Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z Minutes 7.21.221 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 6:36 PM. Planning & Zoning Meeting: Welcome Pledge of Allegiance: Jim Lawrence Commissioner Roll Call: ROLL CALL of Planning and Zoning Commissioners: Present: Vince Haley (Vice Chair), Todd Marx, Randall Kempton, Sally Smith (Chairperson), Aaron Richards, Jim Lawrence, Bruce Casper, Eric Erickson, Brad Wolfe, McKay Francis, Vanessa Johnson. Absent: None Minutes: Planning & Zoning Meeting July 7, 2022 (action) MOTION: Motion to approve the Planning & Zoning minutes as recorded for July 7, 2022. Action: Approve, Moved by Todd Marx, Seconded by McKay Francis. Commissioner Discussion on the Motion: None VOTE: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote. (Summary: Yes = 11, No = 0). Yes: Vince Haley (Vice Chair), Todd Marx, Randall Kempton, Sally Smith (Chairperson), Aaron Richards, Jim Lawrence, Bruce Casper, Eric Erickson, Brad Wolfe, McKay Francis, Vanessa Johnson. Instructions to Find P&Z Agendas: Alan Parkinson explained how to find the Planning & Zoning interactive agendas on the City of Rexburg’s website www.rexburg.org . On the main page, scroll down to see the “Calendar and Projects” title. There are three tabs: “Events”, “Public Meetings and Hearings”, and “Construction Projects”. Click on the words “Public Meetings and Hearings”. Then find the date of the meeting. On the date, there is an interactive agenda link, that when 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Phone: 208.359.3020 Fax: 208.359.3022 www.rexburg.org Planning & Zoning Minutes July 21, 2022 2 clicked on, identifies the date of the meeting, items that will be discussed on that date, who is on the Commission. Each item also has a link to all of the documents the Commission are reviewing. Chairperson Smith wants the people to know the same information is available to the community as is available to the Commissioners, and it is easy to get to. Citizens can know what is happening in the community. Public Hearings: 1. (22-00418) – 11 Lots along Hwy 20 in Pine Brook DIV2 – Comprehensive Plan Map change from Rural to LDR1-MDR1. A request to change nine (9) of these lots to LDR1- MDR1 earlier this year was denied (22-00102). The parcels for this request total 6.51 acres. – Todd Webb, Aaron Richards (action) (0:03:25) Aaron recused himself. McKay said earlier this Spring when the request came forward, he was a part of the project. When it was denied, he removed himself from the group that is moving forward with tonight’s request. Vince asked if McKay has any financial interest that would be gained by McKay if this item was approved. He said no, nothing but the money he lost in the Spring. While the applicant’s presentation was coming up on the screen, Vince confirmed that there are no hearing for August 4th. Tawnya answered there are none, but a plat could be ready. Applicant Presentation: Aaron Richards – 351 Talon Dr – He is the owner of Refuge Homes. On April 7, 2022, the Planning & Zoning Commission approved a Comprehensive Plan Map change from Rural to LDR1-MDR1 for a section of nine (9) lots in the Pine Brook DIV2 subdivision. In the same meeting, the Commissioners were short one vote to approve the subsequent zoning change from Rural Residential 2 (RR2) to Low-Density Residential 2 (LDR2). In an unprecedented stalemate, the zoning case died. City Council saw P&Z was split and went ahead and denied the request. The application was for twinhomes for the lots backing up to Hwy20. The feedback the applicant received was they did not want an attached housing product. Some comments made were we do not want those types of people and that kind of use in our neighborhood. There was also some concern about the minimum 5,000 sq.ft. lot size. He listened to the homeowners, reevaluated the product, and believes he has come to some middle ground. The same lots originally requested are still included, he added the two bookends to represent all the lots that back to Hwy 20, and are now requesting a change in Comp Plan and zoning to LDR1. There is a significant difference between Low-Density Residential 1 (LDR1) and Low-Density Residential 2 (LDR2). These lots are being branded as the Courtyards of Pine Brook. 3 (He showed a colored map of the 11 lots showing ownership.) The dark brown lots are owned by Curtis Ferney Gray lots owned by Hinge Point Builders. On the east side the lots are vacant, owned by a homeowner or the original developer. On the west side of the road, a home builder owns two lots, and the Pettengills, the Wells, the Bennetts, the Hruskas, the Allphins, and the Churches own a lot. The challenges of developing a home product at this particular location is there is a twenty (20’) foot rear setback from the highway right- of-way to the backdoor of the houses in the Rural Residential 2 (RR2) zone. The current selling price of the product is $750,000 in the community right now. There is an obligation to do some kind of permanent screening for not only the product but also the community. Between the April hearing and now, the applicant learned at the end of Castle Pines Rd has a temporary turn-around platted on the north three (3) lots. Unfortunately, the developer never completed the street. Three lots do not have street frontage, which makes problems with the Fire Marshall, and those homeowners cannot get a final Certificate of Occupancy (CO). HK Contractors, a local paving company bid the finishing of the road at $80,000. This is unfair to put on the Pettengills as a house-warming gift. The LDR1 zone is for single-family, detached homes. The size of homes and “detached homes” are the same as the rest of the lots in Pine Brook. The LDR1 lot size creates enough single-family units to address the screening and finish out the road. The original lots have been on the market for 13 ½ years since 2009. The lots are stale improvements for the tax rolls of the city. Current municipal value on those eleven (11) lots is $165,000. When this project is built out, the taxable value would be $500,000 - $545,000 per lot. This will allow the project in Pine Brook DIV2 to complete. Commissioner Questions: Vince asked if there is an agreement with the HOA. Aaron said the HOA is in a fractured state because of the way the April hearing concluded. The board is in the process of turning over. There are no clear communication lines. The Development Agreement was for the LDR2 zone, which allowed more density than the 4 developer was going to plat. The HOA wanted some kind of documentation for the cap of density the developer and HOA had agreed on. The project can move forward without a Development Agreement, but he would be happy to sit down with the HOA. Staff Report: Alan Parkinson – We have been down this road before for this change to the Comprehensive Plan Map. Nothing has really changed. The request is to change designations from Rural to LDR1-MDR1. Staff believes fits within the statutes of the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Questions: Eric asked if there were any contiguous properties with this same designation. He confirmed Rural Residential is on all sides of the request. Eric asked Alan to help him understand the idea of this request and the idea of “spot zoning”. Alan said this is not an example of “spot zoning”. Chairperson Smith clarified the Commission are considering the Comprehensive Plan change. She asked about the minimum lot size in LDR1. Alan said the minimum lot size in LDR1 is twelve thousand (12,000sq. ft.) square feet. In Rural Residential 2 (RR2) the minimum lots size is one-half acre. The lots are not being truly split in half for the minimum lot size of 12,000 sq.ft. Brad asked if the LDR1- MDR1 designation is for units or lot size. Alan explained the Comprehensive Plan identifies a range for zoning. Vince confirmed the applicant is asking for a Comp Plan to change, which would then allow a zone change. To change the lot sizes, a plat would have to be approved by the governing bodies. Correct? Alan confirmed. Vince said the setback requirements would change. LDR1 is only single-family detached homes. Alan said one (1) unit per lot is all that is allowed. Alan visited with Keith that the road would be maintain the same road structure to match the Rural Residential; there will be a seven (7’) feet swale and a five (5’) feet wide sidewalk and one (1’) foot of ribbon curb. Vince continued the rear setback changes from twenty (20’) feet in RR2 to twenty-five (25’) feet in LDR1. Side setback minimum increases from six (6’) feet to seven and one-half (7 ½’) or six (6”:1’) inches for every one foot of building height, whichever is greater. The maximum building height changes from twenty-five (25’) feet to thirty (30’) feet. The setbacks are gaining. Going from RR2 to LDR2 allows an increase in density and five (5’) more feet in building height. Chairperson Smith opened the public input portion of the hearing at 6:58PM. (21:59) Vince requested anyone who wants to speak for each point of view to speak no matter if the view is the same as your neighbor’s. Favor: Greg Jensen - 366 Talon Drive – Greg has lived in Rexburg for about five years. He is a sixth generation Idahoan. His family lost their family farm. Greg moved to Utah and started his business, which became successful. He wanted to raise his family in Idaho. After his business became successful, he was able to choose where he wanted to live. The community needs growth. Greg’s children need places to work or those children will have to move to find work. The only large employer is the college. We need growth here in Rexburg. People need to be able to afford housing or the young families will leave our community. His neighbor just listed their home at $230 per square foot. He asked the Commission to tell him a college student that could afford that price. Mary Maroon – 367 Talon Drive – Mary and her husband are both business professors at the University. She has moved from New York and Chicago hoping to escape really high 5 home prices. She has found herself in the same situation, where young families cannot afford housing. We live in a semi-rural area and our children need options. She wants her children to grow up and stay in this area. She is in favor of these public projects that will allow more housing at a cheaper price. This will keep our city thriving. Neutral: None Opposed: Alexandra Holt – 862 Pine Brook Ln – She lives three (3) lots from the proposed changes. Alexandra has taken information from the City Council and P&Z Commission meetings. During the closing remarks, during the changes to the Comprehensive Plan proposed in April, one of the Commissioners asked the developer to work with the homeowners to come to an agreeable plan for a solution that would benefit all. There has been a lack of communication between the developers and the homeowners. She tried to email Mr. Richards with the email from her public records request; the email did not work. She would like to see how the twenty (20) homes will be put on the nine (9) lots. The posting in the front of the neighborhood was removed by someone and it has not been there for about a week. On the notice she received, the change was to LDR1, but now she is hearing the change is from LDR1-MDR1. Alexandra feels there has been a lack of information or misinformation. In previous meetings, Vince made a motion to deny the request “based on the inconsistencies of the neighboring properties”. (This motion was withdrawn.) While the developers have moved forward toward single-family residential homes, twenty homes on those back lots is still dangerous for traffic and movement in the neighborhood. The Mayor’s informal study claimed that single-family homes generate six (6) times the traffic of a multi-family homes. The neighborhood has many families with children and some adults with disabilities. She feels adding additional traffic from more units that only have two accesses through the entire neighborhood make a dangerous situation. She has small children and it scares her to see the increase of traffic. Council Member Johnson said, “the Comprehensive Plan Map is a vision or a guiding document. Most, developers use the map to gage how the city is developing in certain areas of the city. One of the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan is to preserve the community. She feels this change to the Comprehensive Plan doesn’t fit with the existing development. The Low Density Residential One (LDR1) and Medium Density Residential One (MDR1) Zones do not fit the existing development.” Another Council member said by changing the zoning of these lots, we would be showing developers would could happen in Rexburg – (this claim was not found in the Council or P&Z minutes in April). Alexandra believes the community would not support a precedent for a row of undeveloped lots to change zoning with little to no notice to the neighborhood. She does not care about a freeway buffer; she new the freeway would be there when she moved into her home. Twelve neighbors that live in close proximity to the freeway, herself included, mentioned a freeway buffer would not be a relevant exchange for the lifelong traffic this request would cause. Pine Brook is one of the only neighborhoods on the north side of the freeway and within the city limits. An increase in the allotted home size would not be in the best interest of the community. She indicated the neighborhood at Pine Brook is one of a kind. Council Member Colin Erickson stated, “he understands the property lots closer to the highway may be 6 more difficult to sell because of the noise; however, there are housing developments all along Interstate 15” He claimed the lots had been sold in groups instead of individually. In City Council, Council Member Busby talked about an agreement with the City for a berm as a sound barrier for the lots and asked it hadn’t been built. Mr. Zollinger said the City has had to go back to the Development Agreement several times over the course of thirteen (13) years as the lots have developed. Keith clarified the berm is along 12th W, not along Hwy 20. Development Agreements stay with the land. Council Member Erickson said a berm would be more appealing to buyers. Council Member Flora said , “if the developer knew these lots were going to be difficult to sell because they are against the freeway. When the original plat for the subdivision was completed, and the existing zone was requested. Why were the LDR1 and MDR1 zones not originally requested? If they foresaw that these lots were going to be hard to sell. Why did they not request this higher density zone from the beginning?” Alexandra said she called a real estate agent and the lots are being sold to developers and not sold to individuals. Changes to the zone for the residents who live in the neighborhood is unfair. Overall, the neighborhood people she talked to preferred the building of eleven (11) single-family homes as proposed and deny this request. Jenny & Michael Ferris – 859 Pine Brook Ln – They live one lot from the proposed zone changes. She does not feel that the changes to the Comprehensive Plan and the rezone are needed. Jenny believes the claim of building a million dollar home that will not sell is false. A million dollar home is not needed; this is the product the applicant sells. The request also does not help with affordable housing. The original lots in Pine Brook DIV2 have been sold; however, thirty (30) of them currently sit empty, in addition to the eleven (11) lots looking to rezone tonight. Thirty (30%) percent of the subdivision are undeveloped; a year ago, this was forty (40%) percent. Yellow are occupied, green held by developers or other people who have bought property and have not built, orange have been moved into or are under active construction within the last six (6) months. The red ones are the ones where construction appears to be stalled. The lots still have time to sell; it is too soon to say these lots need to be rezoned in order to sell. A lot adjacent to the golf course has also not been sold and has been on the market for a year. From her understanding, there was a Development Agreement that included the sound wall berm. Even though ninety (90%) of the lots have been sold, why hasn’t the developer installed the berm? Why doesn’t the city make the developer put it in? The issue of the cul-de-sac? The city should have bonded for these issues and retained the money until the issues were resolved; this is the fault of the city. Jenny claims Todd Webb told her that Todd owns fourteen properties and only one of them is under contract. Much of the building in the neighborhood has happened in the last three (3) years, even though before that the lots had sat for about a decade. She has a disabled son, who has developmental disabilities and autism; he is a flight risk. She chose the location of her home with minimal hazards. Jenny expected the subdivision to fill in, but she did not expect the number of residents to double. The more cars; the greater the danger. Her family moved into their home in December 2021. Jenny said the previous request was doubling the number of residents on the lots; this is the same request. What would stop the zoning of the entire neighborhood? 7 Ryan Hruskah – 1111 Castle Pines Rd – Ryan lives directly across the street from the proposed changes. As you can tell, most people are in opposition to the request. He was adamantly against the previous request. He wants to express his opposition for this request also. Initially, the reasoning was the lots could not be sold; you have heard tonight comments that counteract that claim. Expensive homes do exist along freeways. What makes this request any different? Eleven (11) lots are not selling, and now the developer is making that twenty (20) lots that do not sell. You are looking for people who are established to occupy these homes. Cheaper homes can go somewhere else in Rexburg for recent grads. The market is heading into a recession. The number of home permit applications is slowing across the country. Ryan has heard several reasons why the request should not be approved concerning traffic, a berm, or density. He is against this request. He has four (4) children. As far as the Comprehensive Plan, he knows a new change is being made. The legal team mentioned the land is not rural – there are no agriculture and ranching uses on the land; here there are single-family homes. Ryan said the rural designation means residential on larger lots. Ultimately, this is all about money. The Commissioners are in charge of taking care of the residents of Rexburg, not the developers or builders. Ann Dougherty – 934 Pine Brook Ln – Ann agrees with what has been shared. She does not feel in the neighborhood the issue was between attached and unattached homes. The vision of the neighborhood should not change; this is unfair. The neighborhood is enclosed with two entrances or exits. People cannot pick up and move in today’s market. She is against the request. Mindy Hancock – 935 Pine Brook Ln – She bought her home two (2) months ago. She received a letter in the mail for notification of tonight’s meaning. Mindy is against the request. She agrees with what has been said. The reason she purchased her home was to allow her children to run and play. She is asking the Commissioners to deny the request because the request is not in agreement with the Comprehensive Plan. David Reeser – 1196 Torrey Ln – His road connects with McJon Lane due to traffic. In April, he could have cared less about the buildings, but his concern with the doubling of capacity at the end of the subdivision. David lives along one of the entrances or exits to the subdivision. He has seen an increase in traffic over the last two years as he has lived in the neighborhood. David is against the proposal. Written Correspondence: (see the following pages) 8 #1 WRITTEN RESPONSE: Paige Lowry – 1101 Castle Pines Rd. 9 #2 WRITTEN RESPONSE: Beth Hendricks – 941 Larch Ave 10 11 12 13 #3 WRITTEN RESPONSE: Cameron Robins – 331 Eagle Summit 14 #4 WRITTEN RESPONSE: Selena Robins – 331 Eagle Summit #5 WRITTEN RESPONSE: Brandon Winter – 588 Terra Vista Dr. 15 #6 WRITTEN RESPONSE: Raylene Eldridge – 1101 Castle Pines Rd. 16 #7 WRITTEN RESPONSE: Ray Church – 1101 Castle Pines Rd. #8 WRITTEN RESPONSE: Jared Peterson – 988 Pine Brook Ln 17 #9 WRITTEN RESPONSE: Jill Peterson – 988 Pine Brook Ln Rebuttal: Aaron Jensen – He has been a developer for twenty-five (25) years. The comments regarding traffic do not apply. If you look at National Highway Standards and average trips per single family unit; it is one (1) trip per two and one-half (2 ½) hour. This is the exact number of trips the homeowners create. The request is a minimal boost in density. Traffic safety and drunk drivers coming off the highway is a greater danger than people driving twenty-five in a subdivision. The home sizes will be equivalent to those in the community. These lots are not prime real estate. Aaron is an opportunity to create a lifestyle product with stale real estate to compliment the neighborhood. Interest rates are rising; those people who just closed on their homes will not be able to afford them in the Spring of 2023. This will create movement and housing opportunities for those graduates. Chairperson Smith asked if anyone else would like to speak. She closed the public input portion of the hearing at 7:31PM. 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: She reminded the Commissioners that the Comprehensive Plan Map is being considered, not the zone change. Vince clarified eleven (11) lots are in the proposed area and this will not change with the approval of this application or the rezone. The size of the lots are not being changed tonight. Bruce confirmed the lots are eleven (11) ½ acre lots. Randall said he is not basing his decision on a project, only on the land request. McKay asked about Keith’s feedback for traffic. Alan answered Keith saw no problems with the traffic; the roads can support the change. The cul-de-sac discussed tonight is also a stub-out for future development to the north. On the Staff Report, the Public Works Director looks at the streets, the water, and the sewer. The lift station at Pine Brook is built to service future development above Pine Brooks needs. Chairperson Smith is in real estate. The lots expired several times and have been available separately. Vince clarified expired means the listing had expired on the lots, because they had been on the market for 18 three hundred four (304) days. Vince said he remembers the fun we had last time. Last time, he did not feel it was fair to change these lots to LDR2 and enable buildings different than others in the community, without having the community onboard; he still feels that way. He does not want to discount changing the neighborhood. Vince says the zones are very similar. Jim said, at the same time, we need to look at what the potential is in the new zone. With the change, a developer could put in more lots and would have to go through the plat process. Vince explained when a Comp Plan Map change is made to LDR1-MDR1, and someone requests the MDR1 zone, the Commission does not have to grant the MDR1 zone because it is an allowed zone in the Comprehensive Plan Map designation range. Jim wants to comment on the comment made the Commission is responsible for “taking care of the residents”. The residents and the landowner’s rights both have to be considered. Randall said if you plan to deny the plat, why would we approve the Comp Plan Map change today. McKay looked back at the minutes and many of the comments were based on the style the developer was proposing: twinhomes, townhomes, duplexes, connected units. He comes from a developer background and after the previous hearings, the developer listened and came back with a different proposal. In the LDR1 zone, the units will not be connected units in a twinhome, duplex, or townhome style. Anywhere you go, there is buffer zoning. It would have been advantageous for the original developer to buffer from the very beginning. These lots are owned by people also. It is not unusual for someone to say, this is not working, we are going to do a step down buffer to make this land work. Randall said if a change is made tonight to make this first step, and change the Comprehensive Plan Map designation, this would give the HOA time to get with the developer to compromise. The developer has made changes in response to the neighborhood’s comments. There is some danger in leaving the project undone. There is truth on both sides. Eric is concerned about the egress. If the turn around had another egress, the traffic issue may not be as concerning. He is weighing the pros and cons; he is thinking about who benefits from this proposal? He does not see the neighborhood benefitting from additional homes. The city does not necessarily benefit; he sees how an argument could be made for a lower price point and, in a round-about way, providing more affordable housing. The developer is gaining the benefits. Chairperson Smith disagrees; she believes approving this request could benefit the community as a whole, which is who the Commissioners are here to think about. There are few areas to build homes in the city limits. Many of the requests lately have been for condo plats. Jim said there are currently two (2) points of egress people can use. He does not see the traffic being an issue. Even if the lots are replatted, the number of lots is not going to increase significantly to cause traffic issues. Randall asks those involved to ponder on the request and consider if the change is really as scary as they are thinking. Once homes are built, they are built. Vanessa says she is new to this situation and she loves listening to peoples’ concerns and thoughts about this. Thinking about the Comprehensive Plan Map change - she is on the fence. As she thinks from the point of view of a home owner, she would love to see something other than dirt and a highway. She does not feel the added lots down the road will cause a large increase in traffic. Todd asked can the same house be built in RR2 as LDR1. Is a zone change needed? 19 Aaron explained the answer is simple math. There are eight lots under contract. To spread the cost for $80,000 of the completion of the cul-de-sac, there is almost double the cost needed for berming if the number of lots increases, and you still have to hit a $500,000 product level. Static costs have to be spread across all the lots; you have to have screening to sell the lots; you have to complete the street to get the Certificate of Occupancy (C.O.). Some of the work is still being covered by the developer – for free, for practice. Under the existing zoning (RR2) there are eight (8) lots, a house can be built, but with the additional costs of the cul-de-sac, berm, etc. additional lots need to be built to cover costs. Vince says he is outgrowing his current lot and he is moving out the county because in the city there are no lots with the acreage that he would like. Do we preserve larger lots in the city? Or do we push the larger lot sizes out into the county? Randall said we sometimes wish we could tell a developer what to do. Sometimes you have to let the market determine the rest. If a developer is willing to finish the project, the community may be able to come to terms with the changes. The Commission has the ability to table the request to give more time for consensus between the developer and the neighborhood. Vince said we initially heard this in April and now it is July and things are still not resolved. He would pass this motion. But if the developer comes back with a plat change, Vince would not support it, even though he has heard the developer cannot make money without a plat change. McKay asked Vince why he would take the land to a new designation, knowing he would deny a plat change; why would Vince not deny this initial request?. Vince said we have to recognize the rights of the developer, but we do not have to default in favor of the developer. He would vote in favor of this request based on the rights of the developer tonight. Randall does not agree with Vince. McKay said the concern of an increase of traffic came up several times in the public input. If you have sixty (60) lots and you increase by nine (9) lots, you have added an increase in traffic of six (6%) percent in the entire neighborhood; the traffic is not doubling – the number of lots is not doubling to one hundred twenty (120) homes. The roads, built to city standards, have the ability to hold eight to ten (8-10) times more traffic then they are currently carrying. Vince’s thoughts go back to preserving the integrity of the neighborhood. If he were a homeowner and had just built across the street, expecting a certain number of neighbors, I would not want to see this change. Brad is looking at the proposal before the Commission for a Comprehensive Plan change; he has been listening to everyone’s comments and they are based upon the future. If something happens, they do not like the request. Tonight, the Comp Plan change allows for future possibilities. Nothing is allowed to change right now. In his mind, the vote should be on what is before the Commission. When the future things come, we deal with them. Maybe, between now and then, something might change that makes more people happy. Vince said he was trying to say the same things Brad just voiced. Vince’s vote against would be based on assumption for the future. MOTION: Motion to recommend the City Council approve (22-00418) the Comprehensive Plan Map Change from Rural to LDR1-MDR1 for the eleven (11) lots along Hwy 20 in Pine Brook DIV2, because it allows for future possibilities, without encumbering anyone at this time, and Staff has indicated that the infrastructure can 20 support the request. Action: Approve, Moved by Brad Wolfe, Seconded by McKay Francis. McKay said based on the infrastructure to service the additional lots and buffer the lots from the highway. Brad said we could include the Staff has said the request makes sense to them and does not impact the city services in any detrimental way. Commissioner Discussion on the Motion: None VOTE: Motion passes. (Summary: Yes = 7, No = 3). Yes: Vince Haley (Vice Chair), Todd Marx, Randall Kempton, Sally Smith (Chairperson), Aaron Richards, Jim Lawrence, Bruce Casper, Eric Erickson, McKay Francis, Vanessa Johnson. No: Eric Erickson, Bruce Casper, Randall Kempton 2. (22-00419) - 11 Lots along Hwy 20 in Pine Brook DIV2 –Rezone from Rural Residential 1 (RR1) to Low-Density Residential 1 (LDR1). Parcels along Hwy 20 were originally zoned LDR1, but when Pine Brook DIV2 was annexed in 2007 (07-00209), the parcels along Hwy 20 were rezoned to Rural Residnetial 2 (RR2). A request to change nine (9) of these lots to Low-Density Residential 2 (LDR2) earlier this year was denied (22-00103). The parcels for this request total 6.51 acres. – Todd Webb, Aaron Richards (action) (Video 1:29:34) Applicant Presentation: Aaron Richards – He has no additional information to present, but he would happy to answer any questions. Commissioner Questions: None Staff Report: Alan Parkinson – He wants reiterate the utilities can service these parcels. The application meets the requirements for the zone change. Staff recommends the Commission recommend the request to City Council. Commissioner Questions: None Chairperson Smith opened the public input portion of the hearing at 8:07PM. Favor: None Neutral: Jim Brannon – 321 S Mill Hollow – He asked Aaron where Refuge Homes is based. Aaron Richards answered the LLC is based in Idaho in Rexburg. Jim continued the issue is not what is approved today, but the great opportunity discussed today could go south in the future. Looking out into the county, people are making roads into their fields to create subdivisions. How many subdivisions are coming? Someone in the audience mentioned the downturn in the market. The decisions of the Commissioners should not be based on what 21 the developer is promising. The neighborhood has learned it is what the developer is held accountable for. What are the downsides to approving this request? He referred to the Mill Hollow Subdivision and the floodplain issue. He asked if the Mill Hollow subdivision below his house went through Planning & Zoning. Chairperson Smith told Jim that he was referring to an item that would be discussed later in the agenda. He knows someone platted that land and he believes the developer was told he needed to fix the floodplain issue. Vince said the purpose of the Commission is for land use only. Many of the details for development are reviewed by the City Staff. Jim believes the applicant will keep coming back time after time, and the Commission will give way to his request a little bit at a time. Opposed: Leah Heise – 15 S. Hidden Valley Rd – She is speaking on the vision. Leah has lived in many different places across the country. One of the towns she lived in in Georgia had lots that remind her of tonight’s lots, the size of those lots was ½ to one acre. In the city, there are decent size lots, but there are some that are definitely smaller in some parts of Rexburg. It is important to decide ahead of time: where do you want the college students? Where do you want the different kinds of housing? Deciding ahead of time will make the hearings go more quickly. She would like to see the vision of the City Council and their vision. Chairperson Smith stated the Comprehensive Plan work is underway and she is welcome to participate. Planning can occur, but some things change those plans over the years. Leah responded the decision of the Commission tonight needs to be based on the current plan. Written Correspondence: (See responses for 22-00418 in previous hearing.) Rebuttal: There are many people who are in favor of the applicant’s request, but they have chosen to remain quiet due to the contention back in April 2022. This is an opportunity to try and pull the community together. He looks forward to a decision one way or the other on the zoning. Chairperson Smith confirmed with Attorney Rammell about speakers after rebuttal. Attorney Rammell said the applicant would then be allowed another rebuttal. Chairperson Smith closed the public input portion of the hearing at 8:16PM. 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: Randall indicated that Aaron may have said the HOA is contentious, but more accurately, the H.O.A. may be divided. It seems there is a win-win for communication between the H.O.A. and the developer. Tonight, is not that night. Eric says his concerns are the change in density from what was originally platted, echoing the neighbors, who have bought their properties expecting ½ acre lot sizes in this development. There is not a compelling reason to increase the density to double the number of homes on 22 the same acreage in an already platted subdivision. He feels the lots will build out one way or another. Bruce confirmed the number and size of lots are not changing tonight; there are still only eleven (11) lots. Eric says the number of lots are not changing tonight, but the Commission would be allowing someone to request the number of lots change. If denied, no one has the possibility to come back with a plat change. Vince said the Commission needs to vote on what is in front of them, not what might happen in the future; he knows he is contradicting his reasoning in hearing #1. MOTION: Motion to recommend the City Council approve (22-00419) the 11 Lots along Hwy 20 in Pine Brook DIV2 from Rural Residential 2 (RR2) to Low-Density Residential 1 (LDR1), because currently, the lot sizes are not changing and the density is not increasing in the neighborhood. Action: Approve, Moved by Vince Haley, Seconded by Vanessa Johnson. Commissioner Discussion on the Motion: Eric is not sure how the approval of the zone affects the developer’s rights for a plat change. To clarify, if the LDR1 zone is approved, and a plat change comes before the Commission that complies with the zoning, the Commission would have to approve the plat. The zone change will allow for a twelve thousand (12,000 sq.ft.) square feet lots. Brad said all kinds of things could happen. Vince said the Comprehensive Plan Map designations give a range, so the Commission can determine if a requested zone change is right for the area. VOTE: Motion carries. (Summary: Yes = 8, No = 2). Yes: Vince Haley (Vice Chair), Todd Marx, Sally Smith (Chairperson), Aaron Richards, Jim Lawrence, Bruce Casper, McKay Francis, Vanessa Johnson. No: Eric Erickson, Randall Kempton (5 min. recess) Aaron Richards joined the Commissioners back on the dais. 3. (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 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) 23 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 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 24 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. 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 25 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. 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 26 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 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. 27 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 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. 28 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. 29 Written Correspondence: #1 WRITTEN RESPONSE: Mark Farnsworth – 278 W Moody Rd. 30 #2 WRITTEN RESPONSE: Petition 31 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 32 Rd is a very rural, agriculture use within the city limits. A lot more farming and 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 33 contiguous. Vince consulted Attorney Rammell. The Commission was told there was 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 (3 min. break) 4. (22-00420) – RPRXBCA0291271 (south of Star View Drive) – Rezone from Low-Density Residential 1 (LDR1) to Low- Density Residential 2 (LDR2). This parcel was included in the impact Area of the City of Rexburg in 2002. In 2003, the property was annexed into the city as part of Area 4 and zoned as Low- Density Residential (03-00098). The Comprehensive Plan Map designates this parcel as LDR1-MDR1. The parcel for this request is 31.51 acres. – Brad Brown, Jake Young (action) (Video 3:28:56) Applicant Presentation: Jake Young – 239 Iron Side, UT - This request is compatible with the Rexburg Comprehensive Plan Map. This area is compatible with the LDR1 and LDR2 zones, as well as the MDR. At the development team, they looked at the Comprehensive Plan and visiting with Staff about where to plan neighborhoods for growth. This request is also compatible with adjacent zoning. LDR2 is adjacent to the north and to the south. The LDR2 zone is fantastic for today’s market. He appreciates all of the comments that have been made for attainable or affordable housing. Attainable housing is looking at young professionals, college grads, newly marrieds, and others who want to get into the market and buy real estate. The LDR2 zone is aimed at filling this need. It is also a 34 good zone for missing middle housing. Missing middle housing is not about income but about size; this is not stacked units or apartments. Missing middle housing is a problem throughout the intermountain west. A starter home is now a small lot home, twin home, or townhome where families are looking for middle housing. You can do smaller lots and the units can be attached, allowing for flexibility of development. The property has an easement on the north for connection to Star View Drive. Jake is also working with the landowner to the south to connect to existing roadways. The city’s Transportation Master Plan shows the East Parkway Corridor for connectivity. He sees six (6) or more street connectivity options for this property to the south and east over time. Utilities are directly adjacent to the property. The water connection in this area would actually improve. Connection could be looped for water at the top of the hill to water at the bottom of the hill. Water always works best in a connected network. Sewer flows downhill and this property would be connecting sewer lines uphill and downhill also. Storm water is always a concern with hill properties. Detention basins and low-impact development can be created to mitigate and retain water on-site before the water affects the neighborhood downhill; he realizes this is a concern of residents. He has met with City Staff multiple times on utilities and transportation. Through due diligence, you will notice on the Staff Report that Staff does recommend approval of the request. The request does fit with the pattern of growth. Multiple voices have been in favor of attainable housing and the need to allow Rexburg’s growth to happen. There are a lot of good opportunities in Rexburg. Jake grew up in a college town; he knows what it means to compete for college housing and the raising of rents. This type of zoning of LDR2 would allow people to borrow and get out of the renting game. Commissioner Questions: Aaron said the typography is unique. He confirmed the north end of the property is the low end. He asked Jake if has thought about using the detention basins as a buffer to the adjacent properties. Jake said absolutely. The buffer with the adjacent neighborhood is also a good idea. No specific plans have been developed. Staff has requested he not come with specific plans to allow tonight’s decision be about the land use. Aaron referred to the escarpments and undevelopable slopes - will these go into common areas? Jake answered this is not a decision that has been made, yet. There are opportunities to work with the existing landowners. He tends to use these areas as pocket parks. Staff Report: Alan Parkinson – When Staff was reviewing the request, storm water has been an issue. In 2014, a stormwater event created some challenges in many areas of the city. Engineering will be required to contain run-off and retain stormwater on site. Arrangement are being made to bring water from the top of the hill, down, and alleviate some of the low-pressure problems in the existing Hidden Valley area. Two accesses will be required in the beginning stages of this development, connecting to the north and the south. In the future, the city would like to see connection to E 2nd S. Right-of-ways will be collected during development. At any point there will be four or five different routes for residents to connect to the traffic network. The lift station has been replaced in this area with a larger lift station to service any additional future growth in this area. The change to the lift station was also to mediate some of the problems the area faced in 2014. Staff recommends the request to the Commissioners to recommend to City Council. 35 Commissioner Questions: Aaron confirmed the road along the church on S Hidden Valley Rd will be extended to the property line. Water and sewer will also be connected at this point. Alan said the applicant will have to work with the property owner to the south to connect to the road, sewer, and water by the church. Until an agreement is made with the landowner to the south, the parcel will not be able to be developed. Eric asked what is meant by containment of the surface water. Alan said there is no storm drain in this area. The developer will have to show how he will address the 100-year flood levels and maintain the water on site. Randall are the concerns about storm water and water pressure requirements any different for the LDR2 zone than they are for the LDR1 zone? Alan said the infrastructure requirements are the same for both zones. Randall asked if the land is platted. Alan said no. A plat would be the next step if the zoning is approved. McKay asked for clarification: over the last couple of months, a parcel east of tonight’s request was tabled twice and then and then withdrawn by that applicant. Chairperson Smith confirmed that Hidden Valley is zoned Low-Density Residential 2 (LDR2). Jim asked about the difference between the LDR1 and LDR2 zones. Alan answered in LDR1, the lots would have a minimum size of twelve thousand (12,000) square feet. The uses would be single-family detached homes. LDR2 has a minimum lot size of eight thousand (8,000) square feet for a single-family detached home or for duplexes or twin homes the minimum lot size is ten thousand (10,000) square feet. No townhomes or multi-family apartments are allowed. Hidden Valley as a whole does not meet all the standards of LDR1. Chairperson Smith asked about the zoning in the whole of Hidden Valley. Alan said most of the lots are zoned Low-Density Residential 2 (LDR2), except some lots to the west in phases 5 and 6. Vince confirmed, even though the zoning designation is LDR2, the majority of the lots are built to the LDR1 standard. Alan said several of the lots in Hidden Valley are built to the LDR2 standard. Chairperson Smith opened the public input portion of the hearing at 10:22PM. (Video 3:46:13) Favor: Brad Brown – 719 W 4350 S – UT – Brad did not know if he should speak now or with Jake in the beginning at the applicant presentation. Jake knows a lot about master planning. He has gone to school for planning and worked as a planner for Salt Lake County. He is an independent consultant for many clients. Brad knows this is a special project and he knows he needed someone to make sure the development is done right. Looking at the property and its geographic constraints, elevation differences, the utilities, and roads, there is a lot of financial and planning considerations. Brad’s team felt very limited with the single-family lots and the LDR1 zone. The hill on the west side was a topic of mitigation, as well as offsite infrastructure costs. Brad feels Jake has a good handle on what would be best for the community. He has worked well with Staff and has listened to their comments. Brad’s team is excited and feels this is a positive change for all sides. Neutral: Tracy Wynn – 290 Rodney Dr – She is representing the neighborhood. They have been sewered out twice, along with a neighbor, in 2008 and 2014, with over $60,000 36 in damage. She knows growth is going to happen but does not agree with multi- family housing in the area per lot. Single-family housing is suitable for this area. There are other places in Rexburg that would be more suitable for multi-family housing per lot. Tracy wants the Commission to look out for the people. Please make the developer have adequate drainage; do what it takes to support your tax payers with adequate infrastructure and drainage. We can grow all we want, but if we do not have a good foundation, all we are doing is making more money. Tracy is pro-growth. Please protect the people and watch over them. Steve Oakey – 175 S Mill Hollow – In deciding whether to be for or against any land issue and specifically in the one before the Commission, he wants to consider the strongest, reasonable arguments. He supports a single and fundamental right of a landowner to use their property as they see fit. The following are reasons Steve has chosen to remain neutral: 1. Over the years, he has heard it said in many public hearings, some folks do not like outsiders come to our town to make a buck. The outsiders do not care about our community. He has to remind himself that there is a shortage of housing across the country and in Rexburg, as has been stated tonight multiple times. When demand is high, someone has to supply to meet that demand. The best way to incentivize free-market producers in a free-market economy requires there is a profit on investment. He would like to thank developers, whether they live in our community or not, for investing in our county. Steve thanked those who had presented their projects today. 2. Perhaps his objection would be the added traffic, overcrowding of schools and emergency and utility services. I remind myself that the city has competent engineering staff, legal counsel, and administration that will ensure safe and efficient construction in the maintenance of roads, sidewalks, and utilities. We have a responsible school district, police, and fire department that hire new personnel as needed. Knowing this, he could not object for this reason. 3. Perhaps I should demand the City of Rexburg protect the value of his property. What if his neighbor’s value is different than his? And if I demand the city open a Pandora’s box of competing values, the city would have to legally define and then coercively enforce those values. Is it monetary value or aesthetic value or lifestyle value? Or predominant majority value? A room where a small group of local citizens are granted the right to dictate value over a lesser unseen minority. Steve does not feel it right for any government to define or coercively enforce value. Citizens should be able to create many values. Rather, government should guarantee freedom for individual citizens to create many values. 4. Perhaps as a citizen of the United States, I have a skewed view that the majority should be able to shape the community. And the shape of the community is best defined by the government, rather than many individuals, competitive choices. He read a book, The Color of Law, written by Richard Rothstein, who argues that the history of zoning throughout the United States has been used by multiple governments to segregate and exclude certain disagreeable and deplorable classes of people. In fact, he has heard it stated in this very room, at this very mic, when a 37 person says they do not oppose housing, but only a certain type of housing. Many varieties of people over the course of time, through many interactions shape a community. Because people like to use exaggeration and hyperbole, they have asked Steve, would you allow a pig farm in downtown Rexburg? Steve thought it would be impossible to find such a pig farmer, or any other kind of farmer, or any other successful business person, who would so misallocate the valuable investment of raising hogs, on such expensive, hard to access land. For this reason, he could not oppose. 5. Perhaps Steve should be for the negative because the development would be detrimental to his lifestyle. He reminds himself in the early 1970s, Jack Randall Development developed the Indian Hills Estates, his parents purchased a lot on a patchy avenue, where their young family moved from a more modest home on Center Street, sold to his parents by Ross Reese. Steve is certain both Jack and Ross made money on the transactions. He is grateful the already established neighbors did not put up too much of a fuss over his parents building a home there, even though it would have impacted their lifestyle. Subsequent housing development greatly impeded Steve’s young lifestyle. He could not walk across a previously open field and down into Mill Hollow Canyon, where he spent many year-round hours and days. Because of the slow housing development, Steve’s mother often lamented the diminishing views and lessening of meadowlark morning songs, of which they were a part. Isn’t it ironic that he now owns one of the homes that impacted his young lifestyle. Steve remembers years ago the Teton Flood Dam and the Mill Hollow Trailer Park was built in the middle of a hollow across the street from Palmer’s farmhouse. When Dale passed away and the farm went into the hands of his son, Gene, and his son-in-law developed the land into the Hidden Valley Estates. The diverse income levels of diverse home values like the mobile home park have not interfered with the quiet and peace of the Hidden Valley owners. 6. Perhaps he should object because there are plenty of other places to develop in the county. Because Steve has paid attention to the housing developments, in the county, he can assure the Commission, as has evidenced tonight, in every case he has observed, there has been varying levels of opposition in all of these developments. Sometimes, nasty opposition. The acrimony generated by one of our Madison County housing developments led to a recently decided Idaho Supreme Court case. He read a letter submitted during a hearing which said, “I oppose any housing development across from me. I do not need all those people living across from me. I do not need the noise, the speeding up and down the road, and most of all the raise in property taxes, because it is there.” There may be some strong reason or justification for Steve to oppose this land action he has not yet considered. But, he likes to think he is capable of persuasion, he would be happy to listen to the negative voices but for the reasons stated, he remains neutral. 38 Leah Heise - 15 S Hidden Valley – She showed the location of a path that many residents use. Leah asked the developer to include the path in his plans. Kristine Bennion – 295 Shoshone Ave – She is torn because of the housing and how it is affecting the students. Kristine is worried about the destruction from the water to prepare for the 100-year flood. She is sure this was done for the people who live south of Mill Hollow in the valley. It did not help and people still lost thousands and thousands of dollars of property. Also, she is concerned about the access. One of the things she is opposed to is going through the Benfields’ house. Anyone who drives Mill Hollow in the winter knows the street can be dangerous. The idea of bringing the road through 2nd S is ridiculous; she does not know why anyone would do that. There is no stopping in the winter; accident after accident would happen at the bottom of the hill if you hook on to the road at 2nd S. She is pro-growth; she feels it is important for Rexburg to have growth, especially in that valley. No one wants their view of the Tetons taken. She wishes she had more assurances. Abri Apartments is an example of spot zoning; the development has changed the integrity of that area. Kristine clarified from the developer that townhomes are not allowed in LDR2. Prices are market driven. Opposed: Jim Papworth – 165 S Hidden Valley Rd – Jim thanked the Commission for the time you put into this volunteer position. He and Anne are the last house on the east side of the road in Hidden Valley. The first three (3) years the two lived there, there was a huge plat posted showing lots, just like theirs, going all the way up the hill side south of them; this is one of the major reasons the two chose to build their home at this location. He counted four (4) of the ninety-eight (98) homes are on smaller lots than what he anticipated when he and his wife built their home. His hope is the Commissioners will consider why people move into an area and one of those reasons is what they anticipate will develop around them. Jim would like to see the area remain the same and the Commission deny the request. Donna Benfield – 201 S Mill Hollow Rd – We are all here for the same reason; we all love Rexburg. She believes Rexburg is the safest place in the whole world. She and her husband have been lots of places and she and her husband choose Rexburg. They have lived in Rexburg for fifty years. • How many of you live in Rexburg? She knows everyone does. • How many of you own your own home? • How many of you made one of the biggest decisions of your life to build your own homes? For her and her husband it was one of the biggest decisions of their lives. The two have lived in their home since 1979. People have invested their life savings in their home. 39 She loves growth. Her life’s job was to promote businesses to come to Rexburg. Donna wants the growth to be planned correctly. She thought everyone in Hidden Valley was LDR1; she stands corrected. Donna wants planners to learn and listen to why people live where they live. Single-family homes are very appropriate in this area. She loves having neighbors with different opinions. Donna does not like to see people come into a community, make changes to that community, and then go back to where they live. The developer said he has six (6) different options for roadways. Why does everyone come up to us and say what are you going to do when the road goes through their living room? No one has come to the Benfields and told them there is going to be a road through their living room, but it is on the internet. A map shows a road going straight through her house. Donna was just told if they do not like what is offered, it could be considered eminent domain. She has dedicated her life to Rexburg, but tonight she has a sick feeling in her gut. Is there an answer for me? Is there a road going through her home? If that scenario did happen, this eighty (80) year old woman would not leave her home. Brad said Donna deserves an answer. From his service and during Donna’s service, to his knowledge, the City Council has not pursued eminent domain. The Commissioners can only do land use only. Brad asked Alan if he has any knowledge of this. Alan said the city looks at development in this area and the connectivity is projected. The City will negotiate purchase. Donna has had several people desire her home and yard. Aaron asked if there are funds for the extension of E 2nd S. Alan answered, “no”. Chad Richards – 720 Centennial Loop – He is against the applicant’s request for a couple of reasons. Seventeen years ago, he bought his lot and built his home. They bought due to its moderate lot size, the modest location, and intended this to be their final home. He would argue the entire hill on the map near the hospital that have the LDR1 zone but are smaller lots. There is another section of land, which is ninety-five (95) acres to the east which came up and was withdrawn; their request was for LDR2. Accepting tonight’s request would influence the zoning of the other ninety-five (95) acres. One hundred twenty-five acres at an LDR2 zone allows five thousand (5,000) square feet per lot. Chad’s lot is 15,000 square feet; this means the density would be going from one door to three doors per acre on the entire hill. This density does not match anything else that has been done on the entire hill. Chad has to evaluate from a worst-case scenario. A Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) could be completed and make the density even worse. If we can put a man on the moon, we can figure out the storm drain problem. He would question the six (6) accesses. Low-impact housing is what is already present. The neighborhood looks forward to the growth there. Chad does not care what type of house goes in. It is just the density they want with the open feel he is seeking. The desire is to maintain the same development on up the hill. 40 Vaughn Price – 315 S Mill Hollow Rd – He works in the insurance business and was involved in the litigation of the damage in Hidden Valley. There was hundreds of thousands of dollars of litigation, as well as exposure. Considerable engineering will be needed to reduce that risk. Before a zone change is completed, he believes the residents deserve to see a plat for this area. He is interested in seeing the mitigation plans. Steven Hart – 285 S Mill Hollow Rd – He has some of the same concerns as Vaughn. The back of his house is a cliff. He does not want the hillside dug into from a safety standpoint. He did not like the comment of identifying LDR2 zoned properties in the Hidden Valley subdivision; he feels this is feeble attempt to add power to what they are asking for. The whole area should be a single-family development. Steve does not mind looking down on rooftops, but he does mind when his neighbors have increased traffic, etc. Chad Price – 269 S Mill Hollow Rd – He sat back and looked at the seal. The seal is going to have to be changed. The Commissioners get faced with people packing into the city. We are losing the agricultural focus. Let us maintain some openness with the tightly packed density. He knows developers need to make a buck in development. Let us zone the land like the rest of the neighborhood as LDR1. Eric Barzee – 107 Star View Dr – He asked people in the audience to stand if they have the same concern Eric does. Is anyone concerned that N Hill Rd is already very narrow with no plans for expansion? Is anyone concerned about sewage flowing down the hill due to inadequate structure? Is anyone concerned about retention of storm drains? Is anyone concerned about Benfield’s house being torn down for the road down the steep hill? (Many people in the audience stood for each question.) The people all have similar concerns about how each issue will be dealt with. Right now, there is one entrance into Hidden Valley. (For all Hidden Valley phases, there are two entrances into the subdivisions.) Sky Sessions -118 S Hidden Valley – Sky was born and raised in Rexburg. He served in the Army active duty. There is nowhere else he would rather live; he loves it here. Developers provide the growth; we need to create a pathway for them. Markets are cyclical; things will change. The market cannot be predicted one hundred (100%) percent. Middle of the ground housing belongs in Summerfield, not here. Jessica Dustin – 636 Centennial Loop – She wrote a letter. The request is not congruent with what is already developed. Michael Larsen – 104 Star View Dr – He can summarize his opposition to two issues when considering development: 1) Are there other options or areas that are already zoned LDR2? Why must this parcel be changed? 2) When making a decision such as this, do we honor the desires and expectations of the established residents or those that do no live in the area? 41 Marianne Sessions – 118 S Hidden Valley Rd – She represents Craig Broadbent, who is a Doctor of Economics, from whom she will submit a written response after her testimony. The gist is the affects of development on the storm drain system. For herself, she is against a higher density in this area. Adams Elementary and Lincoln Elementary are already overloaded. Tripling the density in this area will greatly impact those schools. She loves this community and this area. Graduates should not expect to be able to afford a home just after graduating from college. The housing crisis is nationwide. We want to create opportunities for people. Why would we allow a change in zoning in this area when there are other areas feasible for this? Scott Gardner – 92 Star View Dr – There are to main concerns that stand out to him. The two adjacent parcels that are zoned LDR2 are actually not adjacent, they just touch the parcel. There are two potential road connections for access – Star View Drive and to the south. The zone change would add sixty (60) additional homes. Insufficient snow plowing narrows the road. Is this the right time to change the zoning for this parcel? Do we wait for the connections to develop first? Richard Cluff – 631 Vale Ln – He agrees with what has been said. This parcel is in his backyard. One concern is the unknowns. This does not give him any faith or hope the residents are going to be taken care of. Craig Johnson – 641 Vale Ln – He and his neighbors are doing what they are privileged to do as Americans; he is grateful to express his feelings and concerns to his representatives. What will happen if the detention ponds fail? And if the water does come down the hill, then what? His understanding is once water leaves your property it is not your problem. He is also concerned with other issues, but they have been said. Peter Williams – 696 Centennial Loop – He agrees strongly with what has been said. He likes the comment on the timing for the roads. Let us fix the roads first. The road problem is a big one. Jim Brannon – 321 S Mill Hollow – He will leave pretty happy tonight. The lady who moved from New York to Chicago to Rexburg and is pro-growth, by the time all this happen, her grandkids will not want to come here. He has lived in Rexburg for thirty-seven (37) years. Jim believes he has lived in Rexburg during its best years. He foresees passing away before the consequences of growth take place. Russ Norton – 691 Dell Dr – He agrees with the comments expressed. Russ lives at the bottom of Mill Hollow. He is concerned about egress. He worries about the water – whoever designed the solutions previously, failed. Russ has a difficult time having confidence that a solution will be found. Victor Harrison – 782 Nina Dr – Victor identified his home on the map. He opposes this request due to the stormwater issue. Sewer runs downhill to Tracy Wynn’s basement. The city has said they have put in a new lift station. The new lift station is designed to help with the Barney Dairy property on the back of the 42 baseball fields. There is a problem lift station by the Junior High that has failed twice. Until there is a guarantee, that this will not happen again, he opposes this. He also opposes the request due to the storm water issue. In Rexburg, the ground freezes and when you run water over it, the water does not stay in a catch pond and runs over the banks. He has lived in Rexburg for thirty-five (35) years and he has lived in his home for twenty (20) years. He has had water run across the road to the east of his home. The ditch above him flooded because it was not properly maintained or adequate for the run-off. Why will a storm system not be put in this area? Someone opened a manhole, which allowed the storm water into the sewer system, causing the sewer to flood into the residents’ basements. He opposes any development that does not solve these problems first. Nate Allen – 65 S Hidden Valley – He echoes the concern of the domino affect of approval. Nate showed his home. Increasing density through here will increase the danger of traffic not slowing down past his home. Someone planned this area for LDR1, they had a reason for the LDR1 zone, and he does not see a reason for this to change. Travis Greene – 112 Star View Drive – He is opposed. Travis would like to see single-family homes on this parcel. Gene Palmer, when developing this area, zoned the land LDR2, giving him developer options, but he chose single-family homes. When it comes to affordable housing; this will not be affordable housing. This is not the developer’s fault due to the building and land acquisition costs, a road is needed, and the land will need to be blasted for lava. The hillside cannot be built on. The expense to put the development together will make the prices of the homes unaffordable. There are other places for development without all these barriers. David Heise – 15 S Hidden Valley – He asks the body to reject this proposal and ask the developer to come back with more concrete plans. Vince said the Commissioners consider land use and the Commissioners do not want a project to influence their vote. As much as the residents want to see the project, the Commissioners do not. If the zone is going to work for Developer A, it is going to work for Developer B. He wanted to address this concept before the developer speaks, so he is not influenced to answer the people with details about the project. 43 Written Correspondence: #1 WRITTEN RESPONSE: Jessica and Tyler Dustin – 636 Centennial Loop 44 45 #2 WRITTEN RESPONSE: Craig Broadbent – 123 S Hidden Valley Rd 46 Rebuttal: Jake Young - He has listened to the citizens. Some of the concerns are new, others have come from the City Staff, and others have come from looking at the property and thinking about it. Jake thanked the residents for coming to the meeting. It is important to care about where you live. He is on a H.O.A. board in his neighborhood. Jake has met with D.O.T. on a highway going through his neighborhood. He has also has the experience of sewage flooding his basement. A lot of these concerns would be addressed at the platting level, which would come before the Commission as the project moves forward. Street connections, a trail, the 47 opportunity to cluster the homes, and stay away from the hillside would all be shown on that plat. In talking with City Staff, Keith is aware of all of these issues. Development is a long-term process to determine solutions to the problems. The connectivity to the south and the east are the most important to get onto the traffic system and move through the area. He has not proposed putting a road through Donna’s house. Jake is a big believer in property rights. Brad Brown – A lot of the problems brought forth tonight are engineering problems. Others were all about change. He recognizes the opinions in the room and he hopes that the neighbors will work with him to create a great place that addresses property rights for all. Chairperson Smith asked if anyone else would like to speak. She closed the public input portion of the hearing. 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 confirmed the 100 yr. flood, sheet flow from agricultural land coming down the canyon and funneling into the community. Vince added, when the development, the city did their best efforts from what they understood could happen. This event blew those expectations out of the water. The college was also flooded out. Many places were also affected like Hidden Valley. Aaron agrees with the property owners. All the property around the parcel is LDR1. There is one thing that tips the scales in the other direction - Hidden Valley is like looking down the barrel of the gun. He would be so grateful a developer wants to come in and fix these problems. Once you take of the escarpments and the massive retention center, sixteen (16-18) to eighteen acres will be usable. LDR2 will be needed to pay for the infrastructure. Brad says this area is precarious. The Commission is supposed to look at the property to determine if this is the place for this type of zone. Next week, the property can be sold and the plan for the property may change. Looking at the worst-case scenario proposed on the zoning. The greater density of three homes per acre is not a good fit. He does not believe the possibility of a P.U.D. should be put on this piece of property. Brad cannot guarantee that retention ponds will solve all the issues. Everyone wants everything that is ugly to be built in someone else’s backyard. Based on what is around this property and what could happen with the new zoning is the right answer for this property. He is against the request. Jim said he has the best neighbors; this is his neighborhood. It is late and people are tired, which can be a recipe for disaster. He appreciates the cordiality of the situation tonight. It is difficult to be a Commissioner and look at a request from all sides. Jim 48 is a Civil Engineer. A lot of the engineering things will be addressed and he will be watching for them. This is a unique area; the valley is closed in on all sides. The place lends itself to the same zoning that is already there. He wishes the land would develop right at the current zoning, sooner rather than later, so some of the issues can be resolved. Chairperson Smith said this land was owned by her family at one time. She spent her whole life there. When it was rezoned by the city, it all came in as LDR1. Their vision was for LDR1 through this area. Her husband farmed some of the land and the soil is not very deep in places. If everyone could work together, they could really make a beautiful development. Hopefully, the East Parkway Corridor will also happen. She believes LDR1 is the proper zoning for this property. McKay is paying devil’s advocate. A developer could come into the Hidden Valley neighborhood, does a P.U.D. and puts a twelve-story building in the middle of the neighborhood – this is probably an exaggeration. Just because your home was built to a different standard, does not mean the LDR2 zoned parcels cannot go ahead and build another unit onto their home; the LDR2 zoning would allow for this. Chad Richards and he had to build a major retention system for the Cove. The City of Rexburg made them put in a retention system that could hold all of Hidden Valley’s water and half of Rexburg’s. The system does not fill to twenty (20%) percent capacity, even when all of the snow is melting. If I lived at the bottom of the hill, I would be excited that a developer would be addressing drainage with whatever density. Vince asked if the property stays LDR1, does this mitigate any water or sewer problems. It does not. He is wondering, as the land is problematic, he asked Attorney Rammell, if Keith, the Public Works Director, would answer questions in a public meeting. Vince is trying to determine an avenue for the citizens’ questions to be answered if the zoning was approved. Attorney Rammell referred to Alan. Alan said, typically, a meeting can be set up for Staff to answer questions the public may have. Vince confirmed Staff’s willingness to meet with the public. Brad said in response to Vince’s comments the density will not affect the problems with storm drain, etc. Brad would argue with increased density, there is more building and pavement, etc. – at some point there is a difference. Eric says this is a difficult decision, because he knows a lot of the folks in the audience. He must step back and look at several of the comments about people not against higher density, as long as you put it somewhere else. People on the other side of town are saying the same thing. The Commission must determine whether a proposal fits in a particular area. His thoughts are Rexburg needs more of a twin home type of development, that seniors and younger families can move into. Done properly, this is a good fit in an area such as this. He is confident in Staff, that when a proposal is put before them, they will address the concerns of flooding, water, and sewer, the roads, and lot lines against the cliffs. If it cannot be done properly, we are not going to allow it to be done. Eric is still a little bit on the fence. He empathizes with the homeowners. Jim said if the land was flat, he would agree with the zone change. It is such an isolated area, but the zone change does not fit. Aaron argues if the land was flat, LDR2 could be gridded out. The topography limits the number of units that could go in. Aaron lives in Eaglewood in a LDR1 zone. Across the street from him are twin homes. Chairperson Smith sold the last twin home in Aaron’s neighborhood for $740,000. The neighbors should not be afraid of twin homes. 49 Based on the square footage for that sale, twin homes are a good product with LDR1 uses. Vince asked Commissioners to look at the maximum capacity. Alan provided some of the figures. The parcel is 31.51 acres times 8.7, which would allow two- hundred seventy-four (274) units before open space and roads. Aaron figures one hundred forty (140-150) to one hundred fifty units. MOTION: Motion to recommend the City Council deny (22-00420) RPRXBCA0291271 (south of Star View Drive) – Rezone from Low-Density Residential 1 (LDR1) to Low-Density Residential 2 (LDR2), based on the surrounding area all meeting the LDR1 zone requirements and the concerns development based on the Commissioners’ conversation. Action: Deny, Moved by Vince Haley, Seconded by Jim Lawrence. Commissioner Discussion on the Motion: Vince says the topography is what his reasons are based on. The Commissioners need the peoples’ input on the Comprehensive Plan. VOTE: Motion carried. (Summary: Yes = 7, No = 3). Yes: Vince Haley (Vice Chair), Todd Marx, Sally Smith (Chairperson), Aaron Richards, Bruce Casper, Vanessa Johnson, Brad Wolfe. No: Eric Erickson, McKay Francis, Aaron Richards Heads Up for August 4th: No Hearings Adjournment 12:08 AM