HomeMy WebLinkAboutPinebrook Subdivision 22-00102 & 22-00103 Citizen PetitionTo: The City of Rexburg's City Clerk, Planning and Zoning Committee/Alan Parkinson,
City Council Members
From: Homeowners in Pinebrook 1 and 2 and homeowners on McJon Lane, Rexburg, ID
Date: April 6th, 2022
Re: Opposition to the Application for Comprehensive Plan Map from Rural
Residential 2 (RR2) to LDR1— MDR1 (Low -Density Residential 1 to Medium -
Density Residential 1) as per the "Notice of Public Hearing to Amend the
Comprehensive Plan Map for the City of Rexburg" and "Zone change from RR2 to
LDR2" which was placed at the entrance of the PineBrook Estates, Division No. 2,
lots 16 through 24 and the Applications — File #22-00102 and Application — File
#22-00103
We respectfully reject and ask that the Planning and Zoning Committee, City Council Members,
and Alan Parkinson Deny the Rezone Application — File #22-00103 and Comprehensive Plan
Map change Application — File #22-00102 the proposed change to the Comprehensive Plan.
Following are the reasons why we are asking for the City to Deny the proposed changes:
1. An actual plan, plat change application or proposal is conspicuously absent. One major
concern is that changing the zoning from RR2 to the LDR2 would significantly change the
density and engineering and types of uses going from a Zoning limiting development of
acre (21780 sq ft) to lots as small as 8,000 sq ft. and 10,000 sq. ft for a duplex and two
5,000 sq ft. lots for a twin home in a LDR2 zone. This Zone could exponentially increase
the density the Developer(s) is allowed for the property solely that the Developer may
increase the number of residences into our community, at his great profit and the
homeowners and the City's loss. Additionally, different types of uses are allowed in this
LDR2 zone. A required Plat Change Application should be presented by the Developer
for the Planning and Zoning Commission to know what is actually planned to happen
before the Commission should act. Once the zoning is given, a Developer has a legal
right to do anything allowable in that zone and it can't be undone. This Application will
not meet the Goals of the Rexburg Comprehensive Plan. See b. below'
' Comprehensive Plan Goals include
a. To improve the physical environment of the community as a setting for human activities -to make it more functional, beautiful, decent,
healthful, interesting, and efficient.
b. To promote the public interest, the interest of the community at large, rather than the interests of individuals or special groups within the
community.
c. To facilitate the democratic determination and implementation of community policies on the physical development.
d. To affect the political and technical coordination in community development.
e. To inject long-range considerations into the determination of short-range actions.
f. To bring professional and technical knowledge to bear on the making of political decisions concerning the physical development of the
community.
g. To maintain high levels of interaction with the public for planning and decision -making. Encourage citizen input when considering code
modifications.
2. Increased density wasn't initially planned for or built by the original developer as
required and approved by the City. This subdivision was planned, engineered and
constructed with ONLY nine homes to be built on those nine lots and no more. The
developer is now seeking to alter this plan.
3. Before this change should even be considered or evaluated by the Commission to
account for this density increase, an Engineered Impact Study detailing the increased
sewer flow, traffic, stormwater runoff should be completed. According to Idaho Code
67-6511(2)(a) "Particular consideration shall be given to the effects of any proposed
zone change upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public
services." With this increased flow in our community that was built and zoned with the
current allowable density, are we assured that the one lift station for the entire
subdivision is capable of collecting and pumping the increased flow? Furthermore, the
Comprehensive Plan states, "Explore the possibility of requesting area studies to be
prepared by developers showing the relationship of the subdivision to the
neighborhood of which it is a part. Access to the general street system, school,
recreation sites, and other facilities and services should be shown." Pg. 120. This
application hasn't conformed to the Comprehensive Plan's goal to bring professional
and technical knowledge to assist Planning and Zoning Decisions.
4. There is a very large and deep pond in the subdivision. What is the greater probability of
more children and adults drowning in the pond? Placing additional foot traffic of kids
walking down the upper part of Larch Drive is a significant risk because that
Development was never planned for sidewalks or to handle a lot of foot traffic. Is the
City willing to take on this increased liability? The Comprehensive Plan Housing Goals
also states, "Ensure safety in and accessibility between all residential areas." The
Application does not conform to the Comprehensive Plan's Goal to make the PineBrook
Subdivision 'make it more functional, beautiful, decent, healthful, interesting, and
efficient.'
5. We believe the application for the zone change would be "spot -zoning" contrary to
Idaho and Federal law; i.e., well founded, with not only Idaho but United States law to
the contrary that Spot Zoning is illegal. Spot Zoning refers to a change in zoning of a
particular parcel or parcels that is out of character with the surrounding area and the
Comprehensive Plan and is done for the benefit of the particular landowner rather than
for the benefit of the community as a whole. Pinebrook is surrounded by nothing that
resembles what the Developer is proposing. The Supreme Court has held:
In Evans, this Court clarified that there are two types of spot zoning. The first type,
referred to as type one spot zoning, "may simply refer to a rezoning of property
for a use prohibited by the original zoning classification." Id. "The test for whether
[type one spot zoning] is valid is whether the zone change is in accord with the
comprehensive plan." Id. at 77, 73 P.3d at 90. "[T]he question of whether a zoning
ordinance is 'in accordance with' the comprehensive plan is a factual question
which can be overturned only where the factual findings are clearly erroneous."
Friends of Farm to Market v. Valley County, 137 Idaho 192, 200, 46 P.3d 9, 17
(2002). The second type, referred to as type two spot zoning, "refers to a zone
change that singles out a parcel of land for use inconsistent with the permitted
use in the rest of the zoning district for the benefit of an individual property
owner." Id.
Taylor v. Canyon Cty. Bd. of Commis ("Taylor B"), 147 Idaho 424, 436, 210 P.3d 532,
544 (2009) (Burdick, J.)).
From the Idaho Land Use Manual, typically relied on as authoritative, "The Supreme Court
has reiterated in Neighbors for the Preservation of the Big and Little Creek Community v.
Bd. of Cty. Commis of Payette Cty., 2015 WL 5655521 (Idaho Sept. 25, 2015) (Horton, J.),
the type one/type two analysis." The Court has clearly settled in on the type one/type
two analysis. The analysis begins by assessing whether the rezone is in accord with the
Comprehensive Plan. In Neighbors, the Court said that all that is required to meet the
type one test is that the Comprehensive Plan be amended prior to the rezone to say that
the use is permissible. The type two analysis in Neighbors, the Court observed that the
county justified its decision because there were five other industrial uses within five miles
of the rezoned land (CAFOs and a landfill). That was enough to convince the Court that
the County had not singled out this property for special and inconsistent treatment.
For this application, during your, the Commission's discussion and review, this is clearly
not in conformance with the current Comprehensive Plan because you will have to change
it to enable the current application to LDR2 and for the reasons set forth in this letter.
Furthermore, this application is a violation of Type 2 "spot zoning" and the goals of the
Comprehensive Plan because it simply singles out the application parcels of land for use
inconsistent with the permitted use in the rest of the Zoning District for the benefit of an
individual property owner. Like the Neighbors decision, the commission can't find that a
similar LDR2 zone is less than a mile away from the applied for property in PineBrook that
has already been filled in with homes.
6. Was proper notice supplied in this case? Idaho Code 67-6509 clearly states, "The
planning or planning and zoning commission, prior to recommending the plan,
amendment, or repeal of the plan to the governing board... The commission shall also
make available a notice to other papers, radio and television stations serving the
jurisdiction for use as a public service announcement. Notice of intent to adopt, repeal
or amend the plan shall be sent to all political subdivisions providing services within the
planning jurisdiction, including school districts and the manager or person in charge of
the local public airport, at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing scheduled by
the commission." Based upon these requirements, we hope that all of this happened
because several homeowners said they have expressed concerns about what is actually
being proposed. Regardless of the public notices for making these types of changes,
there has been a tremendous amount of miscommunication to the homeowners and
property owners.
7. What is also absent from the documents we received is the current Development
Agreement, that is the current and binding Legal Contract between the City and
Developer for the P&Z to consider, which has the full force of law that can guide you
and us in your decision -making on this current application and a further goal of the
Comprehensive Plan. This matter should be tabled so that the Commission has complete
understanding of the current requirements of the Developer to guide them in any new
additional requirements. We purport that the current Comprehensive Plan and Zoning
Plan are sufficient and legal for any contractor or buyer to rely upon. No changes are
required for Pinebrook 2. Is there additional land being considered to be developed and
annexed into the City? It appears that water and sewer have already been extended
across 12th West. If so, what is the purpose of extending these services?
8. We do not agree with the Comprehensive Plan Map Application and Zoning Change
because we have bought this property and placed our homes knowing that the
Comprehensive Plan had a current zoning of Rural. It appears we have detrimentally
relied on this understanding if these changes can occur so simply and with a developer's
desires. We believe the City should not consider this change in a new subdivision that is
almost completely built out. These new changes will devalue our homes, increase
significantly the number of people that walk and drive our streets, and increase the
density of homes. This request is an example of Land Speculators changing what has
already been planned. We implore the Commission to manage that growth in a fashion
that makes neighborhoods and communities in the great City of Rexburg a measure of
consanguinity, efficiency, and just simply use good planning. To go in and change nine
lots out of the built -out Pinebrook 1 and 2 area, piecemeal, is not good planning that
would single out the Developer's interests, against those of the Community as a whole
and contrary to the Comprehensive Plan
9. Any time a developer requests to change the Comprehensive Plan before he can get his
requested zoning is letting him save a few extra dollars out of his development and a
complete contradiction of detailed planning that the City has tried to do over countless
years through previous Comprehensive Plan hearings and discussions. Yes, our
community is changing with all the growth; however, this should be done in a thoughtful
and detail -minded manner that actually 'plans' where and what we want our
community to be and not allowing developers to fit square pegs into round holes.
Anything less would just be capitulating to a developer for nothing more than his
enrichment to the detriment of the existing homeowners.
10. In a RR2 zone that requires % acre lots, the Developer would currently have to build nice
single-family homes. If the Developer gets the applied for Zone LDR2 as he has
requested, he could then put duplex's, townhomes, and similar higher density housing.
We ascertain that these developers only want the changes so that they may place more
homes, and double or triple their residence units on those lots. We are not in favor of
this proposal. The Developer has stated that they haven't been able to sell the parcels
because they are along the highway. But it is obvious that these parcels have only been
for sale as a group deal and not for individual sale. Perhaps if this matter is tabled to
allow the Developer(s) to complete a detailed amended Plat first before the zone
change is approved, this could alleviate some of our concerns. As is contemplated as a
housing goal in the Comprehensive Plan, "In existing neighborhoods, consider options
for compatible, quality design consistent with existing character. Design standards may
be considered in areas where design compatibility may have an impact on quality of
neighborhoods."
11. Furthermore according to Idaho Code 67-6511 "An amendment of a zoning ordinance
applicable to an owner's lands or approval of conditional rezoning or denial of a request
for rezoning may be subject to the regulatory taking analysis provided for by section 67-
8003, Idaho Code, consistent with the requirements established thereby." This would
give the current homeowners and lot purchasers an alternative to pursue recourse
against the City for the loss of value to their homes after they bought homes as short as
two months ago and are now surprised by the proposed Applications.
12. It is unconscionable to allow a Developer to change and significantly increase the
density and design of a subdivision at this late hour after all of the other homes have
either been built or lots have been sold. Each resident has purchased a home or lot with
a certain expectation and reliance on what was previously agreed upon between the
Developer and the City. This is simply a Developer(s) coming in and squeezing out the
most profit he can with no concern to actual good planning strategies for proper
residential development to only line his pockets, move on to the next existing
community and do it again. As one of the overall goals of the Comprehensive Plan
states that Developments, "To promote the public interest, the interest of the
community at large, rather than the interests of individuals or special groups within the
community."
f N k„ 6 ; _�
Community Development Department lk
YaF
STAFF REPORTREXBURG
l�lV.) lJ 1�Ow
35 North IslEast Alan.oarkinson@rexburcLorg Phone: 208.359.3020Americas Family Community
Rexburg, ID 83440www.plannina.ora Fax:208.359.3022
SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Map change Application - File #22-00102
APPLICANT: TWebb Construction — Todd Webb
PROPERTY OWNER(S): 4U Development LLC — Curtis Ferney
Hinge Pointe LLC — Nathan Christensen
PURPOSE: The request is to change the City's Comprehensive Plan for
this parcel.
PROPERTY LOCATION: Pine Brook DIV2 Blk6 Lots 16-24
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Rural
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN DESIGNATION: LDRI — MDR] (Low -Density Residential ] to Medium -Density Residential 1)
CURRENT ZONING: Rural Residential 2 (RR2)
SURROUNDING COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN Dr.SIGNA T IONS: (North, East & West) — Rural
(South) — Opens Spaces/University
SURROUNDING LAND USES: (North) — Single-family home lot
(East) — US Highway 20
(South) — Single-family home lot
(West) — Single-family home lots
APPLICABLE CRITERIA: City of Rexburg Development Code (Ordinance No.1200)
§ 1.04.020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
AUTHORITY: § 1.03.080 (D) "The Commission may recommend that the amendment be
granted as requested, that it be modified, or that it be denied. "
I. BACKGROUND
The properties are existing lots in the Pine Brook Division 2 subdivision. May 2, 2007, City Council
received a heads up for the Pine Brook Annexation. In 2007, an application was received to annex
Pine Brook Division 1 and the land that would be Pine Brook Division 2 into the city (07-00209) and
rezoned DIVI to Rural Residential 1 (RR1). December 19, 2007, City Council approved the
annexation and rezone of Pine Brook Division 2 to Rural Residential 2 (RR2), changing the portion
against Hwy 20 from Low -Density Residential 1 (LDR1) to RR2. In 2008, a Final Plat was approved
for Pine Brook Division 2 (08-00116). Since 2013, several single-family homes have been built.
Case No. 22 00102 Page 1
The Rexburg Development Code allows for the Commission to
make recommendations to the City Council regarding whether or
not the property should or should not be changed on the
Comprehensive Plan Map based on the criteria found in section
§ 1.04.020.
II. SITE DESCRIPTION
The property is located west of Hwy 20. There are single-family
home to the west, and vacant lots to the north and south. ). The
Comprehensive Plan Map designates all the surrounding land as
Rural. Rural Residential 2 (RR2) zoned parcels are located to the
north, south, and west from the requested property in the Pine
Brook DIV2 subdivision. Across the highway to the east, the land
is in the Area of Impact and zoned Transitional Agriculture
(TAGThe property for this application is 4.727 acres.
III. ANALYSIS
If approved the request will result in changing the Comprehensive Plan Map from the current designation
of Rural to LDR1-MDR1. The request would require the Commission and City Council to review the
proposal and approve or deny this a lication.
Rural
Open Space, University
IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
1: 4514
Staff recommends that this Comprehensive Plan Map change be considered. The Planning and Zoning
Commission should take testimony in public hearing to determine if the request is in the best interest of
the neighborhood and the community.
Case No. 22 00102 Page 2
✓l/ r / -� C2
Community Development
Department
;O�gEx9Ugc�0
C I T Y OF
STAFF REPORT
� 'y
"
J� �VnT m(�
1tC.LVJ V R
35 North Is' East Alon.porkinson@rexburg.org
Phone: 208.359.3020
Americas Family Community
Rexburg, ID 83440 www.planning.ora
Fox: 208.359.3022
SUBJECT: Rezone Application - File #22-00103
APPLICANT: TWebb Construction — Todd Webb
PROPERTY OWNER(S): 4U Development LLC — Curtis Ferney
Hinge Pointe LLC — Nathan Christensen
PURPOSE: The request is to change the Zoning Map for the property.
PROPERTY LOCATION: Pine Brook DIV2 Blk6 Lots 16-24
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: LDRI — MDRI (Low -Density Residential 1 to Medium -Density Residential 1)
CURRENT ZONING: Rural Residential 2 (RR2)
PROPOSED ZONING: Low -Density Residential 2 (LDR2)
SURROUNDING LAND USES: (North) — Single-family home lot
(East) — US Highway 20
(South) — Single-family home lot
(West) — Single-family home lots
APPLICABLE CRITERIA: City of Rexburg Development Code (Ordinance No.1200)
1.04.020 Zoning Map Recisions
AUTHORITY: §1.04.020 (D) `The Commission may recommend that the amendment be
granted as requested, that it be modified, or that it be denied. "
I. BACKGROUND
The properties are existing lots in the Pine Brook Division 2 subdivision. May 2, 2007, City Council
received a heads up for the Pine Brook Annexation. In 2007, an application was received to annex Pine
Brook Division 1 and the land that would be Pine Brook Division 2 into the city (07-00209) and
rezoned DIV1 to Rural Residential 1 (RR1). December 19, 2007, City Council approved the annexation
and rezone of Pine Brook Division 2 to Rural Residential 2 (RR2), changing the portion against Hwy 20
from Low -Density Residential 1 (LDR1) to RR2. In 2008, a Final Plat was approved for Pine Brook
Division 2 (08-00116). Since 2013, several single-family homes have been built.
The Rexburg Development Code allows the Commission to make recommendations to the City Council
regarding whether or not the property should or should not be rezoned based on the criteria found in
section §1.04.020.
Case No. 22 00103 Page I
H. SITE DESCRIPTION
The property is located west of Hwy 20. There are single-family
homes to the west, and vacant lots to the north and south. Rural
Residential 2 (RR2) zoned parcels are located to the north, south, and
west from the requested property in the Pine Brook DIV2
subdivision. Across the highway to the east, the land is in the Area of
Impact and zoned Transitional Agriculture (TAG). The property for
this application is 4.727 acres.
III. ANALYSIS
Suzrounding Comprehensive Plan Designa tions
If the Comprehensive Plan Map changes is approved (22-00102), the
request will result in changing the Comprehensive Plan Map from the
current designation of Rural to LDR1-MDR1.The Comprehensive
Plan designation to the north, south, east, and west of this property is
Rural.
Surrounding Zoning
Rural Residential 2 (RR2) are zoned to the north, west, and south, and Transitional Agriculture (TAG) to the
east.
If approved, the request will result
in changing the zoning of six (6)
parcels, Pine Brook DIV2 Blk1
Lots 16-24 from Rural Residential
2 (RR2) to Low -Density
Residential 2 (LDR2) for 4.725
acres.
The request would require the
Commission and City Council to
review the proposal against one set
of criteria, for the request to
rezone. Below, staff has provided
all the criteria listed by Ordinance
No. 1200 (Development Code)
that are required to be addressed,
followed by staff's analysis of each
criterion.
Criteria Rezone Requests §1.04.020):
a. Be in conformance with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
The request would be in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan Map, should the applicant's
request for a Comprehensive Plan Map change from Rural to LDR1-MDR1 (22-000102) be
approved.
b. The capacity, of existing public streets, water and sewer facilities, storm drainage facilities,
solid waste collection and disposal, and other utilities.
There is capacity for water and sewer facilities. The added traffic for this parcel will not stress existing
public streets.
Case No. 22 00103 Page 2
c. The capacity ofexisting public services, including butnotlimited to, public safety
services, public emergency services, schools, and parks and recreational services. N/A
d The potential for nuisances or health and safetyhazards thatmayadverselyaffect
adjoining properties. N/A
e. Recent changes inland use on adjoining properties orin the neighborhood of the map
revision.
In 2019, the Comprehensive Plan designation was changed (19-00096) and updated when the
designanons were simplified (19-00351) for the Teton Lakes Golf Course. The Teton Lakes Golf
Course was rezoned as Public Facilities (19-00093). Pine Brook is part of LID 50. In 2021, 1154
,NIcjon Ln was annexed into the city as Rural Residential 1 (RR1) (21-00621).
f. Meets the requirements of the Development Code.
The request meets the requirements of the Development Code.
IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff requests that Planning and Zoning recommend to City Council to approve the rezone of Pine Brook
DIV2 Blk6 Lots 16-24 from Rural Residential 2 (RR2) to Low -Density Residential 2 (LDR2), if the
Commission finds that the proposed request is compatible with the surrounding area or in the best interest of
the neighborhood and the community.
Case No. 22 00103 Page 3
Homeowners requesting rejection and denial of City of Rexburg's Rezone Application - File #22-00103 and
Comprehensive Plan Map Change Application - File #22-00102
Printed Name
Email
Telephone
Address
Signature
t'01.--®
D P6AiG.i U
6-0-3-
y 7 3 Lav-,-h
kOJJ-
S5 s UV
DTI14,4/L - i?0m
307 -) a.&.;L
D r I`ve
Ise
3aO -
i1r)+ W-Pn
ad
`CO\1,e1'1�
Q�l\d��`�Ul�l\.COVE•
0`111
t,rrlY'.Q
tIJ1 7G}
�`il� P.ne (reek
'i ,�
39a - 4 SZ�
is
rd d , 6
V-4-
LAVC4 Or
f
�S� �in� �K U►
,i2 c`
��Tb eS c
�.
bc:r►n�t%ntl�� 32L
'La6 -3%3 -32-11
g?Jo ��wc �r7Jd
�C
etiv�e �f
„�
7�1�'�h��\���ah�t•�
i.�`` 'tOl:"i
�� Y111� �1alL�t-1��j�1
�
P`i
�..
V
_� �
! 1. N
i
( C-) VAS
c0M
Al,/ L zl�n,
o wr�7lcu�so
g= 313_SS
c17'1 �acr�� r
qAtop.(-Oj,
Kc tie11S• cpsL_-
0.vG dci 0 I'►lL
�L
wt_ y 11,71
Wa"45
SpeeLK
Homeowners requesting rejection and denial of City of Rexburg's Rezone Application — File #22-00103 and
{�
C/1ompreheln�sivePlan Map Change Application — File #22-001/0�2 n
M Ort I!` aowmziil
d lj L'e"� •_ l� x(-vll rr ew 7, l� I�4iL .Pi
Printed Name
Email
Telephone
Address
Signature
FfV- aKciK.t
HOtr
f k,
(TnA
209-k70-,42-?y
12�, L Ei1,z t3n,,�7
LO-
r brow-5
I���enb��c�sko
c,I(,enIO1•com
19-410-ZZ15
II2.'I GreensjdP.
saol�r0 `
vl
11-1 br-een si`d
L D
t
.zt'b
qt lb 0-1k4vlJ
y'
4
-1 ►cl -3 iy -56"70
91 t• cckk-u.at
n ►� er
Vv�erlt`n find
g rv\ a r4er5 vn
40(o - q 95 S I Q 3
4vty-q35-SIBti�G-�
7 VkQ-)M LA
vu
jcL�11z t YMt YA
korhe hna r�
j 01-3247.1
1Cc�she
I
I
4 05i -Ira 14