Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRFD - 23-00135 -Whole Child Early Education - 728 S 5th W - Rezone 1 | Page #23 00135 Rezone from Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2) to Medium Density Residential 1 (MDR1) 728 S 5th W 1. March 24, 2023, An application was received for a Rezone from Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2) to Medium Density Residential 1 (MDR1) from Kearis Ochs 2. March 24, 2023, Application paperwork was completed. 3. March 24, 2023, Payment was received for the application. 4. April 6, 2023, Staff Reviews were completed. 5. April 12, 2023, Notice was sent to the newspaper to be published on April 18th & April 25th, 2023. 6. April 7, 2023, the Staff Report was completed. 7. April 13, 2023, Notice was mailed to all property owners within 350’. 8. April 25, 2023, Notice was posted on the property. 9. May 4, 2023, the application was presented to the Planning & Zoning Commission. (23-00135) Whole Child Early Education – Rezone from LDR2 to MDR1 – Located at 728 S 5th West, this property is approximately 0.319 acres. – Kearis Ochs (Action) Sally introduced the application to rezone 728 S 5th W and invited Kearis Ochs to present. Kearis introduced herself as the director of a local daycare, and one of the locations is ran out of her home where they are allowed up to 6 children. She is asking to rezone to allow a daycare allowing up to 12 children. Sally asked if she currently has a conditional use permit for the nursey school. Alan explained that a CUP is not allowed in this area, which is why she is requesting a zone change. Sally inquired how many students were being cared for in the home. Kearis answered 3 at this time, but allowed up to 6, per the code. Sally asked about the subdivision question being checked yes on the application, to which Kearis replied it must have been a mistake. Aaron clarified that further in the application, it was stated that it autofilled that question and the system would not allow it to be changed. 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Phone: 208.359.3020 Fax: 208.359.3022 www.rexburg.org Reason for Decision City of Rexburg 2 | Page Alan reported that Staff had reviewed the request and at this point no upgrades to sewer or water would be required, and there will not be a change to the outside structure, and this is an allowed use in the requested zone. Vince reiterated that a CUP was not available in this zone for this use. Alan confirmed, and Vince asked for an explanation. Alan responded that it is not listed in the permitted uses in the current code and he had consulted with Attorney Zollinger about the options and was advised a CUP was not allowed in this case. Vince confirmed that the code would need to be updated to allow a CUP in the future. Alan replied yes. Aaron asked if it was being addressed in the current code amendment. Alan replied no, not in the current amendment, but it is in one of the next 10. The group had a brief discussion on nursery schools and daycares as related to the zones. Brad asked if the land was sold, how many units could someone put onto the lot if zoned MDR1. Alan stated small, maybe 3 units, he hadn’t calculated it yet, but it would have to make the parking work. Vince asked to show the zoning map and reviewed the surrounding zones. Alan confirmed the requested zone was contiguous to MDR across the street. Randall asked for the comprehensive plan designations to be shown on the map, and Alan confirmed the request was within the comprehensive plan. Alan added that there are 3 duplexes on the corner lot, right next to the property. Chairperson Smith opened the public hearing at 6:40 pm. In Favor: none Neutral: Jeff Jacobson, lives south of the Och’s at 806 S 5th W. He stated that he would have some concern if the rezone passes and the Och’s ever decided to sell to a developer. He was worried about the number of units, but doesn’t think 3 units would make a lot of difference. He commented that the neighborhood has had issues with development in the past and would like to keep it low density residential as much as possible. Alan gave clarification that after doing the calculations, it could allow 5 units, if they could make the parking work, which could be done, but it would be very expensive and hard to do. Against: Susan Foster, lives next to the Och’s at 740 S 5th W. She expressed that she is a direct neighbor to the Och’s; they have been helpful and kind and she doesn’t want to start a neighborhood dispute. She believes a person should be able to do what want to do with their property, as long as it doesn’t infringe upon a neighbor. She stated she is slightly opposed to the zoning and asked if it would change her zoning, property value or tax assessments? She stated he is opposed to the extra cars on the street, and reasoned that she would be liable for backing over a child in her driveway. She expressed concern with the lack of an enclosed yard next to a pond as well as additional noise. She maintained that she is not against a larger daycare, just the zoning change. Brad commented that if the daycare moved forward, the daycare permit would probably make her fence the whole yard. Rebuttal: Kearis noted that her and Susan are good friends and she understands the concerns. She stated they will need to fully fence all 4 sides of the back yard and there will not be any children playing in the front yard, but she has no control of the kids when parents pick up. Part of their plans for the 3 | Page project include making 6 angled parking spots in her driveway, 2 for staff and 4 for drop off and pickup, to avoid having cars in front of other houses. She understands the concerns with noise level, and has considered taking kids out in smaller groups to mitigate the noise. Chairperson Smith closed public hearing at 6:48 pm. Commission Discussion: Sally asked Alan to clarify that the zoning request will not change Susan’s property. Alan verified that only the listed parcel zoning would change, and the taxes would also stay the same. Kearis added that they have 2 year agreement/grant with the state, so the property would not be sold or further developed for at least that long. There was a brief discussion on the permitted uses in MDR1. Vince acknowledged the property is surrounded by MDR1, but there is a row of homes that are clearly a LDR neighborhood, and he does not think the block of homes would benefit from the zone change. Aaron shared his support, based on the comprehensive plan and the probable redevelopment of larger parcels in that block and the surrounding uses, and because there seems to be disconnect that isn’t allowing the CUP and this request promotes business in a suitable location that isn’t offensive based on the surrounding uses. Brad agreed, because of the surrounding area. McKay requested this be added to a list for the second round of code revisions and feels like the jump to MDR1 for the purpose they are asking for is excessive and causes a headache for applicants. He expressed concern over putting MDR1 zoning in the middle of LDR2 zoning, even though it is contiguous across the street. Vince recalled previous conversation concerning both planning and zoning, and stated that a possibility of redevelopment does not require the commission to enable the upzone. He considers this a CUP consideration. Randall asked why the comprehensive plan would designate higher density. Vince interrupted, pointing out that the comprehensive plan is so broad, and questioning how to preserve the community feel when the comprehensive plan made 10-15 years ago said what would go in that area. Sally commented about the streamlined designations and looking at the neighborhood and its proximity to the university. She would like to see more than just 1 homeowner come forth asking for the change. Todd stated he agreed with Vince and the zoning should not be changed for a single lot. The group discussed nursery schools, daycares, and permitted uses. Vince asked if the lack of CUP option could be an error. Alan responded that the code was approved as is, mistakes or not. Attorney Rammell reminded the Commissioners to consider the request based on land use and what it could be, rather than focus solely on the individual project or solely on projections of it selling. McKay brought up the comprehensive plan; from a developer standpoint having to ask for a comprehensive plan change prior to a zoning meeting, he puts more weight in the comprehensive plan because it is the vision to work towards. He added that the request is at the lower end of what is projected. Brad commented that some have said they don’t want to see the neighborhood change, 4 | Page and if that is what was wanted, the comprehensive plan should have been changed, because he also sees the comprehensive plan as the direction for the future. Vince remarked that on the comprehensive plan, there is generally a blanket of 7-10 blocks wide and different blocks are not separate designations; there is not control or knowledge of what will go on in an area and Rexburg is different than thought it would be 10 years ago. Aaron countered that it is hard being the first one to ask for change, but based on the location and larger tracts of land that will probably sell, it does fit. Vince retorted the probably is not now. Aaron replied that the comprehensive plan is a 10 year document. Alan clarified that the comprehensive plan map was put together with input from most of the group less than 2 years ago. Brad, asked Attorney Rammell if there was any legal recourse if an applicant asked to do something in compliance with the comprehensive plan and it was denied. Attorney Rammell answered that being in compliance is not a guarantee to do things; to avoid any issues, whatever determination that is made, should include very specific reasons for the decision, despite it possibly being in accordance with the comprehensive plan. MOTION: Motion to recommend the City Council approve the rezone from LDR2 to MDR1 at 728 S 5th W on the grounds that it is in compliance with the comprehensive plan, that it is across the street from existing MDR1 or HDR1, and that it is in compliance with the recommendation from the City. Action: Approve, Moved by Brad Wolfe Seconded by Aaron Richards. Commissioner Discussion on the Motion: None VOTE: Motion carried. (Summary: Yes= 6 , No= 3 , Abstain = 0). Yes: Randall Kempton, Brad Wolfe, Vanessa Johnson, McKay Francis, Aaron Richards, Jim Lawrence No: Vince Haley (Vice Chair), Sally Smith (Chairperson), Todd Marx, Abstain: none Attorney Rammell asked Sally to verbally state how many commissioners were in attendance? Sally responded 9 total. 10. May 17, 2023, Application was presented to City Council. Items for Consideration: A. Planning & Zoning recommendation to rezone 728 S 5th W from Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2) to Medium Density Residential 1 (MDR1) Zone #23-00135. Designated as Ordinance No 1300 if motion passes – Kyle Baldwin Planning Assistant Baldwin explained in the Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2) Zone a Conditional Use Permit is not allowed; therefore, the applicant is requesting a rezone to Medium Density Residential to allow a 5 | Page home occupational daycare of 12 children. The LDR2 Zone allows a minimum number of six children in a home occupational daycare. This property is contiguous with the MDR1 Zone across the street. Council President Busby mentioned the property owner to the north of this property several years ago requested his property be rezoned from LDR2 to MDR1; however, his request was denied so he had to split his lot into three different parcels to achieve his purpose. Council Member Johnson said during the Planning and Zoning meeting Attorney Spencer Rammell reminded the commissioners when considering a zone change decision to only consider the request and not the project because the project could change once the zone is implemented. Council Member Walker expressed his concerns with having a MDR1 Zone in the middle of a LDR2 Zone. He would prefer the code allowing the number of children in a home occupational daycare in a particular zone to be changed and not the zone itself. Council Member Erickson expressed the same concerns as Council Member Walker. He said if they were to approve this rezone it would be considered a spot zone. Council Member Flora said one of the difficulties of not taking the project into consideration when determining a zone change is that in this case the property owner is already operating a daycare and it’s the city’s own code that is limiting the property owner. City Attorney Zollinger explained the Councilmembers could request a change in the city’s code to allow a daycare with 12 children to operate in a LDR2 Zone wit h a Conditional Use Permit. City Attorney Zollinger recommended the Councilmembers to table the rezone and refer the addition of a Conditional Use Permit in the LDR2 Zone to increase the number of children in a home occupational daycare to the Planning and Zoning Commissioners. 6 | Page Council Member Flora moved to Table the rezone at approximately 728 S 5th W from Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2) to Medium Density Residential 1 (MDR1) Zone and refer it to Planning and Zoning Commission to consider adding a Conditional Use Permit in the LDR2 Zone to increase the number of children allowed in a home occupational daycare to be consistent with State Statutes; Council Member Walker seconded the motion; Council President Busby asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Flora none Council Member Johnson Council Member Chambers Council Member Erickson Council Member Walker Council President Busby The motion carried 11. June 7, 2023, the application was considered by City Council. Take from the Table – Rezone 728 S 5th W from Low-Density Residential 2 (LDR2) to Medium-Density Residential 1 (MDR1) zone #23-00135 – Alan Parkinson Council Member Flora moved to take from the table Rezone 728 S 5th W from Low-Density Residential 2 (LDR2) to Medium-Density Residential 1 (MDR1) zone #23-00135; Council Member Walker seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: 7 | Page Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Flora none Council Member Johnson Council Member Chambers Council Member Erickson Council Member Walker Council President Busby The motion carried Council Member Flora moved to deny the zone change at 728 S 5th W from LDR2 to MDR1; however, grant the CUP for the Daycare; Council President Busby seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Flora none Council Member Johnson Council Member Chambers Council Member Erickson Council Member Walker Council President Busby The motion carried