Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Minutes 11.17.22 City Staff and Others: Alan Parkinson – P&Z Administrator Katie Jo Saurey – P&Z Administrative Assistant Kyle Baldwin – Planner 1 Natalie Powell – Compliance Officer Spencer Rammell – Commissioner Attorney Chairperson Smith opened the meeting at 6:32 PM. Planning & Zoning Meeting: Welcome: Sally Smith Pledge of Allegiance: Aaron Richards 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, McKay Francis. Absent: Eric Erickson, Brad Wolfe, Vanessa Johnson Minutes: Approval of the P&Z Minutes from November 3, 2022 (action) MOTION: Motion to approve the Planning & Zoning minutes as recorded for November 3, 2022. Action: Approve, Moved by Aaron Richards, Seconded by McKay Francis. Commissioner Discussion on the Motion: None VOTE: Motion carried. (Summary: Yes = , No= 0 , Abstain = 1 ). Yes: Vince Haley (Vice Chair), Todd Marx?, Randall Kempton?, Aaron Richards, Bruce Casper, McKay Francis. No: Abstain: Sally Smith (Chairperson) Public Hearings: (video index 00:04:35) (22-00733) Aaron Peterson Development – Approximately 301 S 12th W – Rezone from Rural Residential 2 (RR2) to Low Density Residential 1 (LDR1) & Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2). The Comprehensive Plan Map designation for this parcel is Low Density Residential 1 (LDR1) – Medium Density Residential 1 (MDR1). The parcel is approximately 25.5 acres. – Aaron Peterson (action) Vince Haley asked if applicant’s project sign would be allowed? Sally Smith clarified it would not as they just want to talk about the rezone. Presentation by Applicant - Aaron Peterson: Aaron Peterson – 1365 Meadowview Ave, Rexburg ID Aaron said he is a big fan of Rexburg, that grew up here and lived not far from property. He is well aware of the challenges the property has faced in the past and understands the pushback from residents. He has heard whispering that the neighbors don’t want condos, so he has tried to be very mindful, thoughtful, and considerate of the concerns of the residents. With that in mind, he wanted the development to be mostly permanent residents, with 75% of the development as just residential lots. He stated Rexburg is going to grow and will need approximately 250 to 300 additional residences built per year for the next 10 years and asked where we want those new residents to go, and what is available to them? While he understands that some want to see 1 acre lots in this development, what is realistic to the demand? In his research, 95% of those he has spoken with prefer .5 - 1 acre further out in the country and this area is no longer considered country as it is in the city limits. His research shows there are three 1/4 acre lots on market right now, four 1/3 acre lots, eight ½ acre lots, and 26 1 acre lots. Supply and demand show this is what is needed, and with inflation, the average person cannot afford what they use to. Aaron is proposing 75% of the property be LDR1 and 25% be LDR2. He believes that at some point higher density will make sense for this property as no one wants a residential lot next to the highway and they are very difficult to sell. He stated that he hopes this development is something the neighbors can live with, because at some point future developers could stack condos with higher density on property the in 3-5 years. Jim Lawrence alerted the commissioners that the Zoom participants were not able to hear any audio. Once the audio issue was solved, Vince asked Attorney Rammell if in order for those on Zoom to vote, does Aaron need to restart his presentation? Attorney Rammell asked how much they were able to hear, if anything? Neither Jim nor Todd could hear anything. Attorney Rammell advised that Aaron Peterson recap his presentation for the Commissioners attending through Zoom. Aaron recapped stating he is not a developer from Utah, he is from Rexburg and grew up close to the property. He doesn’t want the property rezoned to super high density for a bunch of condos or townhomes. He is asking for 75% to be LDR1, and 25% LDR2 for twin homes or townhomes with two living spaces within the 8000 sq feet. His research shows half acre and one acre lots is not what the market is demanding right now, that there is a lot of room to offer smaller lots, especially with the economy right now, it’s all some can afford. In his experience, smaller lots kept tidy and ends up a nicer development, as there is no room for junk to pile up. He has put a lot of time, effort, and money into research to propose moving to LDR1 and LDR2. Commissioner Questions: Vince asked if the stats were coming from the MLS and clarified that they wouldn’t include any privately owned lots, like Summerfield. Aaron confirmed that yes, the lot stats came from MLS, and no, privately owned lots would not be included in that. Staff Report: Sally asked Kyle to reiterate the density for LDR1 & LDR2 for the audience. Kyle Baldwin LDR1 allows maximum lot size of just over 12,000 sq ft. which is just over 3 units per acre. LDR2 is 8,000 sq ft for single family detached and 10,000 sq ft for single family attached, which allows up to 2 units at 5,000 sq ft each. Sally asked for an example. Kyle clarified just duplexes or twin homes, no townhomes. Aaron Richards asked how many acres are proposed to go LDR1. Aaron Peterson answered 19. Aaron Richards roughly calculated the maximum as 69 LDR1 units and 60 twin units, but clarified this was not feasible as it is assuming 100% density and not taking into account any right of way or common area. Kyle stated the comprehensive plan designates the property LDR1-MDR2, so this comes in at the low end of that. Staff has reviewed this and there is plenty infrastructure available and no other concerns have come up. Staff is recommending P&Z recommends to City Council for approval. Sally asked if when 12th was widened years ago if the infrastructure was put into place then. Kyle clarified the developer will have to widen their side of 12th West. McKay mentioned this is the 3rd time this property has come before P&Z, that each time it passed P&Z and was denied by City Council and asked what zoning had been requested with those prior applications. Attorney Rammell advised that as a reminder, while some aspects can be relevant, the basis of this decision is on a separate application and separate criteria, not on what did or did not happen before. McKay stated that he just wanted to clarify that the requests had started of high, then backed off, and now to lowest ask on this property. Alan summarized the previous applications. Vince asked if when a parcel within the city that has current water rights is developed, do those water rights go to city? Kyle confirmed they do. Vince said that once that happens, they can no longer flood irrigate without being on city irrigation. Kyle answered that they cannot flood irrigate with surface water. Alan asked to clarify, stating that if they choose to maintain some of that for irrigation within that development, they can use surface irrigation if they want to use their own system to irrigate lawns, so they don’t have to go to city, unless they are relying 100% on the city to supply culinary and irrigation water. Vince received confirmation that in any capacity, whatever they do would meet state codes? And asked if the development would be required to widen the road only on the East side of 12th W, or if it would affect the West side? Kyle responded that they it would not. Sally opened public hearing portion of the meeting, instructing those wishing to speak to come forward and state their name and address, that the commissioners would hear from those in favor, those neutral, and those against and testimony would be limited to 3 minutes. She stated that the commission had received written responses and reminded those in attendance that if we have a written response, that is what that speaker wants to talk about, and those with a written response will not be able to speak. Mr. Brent Harris inquired that if he had submitted a written response, he would not be able to speak? Sally responded no, that it was either or. Alan responded that he would have to withdraw his written response. Attorney Rammell advised that discretion lie with the chairperson, for times when overloaded by comments, but there are no hard and fast rules, so if they want to comment tonight they may. Sally clarified that they would need to stay within their 3 minutes, and Attorney Rammell confirmed. Mr. Wanless Southwick pointed out that the hearing instruction literature stated 5 minutes. Attorney Rammell said that if we advertise 5 minutes, we’ll go 5, and we’ll see about fixing the literature going forward. In favor: Joe Allen stated he is a realtor, and agent for the Birch’s that own the land and for the developer. He clarified that with previous applications, the Birch’s were just rezoning, not developing the property. He thinks the comprehensive plan is fitting, especially along the highway - on the other side of the highway, there are 4-plexes lined up. He pointed out that he thought that it was very gracious of Mr. Peterson to go above and beyond and offer a lower density. He mentioned that the road way was expected to be widened for many years, when it went from County to the City. Neutral: None Against: Brent Harris stated he appreciated Aaron’s proposal and that he had been generous, but has three main concerns. Violates intent of the comprehensive plan. Residents like the small town rural feel of Rexburg, and these areas should preserve that character. This land was annexed in 2003, it was agricultural, and it’s still agricultural. To meet that intent, we need to have some of those areas in the city. Traffic issue, only access is off of 12th west, which is a concern. Violates state code, unless they use the water rights. Statue encourages the use of surface water where available to irrigate. A canal comes under freeway, a lateral ditch on the East side property, and a canal on west side along 12th west. To comply with state code, would need to irrigate with surface water, not well water. Those are his concerns and he would prefer it stays RR2. Wanless Southwick stated that he owns property that is contiguous with the property under consideration. The 25 acres is existing stable neighborhood for many years and the residents are in single family dwellings and participate in agriculture and hobby farms which are permitted activities in rural residential zoning and referenced his submitted document. He said that some people argue that people cannot afford single family homes on large lots, and that some of that is caused by the city’s quest for more tax revenue and the city imposing fees upon the developers, such as the cost of moving the canal. That the increased cost to the developer contributes to the overall increased cost. Wanless suggested a more prudent strategy would be to encourage a plan to develop all of the acreage simultaneously to specialty neighborhood that would preserve the small town feel, which is a characteristic of Rexburg’s current comprehensive plan and give newcomers to Rexburg additional options for large lots with single family dwellings and solve the problems of this lands isolation. He is recommending the current zoning petition be denied, to retain the rural residential zoning as it is an important part of what Rexburg has been and should continue to be, and he feels a different development proposal could reflect the rural residential values and what Rexburg use to be. Charlene Evans stated that they were drawn to the area because it was a country area. She currently owns 3 acres, 1 is divided off for their son, and they are approached frequently to sell the acreage. The renters across the street have told her they hope they can buy the house they are renting, as they cannot find an acre lot so close to the city. She asked that the commission take into consideration what the community wants for Rexburg in the future, suggesting houses where people are going to stay long term and build a future; where they will be a part of community, pay taxes, and care about the schools. She asked the commission to consider that some people may not want to live clear out in Burton and Hibbard but rather close to the city and still have land. Applicant Response: Aaron Peterson stated that he sincerely appreciates the residents’ comments. He stated that for every one-off inquiry about a 1 acre lot, there are lots of conversations about smaller lots and most families start out in starter home, not their forever home. He asked if it was ok to welcome those families into our neighborhoods, because he thinks it is. He thanked Wanless for the work he put into his proposal but identified it would be difficult to coordinate with 8 different landowners. He mentioned that 1 acre lots next to highway 20 are not wanted and used Pinebrook’s vacant lots as an example. He asked for consideration to a plan that can be lived with and realistic versus what could happen in the future that could be much worse. Sally Smith closed the public hearing portion of the meeting at 7:12 pm. (video 42:51) Commissioners questions: Sally Smith stated that it is good for people to know that the reason for the comprehensive plan is for the future, and that it reflects the input given by people, and what they have visualized. She commented that LDR1 and LDR2 are stable neighborhoods, not necessarily starter neighborhoods, and that there are not very many single family lots in the city at this time, and referenced the recent comprehensive plan exercise. As the city grows, it’s going to grow in the limits then spread out, and she thinks this is a good use of this property. While there are no multiunits available, it does give options for twinhomes and would appeal to a lot of our residents Aaron Richards (video 44:54) stated that he lives in a neighborhood that is LDR1 & LDR2, and it is very stable and has strong values. That property owners in the LDR2 zone are some of the strongest contributors to the neighborhood. He commented that curb and gutter on larger lots is almost cost inhibitive in todays economy. He stated that he is in support of LDR1 and LDR2 zoning for this location, and mentioned that as a sidenote, he has the listings for lots in Pinebrook on Highway 20, and there is no interest. Vince stated that it is important to consider applicant and application as stands, rather than what the commissioners or citizens want to see in that area. Previously submitted applications did not appease the residents, but do reflect the market. He then summarized some of the differences between LDR1 and LDR2, noting that they are minimal. He stated that he is in favor of the zoning as proposed with LDR1 first and LDR2 next to the highway. Bruce Casper asked the applicant what they considered a starter home. Aaron Peterson replied that it is something smaller than we probably live in now, a smaller residence, but for some, these will be a permanent residence. That a smaller .25/.3 acre lot, may give a family the opportunity to get into a house, and with the growth in Rexburg, this is needed. Bruce then asked if this is this the kind of home realtors are needing right now? Alan replied yes, this where the market demand is right now, and is the most requested to develop throughout the city. There are continuous requests for LDR1-LDR3, but no requests for developments in RR1 & RR2 since Pinebrook, Willowbrook, and Harvest Heights. Vince answered that in Summerfield, there is a great mix of young families in starter homes and retirees. That smaller residences are a great need for a lot of people right now, including those who want to bring their parents home to townhomes or twinhomes, and there is not many available in Rexburg. He believes this application would add to that neighborhood rather than take from that neighborhood. (video index 52:18) McKay added that this section of 12th W, between Main and University, is such a critical part of city growth with so much multifamily and student housing on other side of the highway. He said that looking across street at LDR2 & LDR3, and Summerfield is nearby, this area is being set up for this type of growth and that with Summerfield, there are wider roads and turning lanes making the roads safer, that 12th W can become a more robust roadway. He believes the LDR3,2,1 was a great presentation, but LDR1-2 makes sense all day long. Randall Kempton – stated that the LDR1 and LDR2 are much better proposals than in past that going through the exercises mentioned by Chariperson Smith, this land use is right for this area. He commented that if local residents want the property developed another way, he encourages them to pool their resources, purchase the acreage, and develop it their way. This developer has a plan that is much better than previous plans proposed. Todd Marx stated that he agrees with what Randall said, and agrees with Vince as far as there not being any twinhomes available that would be more manageable for retirement. Jim Lawrence agrees that there is a real need for this, and that this is a really good fit. Vince asked those on the commission who have development background or knowledge, if they think they would ever see a proposal for RR1/RR2. McKay responded that you would look at the land basis cost, but that being in the city, you are required to put in the infrastructure. Alan clarified that in RR1, there are no sidewalks or curbs, RR2 does require sidewalks, but all other infrastructure is still required. McKay stated that the land would have to be super cheap to offset the development costs. Aaron agrees. Sally asked staff to address the concerns with water, and where and when those things are handled. Kyle responded that surface water would be handled through the development agreement. Alan clarified that if the developer chooses to irrigate lawns, they can retain what water they need for that purpose, and the remainder would be turned over to city, to be turned into ground water for culinary needs. Alan stated that normally in this size of a development, all water rights are designated to the city. Aaron clarified that homeowners can use potable water to water lawns. Mr. Harris commented that this violates state code. Aaron replied no, that the entire city would be in violation. McKay explained that a violation seen in the county is that you are allowed to water up to a half acre with a well, not multiple acres, but in the city, it is a different playing field. Vince clarified that Sally’s comment was more stating that staff would worry about the in and outs of it, and the commission worries about the land use only. Sally acknowledged that the public hearing was over, but asked entertained a question from Wanless. Wanless stated it is not about lot size, it’s about the privilege of having agriculture as a permitted use, that if rural residential zoning is taken away, it takes away the designated use of agriculture. Sally stated that this doesn’t change anything for those around. Aaron stated that this is a federally protected land right issue, and the owner of that land has right to request a zoning change, just as other land owners have that same right, that only this land is being addressed, not any other land. McKay reminded everyone that you can still have 7 chickens. Chairperson Smith asked if there was any conflict of interest before the vote? None MOTION: Motion to recommend the City Council approve the rezone from RR2 to LDR1 and LDR2 at approximately 301 S 12th W, as this fits appropriately within the comp plan and leverages existing infrastructure and allows the city to grow organically along the 12th West corridor. Action: Approve, Moved by Aaron Richards, Seconded by McKay Francis. Commissioner Discussion on the Motion: None VOTE: Motion carried. (Summary: Yes= 8, No= 0, Abstain = 0). Yes: Vince Haley (Vice Chair), Todd Marx, Randall Kempton, Sally Smith (Chairperson), Aaron Richards, Jim Lawrence, Bruce Casper, McKay Francis. No: 0 Abstain:0 Heads Up for December 1st: (22-00785) Eldwin LLC – 7th S – Rezone Adjourned at 7:35.