Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002.02.20 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL February 20, 2002 7:00 P.M. STATE OF IDAHO, ) County of Madison ) SS. City of Rexburg ) Present were the following: Presiding:Marsha Bjornn Council Members:Paul Pugmire Donna Benfield Shawn Larsen Nyle Fullmer City Clerk:Marilyn Hansen Finance Officer:Richard Horner PFC:John Millar City Attorney:Stephen Zollinger Excuse:Mayor Bruce Sutherland and Glen Pond Pledge to the flag. Paul made a motion to approve the minutes of February 6, 2002. Motion was seconded by Shawn, all voted aye, none opposed. Recreation Report Jill Anderson, Chairman of the Citizens Recreation Committee reported on the year’s worth of meetings and research the committee has done concerning a new recreation center. With all the work that has been done nothing further can be done without the help of the community. Steve McGarry, 950 Hillview Dr. of Rexburg, a member of the Citizen’s Recreation Committee gave an oral and video presentation concerning the demographics and statistics of the community. He also reviewed how this data was collected from the community and how the process by which the architects of Ohlson LaVoie were chosen. He reviewed the items that would be accomplished by Ohlson LaVoie should the Council elect to approve the funding to hire this firm. It was recommended by the Citizen’s Recreation Committee to approve the funding for Ohlson LaVoie to proceed with this project. Kenneth Hart - 367 Salem Ave. Kenneth stated his concern is whether or not the City can afford this. He would like to see reports from projects this firm has done for cities similar in size to Rexburg in the past and reports from those cities as to the success of their centers before the money is spent. 1 nd Connie Dunn - 340 W. 2 South Connie reported on the brochure which had been provided by Ohlson LaVoie giving all the information which had just been requested, she reviewed this information with the audience. John Watson - JRW & Associates, 39 Professional Plaza John reviewed some of his medical history and related it to this project. He stated that he had to go through all the tests and misery to find his health was all right, but he did not have to do it without a cost. He feels you cannot get good reports or work without paying a price. He is fully in support of the City Council hiring this firm and moving forward with this project. Discussion concerning the report provided by Ohlson Lavoie, demographics and items that have already been accomplished that would not be necessary for Ohlson Lavoie to do again, the cost proposal of $39,500 and $12,000 reimbursable and the scope of the work to be done. Shawn discussed his feelings regarding the make-up of the Recreation Committee which concern was clarified by Stephen. Shawn had a problem with the Council agreeing to spend $40,000 and the bid coming in at $39,500, he reviewed items of concern in the brochure concerning the facility in Parker, Colorado, discussed the fact that Gold’s Gym in Idaho Falls feels Rexburg cannot support a facility of their size, he feels sick every time he drives by Porter Park and sees the pool filled in with gravel and surrounded by chain link fence. He feels this money could be used to actually do something for this community rather than spend more money in this manner Liz Stephenson - 558 Gemini Liz was on the original Recreation Committee and reported on the cost it would have taken to keep the old pool at Porter Park in working condition and bring it up to code. She reviewed that during the time the pool was open it was not big enough to accommodate everyone that wanted to swim, the parking was a big issue and because of grandfathering trees could not be moved to accommodate a larger size. The pool was completely outgrown and putting more money into this facility was not feasible. As a citizen she wants this facility and she feels the community has given their answer to go ahead and build a facility and move on. She supports the Council approving these funds to move forward with this proposed recreation center. Discussion concerning other facilities. Jill Anderson - 419 Morgan Jill stated that all the questions are not new to this committee and there will never be a community exactly like this one to compare with. Part of the committee‘s frustration is that people want to know how much it is going to cost and how will these figures be established without doing some study. She feels Gold’s Gym is not a family oriented facility and we don’t need that type of facility. An outdoor pool is great but look at the season, it will only make us happy for 3 months of the year. She wants to look at the future for her children and family, she is concerned about the financial constraints but she is looking to the future for her family. 2 Shawn feels it is not the responsibility of the government to provide for recreation, there are pools nearby, the college, fitness center and Green Canyon. Regardless of the cost Porter Park could be made into a beautiful facility and there is also the probability of putting this item on a ballot. Steve McGarry - 915 Hillview Steve asked for clarification from Shawn as to his thinking of putting this matter on a ballot. Steve expressed the concern of the community to know this facility could be viable before it is put on a ballot. This money would be a small amount to pay to obtain the information needed. He reviewed the success of the Nampa facility, the fact that Gold’s Gym is not conducive to family use, this project would be something that would be good for the whole community not a target group. Sherry Smith - Sherry’s feelings are that these are the same questions that have been going on for years. This process is exciting and can answer all the questions people have and let them see what can be done and for what cost, let them see a drawing of a facility that can be afforded. She feels it is crucial to take this next step so an educated decision can be made by the community. Whether they build or do not build is not paramount, this next process is important to make an education decision. Donna thanked everyone on the Citizen’s Committee for the many hours spent on this project. She feels Rexburg always comes together when it is necessary, during her election she made an honest effort to knock on every door and reported on the positive responses she received about a recreation facility. She feels she would be doing an injustice to her community if she were to vote against having this good plan and then send it to the community for their support. This business plan is necessary, it is necessary to find out how much this facility would be and if it is affordable. To compare with another community is wrong, this community is different and we want different components and until those answers are received it cannot go to the people. Nyle feels they have gone full circle from the original Recreation Committee, he reviewed the fact that he did not know what he was voting for when there was an election in the past now he believes that the community does not just want recreation but a lot of recreation but they want to know what they are paying for. It may not be the responsibility to provide recreation but when the recreation programs are selected people are lined up at the door to sign up. These recreation projects should be put to the community so the community can be involved. It is our responsibility to provide for a full rounded community. He is fully in support of spending the money to come up with a solid plan to know what we can afford and what it will cost and until the money is invested we will never know what it will cost. You need to spend money to gain information. Nyle made a motion to move forward, to have John negotiate the fees with Ohlson Lavoie on items done in the past so they are not redundant and to accept the proposal of Ohlson Lavoie. Motion was seconded by Donna. 3 Discussion Paul will vote for this proposal and explained that he feels the community wants to see this proposal move forward. It was suggested an agreement be negotiated with Ohlson Lavoie with the stipulation that they take into consideration all that has been done and that John have the latitude to do so. Marsha reviewed the history and her feelings on the old pool and the money that it cost to keep that pool open and felt it was not feasible to keep putting money into that old pool. She has been out with the community and feels there is full support for a new pool and she feels there is enough people to make this facility a success. She thanked Shawn for his opinion and research. She does not want to reinvent the wheel, this research has been done and we need to move forward with recreation and arts to bring a quality of life and she is in favor of this motion. Shawn hopes that this Council will consider having a standard committee for recreation. He agrees there needs to be quality runs programs and facilities and feels this can be done. Voting was as follows: Paulaye Donna aye MarshaayeShawnnay Nyle aye The motion passed. Audit Report The audit report was postponed until the March 6, 2002, meeting. Public Hearing on Comprehensive Plan Changes It was suggested these matters be discussed one at a time but voted on as a whole. John reviewed with a video presentation each item as listed below. #1 - Teton View Drive In - Single Family to Commercial - Approved by P&Z No discussion #2 - Walker Property - No. Barney Dairy Road - Agriculture to Multi-family - Approved by P&Z No discussion nd #3 - Lorin Clements - 7 E. 2 North - Open Space and Single Family to Multi-family - Denied by P&Z Discussion 4 nd Lorin Clements - 7 E. 2 North. Lorin explained the zoning of his property which he would like to change to multi-family residential. The original plan was for parks. His request was denied because Planing & Zoning wanted to keep single family residences in the area. He reviewed all the apartments in the nearby neighborhood and all the homes that have apartments in their basement. Keeping this as a single family area is a mute point. John stated these apartments in homes are allowed in this zone with a conditional use permit. Discussion that the property is 55' wide and 165' long, these would be only for 2-4 apartments, not a large complex, this complex would be built behind the present home on the property, a 20' easement would be the access to the property. nd #4 - Zollinger Construction - 2 North by RR Tracks - Industrial to Multi-family and approved by P&Z Discussion concerning this request and the original plan when purchased from Louisiana Pacific. It was also discussed it would be a conflict of interest to approve this property and deny the Clements property which is nearby, as well as accesses and intended use. nd #5 Earnest Jones - 255 W. 2 North - Single Family to Multi-family - denied by Planning & Zoning Bernice Ricks - 174 No. 3rd West Bernice has a single family home right next to this property, this request would be right in the middle of the block of residential homes, it would block off most of the block if it were used for apartments. She is opposed to the change. nd Tom Williams - 246 W. 2 North Tom wanted to clarify that this property would have a proposed use of ground level duplexes nd with access to 2 North. thth #6 - Jackie Toll - 137 N. 5 West - 137 N. 5 West and th Clinton Parkinson - 75 No. 5 West - Single Family to Multi-Family - denied by Planning & Zoning. th Wilma Parkinson - 75 N. 5 West She believes that the recommendation by Planning & Zoning was political and not sound planning. If this property is not used for apartments it will be forever doomed as a weed lot because it will not be used for a single family residence. There is government housing around the corner, it was opposed by all the same people that oppose this change and she cannot figure out how to justify that decision. If you were to drive by the property you would see pride of ownership and an additional housing unit would be an asset over a weed patch. 5 Tom Williams - representing Toll property He distributed and read a written testimony regarding the action of Planning & Zoning Commission at the last public hearing. The opposition was against high density, this proposal is for medium density which would do away with run down buildings and junky back yards. This property will someday be changed to multi-family housing would it not be better now to change it while there is a commitment to medium density. th Clinton Parkinson - 75 No. 5 West Clinton distributed his written statements and testimony and feels that in order for the City to give back the zoning they originally had there now needs to be a change. Without this change the property is virtually worthless. They have in the past applied to get this zone changed and have been denied. Last week in Planning & Zoning there were 15 items approved and 9 not approved to be changed to multi-family. Of the 9 approved, only 2 were adjacent to other multi-family housing units. This property is in an area that already has 120 existing apartments. He reviewed other items of requested changes on property that have been approved. Clinton also requested that the City officials not cave in to public outcry and change this property back to the zoning it was originally as requested. John Hawker - 126 K Street Mr. Hawker’s property is next to the proposed changes, he invested in that property based on the Comprehensive Plan and that plan is in place to protect the City. There has been nothing changed in the area to necessitate a change in the Comprehensive Plan. By changing this property to multi- family it only opens the door to high density residential. He hopes for protection from the Council. David Daniels - K Street The Daniels property borders this proposed property,. When he purchased his home he knew there were apartments nearby but he also knew it was zoned residential so there would not be further apartments in the back yard. This change could be made, then those building apartments could become more apartments. He will be left with a home he cannot sell with apartment complexes in his back yard. There have been fair market offers on the land, the land is not worthless without apartments. thnd Jody Rawlings - 5 West and 2 North th Jody is concerned because his house is on the corner of 5 West. There is a lot of traffic with cement trucks and why make this worse for children living in that house. Tenants in apartments would have small families with more children. He built the home because he was excited about the neighborhood and everyone knows if apartments are put in adjacent to their property the property values will go down and adversely effect everyone in the neighborhood. Another concern is there are no buffers between the apartment complexes and his home. th LoRee Howard - 155 N. 5 West 6 LoRee reviewed that this street was made wider for the bike path and will be a real concern to people using the bike path having more apartments in that area. She is against having more apartments, they have had to live with the ones already there, 64 apartments in Madison Park, two more apartments will make more problems. There is a housing study going on, why would these projects be pushed ahead until that study is complete. nd Tom Williams - 246 W. 2 North Tom, as a realtor, shares concerns but feels the buildings will not be higher than the present buildings on K Street, it certainly would be nicer to see apartments than a weed patch. David Daniels - Apartments are not well maintained, there is a commitment that they will be but they are usually not. The bottom line is money and the least amount of maintenance seems to be the program. Clinton Parkinson - Clinton stated his apartments are well maintained, the apartment next to Dr. Daniels is not very well maintained, Mary McCullochs property has an old stock rack, a fallen down shed, weeds and a barking dog. Mike Thueson - 585 Summerwood Mike is sympathetic to these people but the zone changes were made and now 12 years later he is asking for protection against more apartments. If it is opened to multi-family there is the option of high density. He hopes there can be a resolution so this does not keep coming back and back th and hopes they are sympathetic to the homes on 5 West. Sherry Hawker - 126 K Street Sherry made mention that at the Planning & Zoning meeting a petition was signed by nearly 50 people, they listened to pleas and letters and she feels the right choice would be to leave this property single family. Paul asked questions to both the proponents and opponents concerning their feeling toward Medium Density Residential zoning. Discussion. Mr. Hawker is opposed to medium density residential. Mr. Parkinson stated the zoning in place originally was R2 zoning which allowed for four-plexes, there is approximately 1-1/2 acres of land, there is presently 32 units on the 11/2 acres of ground. He would prefer having the HDR zoning, putting lesser density is a waste of land but if MDR is the best that can be done, that is fine. thth #7 - Greg Luce - North Main - 4 and 5 West - Single Family to Multi-Family - approved by Planning & Zoning st D. J. Barney - 410 W. 1 North 7 D. J. owns property north of this property in question The back of this property is a mess, they have torn down buildings, they have been before Planning & Zoning to develop some commercial property which was denied. They are looking for the best use of this property and feels this change would meet that need. Putting apartments on this property would be less of a financial burden on the City because of the street cleaning and cleaning of the lot. He reviewed past uses of this property. He feels the neighbors will have more control over this property if it is changed. He is in favor of the change. st #8 - Scott Hurst - Westside Estates - 1 South - Single Family to Multi-family - Planning & Zoning requested to leave as it. This was a request made specifically by the property owner, the owner has withdrawn the request. ndstnd #9 - Trevor Cardon - 2 East - 1 and 2 South - Single Family to Multi-family - ndstnd #9 - Don Harvey - 2 South - 1 and 2 East - Single Family to Multi-family - Recommended that only a small portion be changed to multi-family. Discussion concerning the recommendation of Planning & Zoning. Tom Williams - nd Tom would like to see everything included on 2 South because everything except two homes is multi-family now. Trina Clegg - 347 No. 300 East, Rigby, Idaho The Cleggs are potential home owners looking at purchasing the Harvey home. They had understood that the south side was added in the change. She had letters and read some from the neighbors to the Harvey home approving the zone change. They are looking at purchasing this home, living in the home and renting out the basement. Gwen Butler - 225 Harvard Gwen is more effected with the whole proposal and feels the Council needs to see what they nd really want the City to be. She agrees the south side of 2 South should be Medium Density Residential, all houses either legal or grandfathered are multi-family but not if you go further west. Is the City requiring enough of developers for landscaping? These requests will not go away if you do not have enough information because they will come back again and again. nd Phyllis Thompson - 2 South Phyllis asked for a clarification of the area included in this request, which was given by John. Craig Rindlisbacher - 266 Harvard Craig is present as a concerned citizen and considers this request as part of his neighborhood. This community is important to him, the homes in the area are designed to function as single family dwellings, small in size and frugal to maintain and he is concerned about the degradation of 8 this neighborhood by changing the Comprehensive Plan. He discussed other college towns and their zoning. It is important to look at what surrounds the campus now and not have to go in and fix it later. He feels these changes are driven by individual needs and development pressure rather than planning. The big picture needs to be reviewed and not bow to development pressure. He is happy with the action that Planning & Zoning recommended. nd James Newman - 141 E. 2 South He feels squaring off the block is only for the benefit of Ross Farmer who purchased the single family homes and is turning them into apartments. He feels we are allowing the destruction of single family housing. Sherry Smith - corner of Cornell Sherry emphasized what do you want the City to look like? There are single family dwellings and Ross Farmer came in and immediately tore out the landscaping. Do you want it to look neat, Cornell is a gorgeous street, it is a beautiful neighborhood and to change it will necessitate going back in and changing. Marilyn Rasmussen - Marilyn is concerned about the community. She has been involved with several universities and related that some had been turned into slum communities near the campus and the plan needs close attention. She feels these changes need more time and planning before the changes are just made under pressure. She requested that a good look be taken around the university before they make the changes. Discussion. John gave the speech concerning Comprehensive Plan versus zoning. It was suggested voting be done on the items covered to this point. Paul is dissatisfied with the handling of these issues, zoning requests and planning of this community. He feels we are reacting rather than acting and feels this is not wise or judicious, he is uncomfortable and not pleased with the issues. He does not feel the Council is doing their job and doing it well and to do so will require a substantial amount of time, development interests are driving the action. We are paying for a housing study which should be due in March and dealing with these issues without that information is wrong. Paul moved to table the entire Comprehensive Plan agenda until the housing survey is received and sufficient time has been taken to review and digest the study adequately. Motion was seconded by Nyle. Voting as follows: Paul ayeDonna nay Shawn aye Marshanay Nyleaye 9 Motion passed. Jaywalking Ordinance The public safety committee reviewed the jaywalking ordinance, they have reviewed and forwarded this ordinance for action at the earliest convenience. Paul made a motion that the proposed ordinance be considered first read. Nyle seconded the motion. Discussion. All voted aye, none opposed. Ken Benfield, expressed deep concern and the opinion that he felt the tabling of the entire Comprehensive Plan was not only not responsible as Councilman Pugmire indicated, but was irresponsible and possibly disastrous to the community relative to married student housing. There may exist problems in proximity to the college, but it was irresponsible to couch them all into one. Update on Projects John reviewed the only project which is an addition to the Wastewater Treatment Plant which is going out to bid. Committee Reports Marsha reported on her meeting with the United Way. United Way has been effected by September 11 and the benefits will be cut. Comprehensive Plan Paul acknowledged that Ken Benfield made a valid comment, but Paul feels this Comprehensive Plan has many layers of issues. These judgments should be made for the benefit of the community and all property should be considered after the housing survey is received. The Council’s job is to make decisions for the community and he cannot make these changes without the benefit of the study which taxpayer money is paying for. Discussion, economic values should not be a determinate in Council decisions. Discussion concerning the time line to bring this matter from the table, the rationale of the motion, various changes were discussed individually, changes being driven by individual land owners, property in outlying areas, discussion of work meeting to study the Comprehensive Plan, the housing study. Marsha made a motion for a work meeting on the Comprehensive Plan for March 6, 2002 at 6:00 p.m. Motion was seconded by Paul. Discussion. All voted aye, none opposed. Donna made a motion to approve the bills, seconded by Nyle. All voted aye, none opposed. 10 Project Update John reported on a snow removal unit the City is looking at for snow removal which is more efficient, will be cost effective and safer. He will be looking for some of this equipment and will be coming before the Council with a proposal shortly. Downtown Vision Mitch Neibaur encouraged the support for the snow removal equipment. The committee met with the State Highway Department and has received positive responses concerning parking and is requesting a work meeting on March 20. Shawn made a motion for work meeting on March 20, 2002 at 6:00 p.m. Motion was seconded by Nyle, all voted aye, none opposed. Property Surplus Stephen Zollinger requested that the property at 164 Rosewood be put to surplus. Nyle made a motion to put the property at 164 Rosewood to surplus for the purpose of resale. Motion was seconded by Paul. All voted aye, none opposed. Business Park Building Business Park Building - Collaborative Genetics was cancelled by Clair Boyle. Donna made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Nyle. All voted aye, none opposed. _______________________________________ Marsha Bjornn, Presiding _________________________________ Marilyn Wasden, City Clerk 11 12