kerri-Anne Spear – 511 Park St - She works for the school district. She has a Masters and is currently house sitting; she cannot afford to buy a home in Rexburg. Anyone who rents would tell you finding a rental is difficult. The applicant’s proposal, which would add more homes to Rexburg, would benefit her and others like her. Rexburg is getting bigger, but it is not building fast enough to support the population. She loves it here and does not want to move. Wayne Neff – 262 W Moody Rd - He owns the property to the southwest. Last time, he was neutral, and he signed up to be in favor this time. The arguments made tonight makes him feel less in favor. Wayne asked Charlotte why she showed a high- density scenario; she answered him. He is changing, because he sees change is inevitable, whether he likes it or not. The Commissions’ fickleness is concerning to him; not change for each developer. People buy land based on the Commissions’ decisions. Rachel has made a good enough argument. He is in support. Ethan Richards – 351 Talon Dr - He moved from Dallas, Texas, a couple of years ago. He would like to stay. He is attending the university. The growth by Walmart excites him with the opportunity to be able to stay in Rexburg. People his age cannot stay due to the lack of multi-family housing. Finding a future in the community is difficult if people are so slow to build. He is pro-America’s Family Community and against Rexburg’s Retirement Community. 18 | Page Paul Hom – 1120 Elderberry Circle, CA – Paul has two (2) children at BYU-I. He is acting as an advisor to Rachel and investors developing this project. He is a traffic engineer in the state of California. He has been involved in numerous development projects in the twenty-two (22) years he has been working professionally. The investors are interested in this property due to the Comprehensive Plan Map designation of LDR1-MDR1, the proximity of the property to the commercial, and the transportation network. Workers in Rexburg have been forced to find housing outside of the city in St. Anthony and Rigby, forcing them to commute into town, increasing traffic congestion on the road network. Hwy 20 is intended to be a main artery for moving traffic in this area. Developing MDR near the highway, is an efficient way to manage the future traffic load in his opinion. Allowing the property to develop to MDR, will help to alleviate traffic congestion. The Comprehensive Plan Map designates this area for growth. Paul urged the Commissioners to approve the rezone request. Marie Coffman - 40 Studio Dr – Indiana – She and her husband are real estate investors across the Midwest and on the west coast. The two are interested in property in Rexburg. She and her husband have five (5) children. One of her children attends BYU-Idaho. Marie has nieces and nephews who live in Rexburg. Her family visits Rexburg often and loves the community. Marie understands some of the challenges Rexburg is facing. Her brother-in-law and his wife, graduated from BYU-I a couple of years ago and are starting their family in Rexburg. The two are renting but have been unable to afford a home. Professionals would love to stay there; this is a commonality with graduates from the university. The medium house price in Rexburg has gone up fifty (50%) percent over the last few years. The median income of $36,000 prices most people out of the housing market. In the different communities, in which she has property, she has been able to provided housing for lower-income families. There is definitely a housing need. If the issues are not addressed, the families will have to leave. As the property is zoned, eleven (11) families could live there. With MDR1 zoning, the land can be beneficial for many more families. Neutral: Kristine Bennion – 295 Shoshone – Her ward extends into an area with twenty – six (26) student apartment buildings. A more stable part of her ward is up on the hill, close to where Sally lives. Kristine sees the pros and cons of both sides. We do need lower-income housing. Investors came in from Utah, bought Draper Oaks at 457 S 4th W and are raising the rent. Twenty (20) married students are moving, because the rent is changing from $500 to $1250. Just outside of her ward, another property was purchased and it has also been priced out of their range from $550 to $1200. The same developer that bought Draper Oaks, also purchased Apple Tree. Apple Tree at 347 S 4th W is being remodeled and the rents are skyrocketing. The 2020 income is $42,000. A new mortgage for a family member was $2,800 without home insurance. The mortgage would jump to $3,500 at $500,000. Her husband has worked up at the university for twenty-two (22) years; they cannot afford these prices. Kristine would have to go get a second job – she would not be able to stay at home with her kids. Kristine likes what the California engineer says about the easy access to the highway. The traffic would go to the north exit to ease the traffic coming through town. She 19 | Page wishes she could lock in low-income housing prices. A junior high school teacher saved for fifteen (15) years over $100,000 and cannot afford a home now. Kristine believes this decision could go both ways. Roger Muir – 252 W Moran View Rd – He is representing the Teton Island Canal Company. The canal company will maintain the canal. Shrubbery, fences, etc. cannot inhibit the canal company from accessing the canal. Opposed: Neil Call – 320 W Moody Rd – He owns the property west of the proposed property. He does not see anything change to the property since the last hearing. The canal still backs up to this property. His concern with the change to medium-density is the sewer line will need to be buried twelve (12’-16’) to sixteen feet deep. The line will need to go up the road. A developer would want to build to the maximum for the zone on the eleven (11) acres to get his return at twenty (20) units per acre, which is two hundred (200) units. Farm equipment travels along Moody Rd; it is not safe. You take your life in your own hands to get through the interchange of Moody and N 2nd E to get across. Last time, we talked about spot-zoning. He cannot see leap frogging out in this area right now. It is not time to change the zoning. The church is not going to do anything on the property for sixteen (16) months. Thompson Farms has one hundred ninety (190) units. There is a plan for another One-hundred ninety (190) units. By Albertson’s, another ninety (90) units are going in. There is a plan for another two hundred (200) units. Kenneth Square has additional units to be built. Now is not the time to change the zoning. Nicole Farnsworth – 278 W Moody Rd – To the south, her land borders this property. Walmart is on the opposite side of N 2nd E. The applicant’s lot does not border commercial. On her side of N 2nd E, there is a lot of farmland and a future church building. Nicole does not believe the decision of the Commissioners should be based on possible revenue for the city. Many residents in this area do not want to be annexed into the city. The request feels like a big jump from Transitional Agriculture (TAG) to Medium-Density. The TAG zone was recently changed to one (1) acre minimums. MDR1 allows for sixteen units per acre and is a far cry from one home per one acre. There should not be an island of exception for this one parcel. The Applicant does not have adequate room for a road to this development and there is no other access. The applicant pointed to the Light Industrial area nearby, but that would not bring the traffic that she is requesting. The applicant has not reached out to the residents of the road; she has not changed anything to address the concerns of the neighborhood. She is opposed to this zone change. Roger Muir – 252 W Moran View Rd – It was stated that in the applicant’s request there is new evidence; nothing has changed from the previous hearing. If you look back at your minutes, and if they were recorded correctly, the zoning of the White Owl Business Park was discussed. There is a discrepancy on the number of acres. The applicant lists just over eleven (11) acres. The property takes into account land on the other side of the canal, the forty (40’) feet of canal, and to the fence that borders the highway. Approximately two (2) acres cannot be built on. He has an 20 | Page access question. Is the access wide enough to meet the city requirements. Spot zoning definition was read, “the process of singling out a small parcel of land for use and classification, totally different from that of the surrounding area for the benefit of the owner of such property and to the detriment of other owners.” He does not know if this request is completely “to the detriment of other owners,” but he feels this fits in the spot-zoning classification. Sewer, water, gas, drainage are all three-quarters of a mile away from the nearest service lines to service ten (10) acres. The best use of land was based on taxes; the city should not be looking at the revenue aspect of a piece of property. Why would we have zoning if we are going to persuaded by tax dollars? As was mentioned, there are several subdivisions around. No one knows what is going to happen; the adjacent landowner is waiting to see the best use of his property. This does not seem the request is at the right time due to the units been spoken of. Nothing has changed. Mack Shirley – 443 W Moran View – He is the trustee for the Shirley Family Trust, which owns the property west of Neil Call. He is in opposition for many of the reasons that have already been stated. This proposal would not ease traffic; it would increase traffic. My view may be different if I were comparing the traffic to that of California. There is going to be a large amount of development to the east on the property now owned by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. No one knows what that development may be. Decisions for the future need to be considered with the applicant’s request. A large residential area may be included with those who own that property. This change would not be compatible with those potential changes. Whether this does or does not fit, we do not know. He is in favor of again rejecting this proposal, as was done several months ago. Brenda Messenger – 20326 E Bryan Rd, Arizona – She is out of state and is against this request. Low-income housing is needed, Where should this go? Is this location the right place? A development like this should be in an area with a less-congested traffic flow. Her family has owned ground in this area for four (4) generations. Brenda’s grandfather and her father and his brothers broke this area out of sagebrush. She would like bring her children to see single-family homes. Brenda would like to maintain beauty in this area. There are better places to put the medium- density housing. This area requires lesser density. She wants to be able to say she is proud she is from Rexburg, which is getting harder to do. 21 | Page Written Correspondence: #1 WRITTEN RESPONSE: Mark Farnsworth – 278 W Moody Rd. 22 | Page #2 WRITTEN RESPONSE: Petition 23 | Page Rebuttal: Rachel Whoolery – 1331 Charles Place – She appreciate this opportunity to present speak again. As part of master planning, the plans will be engineered to mitigate the impacts. The development logistics will be worked out with City Staff. The rezoning part is based on the development cost. The issue is about whether or not this is the area for growth. For full transparency, Mr. Muir farms her land for free. The investors are pursuing affordable housing. Single-family residences will always be more expensive than multi-family units. The goal is to provide a variety of housing options, and with approval of the zone request, she is obtaining more development flexibility. She not only has responsibility to the neighbors, but also the landowners themselves. It is important to her to be a responsible developer, to beautify Rexburg but also provide functional developments. Rachel’s intent is to pursue a Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) including sidewalks, lighting, etc. The traffic concerns are moot because adjacent lots will also change the traffic patterns. It was established in the previous meeting that this is not spot zoning. There is a need for housing, not just one person benefits by having the zone changed. There was a rezoned parel close the property. The request fits within the Comprehensive Plan. The city sees this as an area for growth. She sees this is a step down in zoning from the commercial. The neighbor’s timeline should not be a barrier for her property to rezone. The property to the east was purchased as a developer price, not at an agricultural price. The property Rachel purchased was also purchased at a developer price. She would like to invest in Rexburg and meet the housing needs of the population. For her property management company, the wait list for Oxford of eight (8) units has a waitlist of sixty (60) people. Rachel has to turn people away. Chairperson Smith asked if anyone else would like to speak. She closed the public input portion of the hearing at 9:36PM. Conflict of Interest? – Chairperson Smith 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. Commissioner Discussion: Eric said we have visited this request before. The pattern of this application is each body has been denied. The Board of Appeals sent back this application based on new information that would be presented. From his point of view, he does not see there is new information presented from the original vote. The one thing that has changed is the make-up of the Commission. He sees the return of this application at this time may sway the previous vote. Eric will vote as he did previously. Chairperson Smith confirmed the request would be to the County Commissioners. Vince said the new evidence, as stated, is not new evidence as the zoning for the White Owl Business Park happened in February 2018. Sitting on a Planning & Zoning Commission is difficult. This week, he has donated nine (9) hours of volunteering for his position for the city. He sees a transition for density from the middle out, like a balloon as it is inflated, not from the outside in. Moody Rd is a very rural, agriculture use within the city limits. A lot more farming and 24 | Page ranching is happening in this area. TAG to MDR1 is a pretty high change. Bruce said he voted no last time. He is a County representative on this Commission. He and his wife have driven out to this property twice. He has looked at this area. Bruce does not quite understand the rezone without development. The land could remain undeveloped and grow up as weeds. He waited in the life-in-his-hands-corner and he waited and made it across fine; he is here tonight. There are some brothers who are wanting to sell their property. The growth of Rexburg is happening as you go down this road. Low-income housing is no guarantee. The costs of development may increase the low-income housing to a greater cost. Jim is with Vince and looking at growth. Managing growth means that you control the growth and it does need to grow like the inflation of a balloon. A lot of the discussion here assumes that a certain property is going to build something; this is unknown. In his hometown, the church announced a temple, and it did not happen. The temple moved to a different location and the original piece remains farmland. He still believes this request is jumping the gun; he does not believe this is the way we want to grow in this area. Randall has thought about this as well. On the other hand, we did look forward knowing we do know this is what we want to fit in this area. The area has been planned; the request fits the vision of the area. He agrees the timing feels early. As Randall looks at his responsibilities as a Commissioner, he is supposed to look at infrastructure, roads, and existing facilities; these things do not support the zone change. Randall’s feelings have not changed. Recent changes in land use do not convince him either. Chairperson Smith said she made a list of things that should be existing and none of them are existing. There are three (3) members of the Commission that are licensed for real estate. As of today, there are thirty (30) condos and townhomes for sale; there is some affordable housing. Vanessa said when you talk about affordable housing, what does Charlotte mean? Charlotte clarified section 8 vouchers are currently accepted. Aaron says he has dyslexia, but he can see things three- dimensionally in his head. He can see Moody Rd built out in his head, which will be a major corridor. He originally voted in favor of this. This is a simple exercise in market pressure. The project will sit without help with the infrastructure. MDR1 against Hwy 20 is an appropriate land use. The zoning request is exactly what is needed against Hwy20. Brad said the traffic and the wrong time have been mentioned in opposition. In the same breath, it was also said that it is inevitable; the change is going to happen. In his mind, he does not see a negative to the rezone. Why would we not pass the application now? McKay said the first two hours of this meeting were spent in Comprehensive Plan changes. A committee sat down at one point and decided the plan for this area. The Comprehensive Plan exists. We are not changing the Comprehensive Plan Map. Each of the residents in the City and in the County have the ability to weigh in on the Comprehensive Plan changes. We are kicking off plans in the community to designate where the uses should be; no one wants it in their backyard. No one is expecting all the landowners to jump on board and build MDR1 on their farmland. Vince said we plan for twenty (20) or thirty (30) years, and where we see the uses will transition. But, we need to watch for development to be contiguous. Vince consulted Attorney Rammell. The Commission was told there was 25 | Page new evidence and there is not. Can an applicant apply as many times as they want without new evidence? Attorney Rammell said in smaller counties there is a ping pong game between the Commission, the Council, and the Applicant. In response, a local municipality puts a limit on the number of times this could happen. The courts stand has been, the limit cannot be detrimental. In this case, this request has precedent, he does not believe this applies to tonight’s application. Vince counseled the Commission to vote on what is in front of them and the evidence today. Brad is thinking of the future based on the information we have today. MOTION: Motion to recommend the County Commissioners approve (22- 00072) 1 Lot in the Muir Glen DIV1 subdivision the Rezone from Transitional Agriculture (TAG) to Medium-Density Residential 1 (MDR1) in the Impact Area, because the burden of the missing infrastructure is on the property owner, not on the county or the municipality, and this request fits with the Comprehensive Plan. Action: Approve, Moved by Aaron Richards, Seconded by Todd Marx. Commissioner Discussion on the Motion: None VOTE: Motion carried. (Summary: Yes = 6, No = 4). Yes: Todd Marx, Sally Smith (Chairperson), Aaron Richards, Bruce Casper, McKay Francis, Vanessa Johnson. No: Vince Haley (Vice Chair), Eric Erickson, Jim Lawrence, Randall Kempton 15. August 8, 2022, The application was presented to the County Commissioners. City of Rexburg: Review & Approve Muir Glen Divl Rezone The property lies in the impact area. The owners are asking for a change from Trans Ag to Medium Density 1. They will have to bring in sewer and water. This would lead to annexing in the future and is the same proposal that was brought earlier but was appealed. The vote from the City P & Z was not unanimous. After review and discussion, Commissioner Mendenhall made a motion to approve Muir Glen Divl Rezone, based upon the approval of the City P & Z. Commissioner Doug Smith seconded and voting was unanimous. The motion passed. 16. August 24, 2022, Recorded as Resolution No.: 485 Instrument #451942.