HomeMy WebLinkAboutWRITTEN RESPONSE 1 - Aaron & Dara Wells - 22-00102 & 22-00103 - Pine Brook DIV2 Blk6 Lots 16-241
Tawnya Grover
From:Alan Parkinson
Sent:Monday, April 4, 2022 7:51 AM
To:Deborah Lovejoy; Tawnya Grover
Subject:FW: Comprehensive Plan Map Change Application - File #22-00102 & File #22-00103
Here is another letter for the meeting on the 7th about Pine Brook Div. II re‐zone
Alan Parkinson
Planning and Zoning Administrator
City of Rexburg
208‐372‐2165
alan.parkinson@rexburg.org
From: Aaron Wells <aaron@incwells.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 3, 2022 2:18 PM
To: Alan Parkinson <alan.parkinson@rexburg.org>
Cc: DaraDee Wells <DaraDee@incwells.com>; hendricksb@byui.edu; ted.hendricks@ecipda.net; chendricks@rex‐
law.com
Subject: re: Comprehensive Plan Map Change Application ‐ File #22‐00102 & File #22‐00103
In January 2021, my wife and I purchased a lot in Pine Brook Div II with the intent of building our forever
home. After years away from lands settled by our ancestors, we were finally able to return to the area, bringing
with us a job with good income to contribute to the local economy and tax base. We selected a lot in a quiet
rural subdivision where the homes were similar in size and value to what we hoped to build. Our home at 1143
Castle Pines Drive should be complete in August.
Now, scarcely a year later, people who will not be permanent residents of our neighborhood want to change the
zoning of a few lots in the neighborhood. Because our position has been misrepresented to our neighbors, we
want to clearly convey our thoughts on this matter.
My wife and I are grateful beneficiaries of expansion in the Rexburg area, and understand the desire of many
similarly situated families, but are against rezoning of the lots directly east of our property for the following
reasons:
1. This practice, known as "spot zoning" is not permitted under state and federal statutes.
2. A change from Rural 2 to up to Medium Density Residential could increase traffic and utility use
beyond the original engineering for the subdivision. Without an impact study, we cannot be sure that the
existing services will not be negatively impacted.
3. Rexburg has sufficient land within it's impact area for residential development that rezoning portions of
existing development is not necessary to support responsible growth.
2
4. These rezoning requests would necessarily result in buildings that are incompatible with the Pine Brook
CC&Rs, and therefore demonstrate a distain for the neighborhood and its residents. The speculators who
are requesting the rezoning are clearly doing so to maximize their profits without investing in dedicated
higher density land development and without regard to the interests of long-term interests of the
neighborhood.
5. If the proposal to rezone the property is rejected, the developers will be able to a) build comparable
homes in the neighborhood and earn a fair profit, or b) sell the properties at a significant profit due to
current market conditions.
6. However, rezoning these lots would result in losses in perceived property value for the adjacent lots,
ultimately affecting real property and resale values, although the taxation on these properties would
probably not be reduced to reflect this adjacency.
In summary, we believe that those proposing the rezoning have not provided adequate due diligence, nor have
they shown that the change is necessary or expedient for the betterment of the neighborhood, or the city of
Rexburg, and that they will not suffer any financial setback if the change is rejected. However, existing home
owners will be negatively impacted by mixed zoning within an otherwise established cohesive neighborhood
plan.
As voters with a long-term interest in the Pine Brook Estates neighborhood and the City of Rexburg, we
strongly oppose both of these filings and implore our elected to officials to maintain their primary
responsibility, which is to represent and defend the interests of their constituents.
Respectfully yours,
--
Aaron & Dara Wells
208-284-8766
1143 Castle Pines Drive