Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRFD - 26-00384 - Sky Meadows - Stone Dr – Plat AmendmentReason for Decision 26-00384 - Sky Meadows – Stone Drive - Plat Amendment April 2, 2026, An application was created for Sky Meadows Development for an amendment to the Sky Meadows Plat. April 8, 2026, Application paperwork was complete. April 14, 2026, Payment was received for the application. April 14, 2026, Plat reviews were initiated. May 18, 2026, Plat was approved by staff. May 19, 2026, Plat was submitted to the County Surveyor for review. May 29, 2026, The County Surveyor approved the plat. June 1, 2026, The Staff Report was completed. June 4, 2026, the application was presented to the Planning & Zoning Commission. Plat – (26-00384) Sky Meadows - Plat Amendment - Located at 243 Ella Ln, the application is to amend the Sky Meadows Plat to add area to seven (7) lots within the existing plat. – Sky Meadows Development LLC (Action) Conflict of Interest/Ex parte Conversation: Chairperson Smith asked the Commissioners to disclose any conflicts of interest or conversations held outside of this meeting relative to this particular subject. Presentation: Planning and Zoning Administrator Parkinson explained the location of the subject property within the city, noting its proximity to the water tower. He stated that the request was a plat amendment, as the homeowners association currently owned a portion of land that it intended to transfer to adjacent homeowners. He described that the amendment would extend the existing property lines of those lots to include the additional area, which would then be deeded to the individual property owners. He clarified that this adjustment would not create any additional demand on city services, including water or sewer. After reviewing the proposal, staff determined that it met all applicable requirements and recommended approval to the City Council. 10:25 Commissioner Richards stated that they had visited the area on foot and noted that the land in question was difficult to access, raising concerns about whether the adjacent property owners were prepared to assume maintenance responsibilities. Planning and Zoning Administrator Parkinson responded that all affected homeowners had signed the plat, indicating their awareness of and agreement to take on the additional land and its maintenance. 11:00 Commissioner Robinson inquired about existing utility easements along the property and whether they would remain in place after the division. Planning and Zoning Administrator Parkinson confirmed that all necessary easements would continue to be recorded with each deed and would remain unaffected by the amendment. He also noted that existing easements, including those running along the north side and others associated with nearby properties, would not be impacted, and that public utilities were primarily located along Stone Drive. No further significant concerns were raised, and the discussion moved toward calling for a motion. 12:00 MOTION: Motion to recommend City Council approve the Plat Amendment for Sky Meadows - Located on Stone Drive, to add area to seven (7) lots within the existing plat because it meets all the requirements under the ordinance and staff has recommended it. Action: Approve, Moved by ____Aaron Richards__________, Seconded by _______Dan Hanna?______. Commissioner Discussion on the Motion: The group discussed the correct address for the plat amendment and updated the motion to reflect Stone Drive as the recommended location. VOTE: Motion carried. (Summary: Yes = 8, No =0, Abstain = 0). Yes: Randall Kempton (Vice Chair), Sally Smith (Chairperson), Aaron Richards, Bruce Casper, Brian Thackeray, Dan Hanna, Tammy Geddes, Rick Robinson No: Abstain: Public Hearing – (26-00477) Goss - Comp Plan change from C to HR – Located at approximately 509-539 S 5th W, the application is to change the comprehensive plan designation from Commercial to High Residential. – Jonathan Goss (Action) Conflict of Interest/Ex parte Conversation: Chairperson Smith asked the Commissioners to disclose any conflicts of interest or conversations held outside of this meeting relative to this particular subject. Presentation: Chairperson Sally Smith introduced the first public hearing regarding a proposed comprehensive plan amendment for properties located at approximately 509 to 539 South 5th West. The request was to change the comprehensive plan designation from commercial to high residential. Planning and Zoning Administrator Parkinson presented the location of the properties, noting their proximity to nearby landmarks such as Carl Sinclair’s gas station and Les Schwab. It was explained that the current zoning of the parcels was High Density Residential (HDR-1), and the applicant intended to pursue a higher density designation; however, the comprehensive plan still classified the properties as commercial. He noted that these two parcels were the only ones on the block that had not previously been updated to a high residential designation. He stated that the proposed change would bring the comprehensive plan into alignment with both the existing zoning and the surrounding properties, which had largely transitioned to residential uses. He indicated that the amendment would also support a future request for higher-density zoning and was consistent with development patterns in the area. In response to 15:10 Commissioner Thackeray’s question, Planning and Zoning Administrator Parkinson explained that the commercial designation likely remained from earlier planning efforts when additional commercial growth had been anticipated in the area. He noted that development trends had since shifted, with more residential infill occurring. He further explained that the area’s proximity to the university made it an appropriate location for higher-density residential development, supporting walkability and housing demand. Based on their review, staff recommended approval of the comprehensive plan amendment to the City Council. The applicant, Jonathan and Barbara Goss of 509 South 5th West, spoke in support of the comprehensive plan amendment. He stated that he and his wife owned one property, while a related entity owned the adjacent parcel to the south. He explained that they had reviewed city planning documents and believed the proposed change aligned with the community’s evolving needs and demographic trends. Mr. Goss noted that the surrounding area was predominantly residential, with only limited commercial presence, and expressed that it was likely to remain so. He stated that the amendment would allow the property to better align with surrounding uses and enable a subsequent zoning request. He added that higher-density residential development in this location would support nearby businesses, provide additional housing opportunities near the university, and increase potential tax revenue for the city. He acknowledged the longstanding history of the home on the property but indicated that it no longer met the needs of the area and that they supported the transition. He also stated that nearby business owners were supportive of increased residential density due to the potential for additional customers. He concluded by expressing that the proposal represented the best use of the property. Chairperson Sally Smith asked a clarifying question regarding the existing development on the property, and the applicant confirmed that the parcels were contiguous and included both a single-family home and existing apartments. No further questions were raised. Chairperson Sally Smith opened the public hearing at 6:51 PM and invited testimony from those in favor, neutral, or opposed to the proposed comprehensive plan amendment. Several individuals spoke in favor of the proposal, including Gaylen Jensen, Jeff Fluckiger, Elaine Fluckiger, Tammy Hibbard, Chaz and Kendra Morgan, also Beverly Taylor who is a business associate of the property, Peggy and Gary Rogers, and Jacob Goss. These speakers expressed general support for the amendment, with some noting their association with the property or surrounding area. Todd Smith, a real estate agent working with the applicants stated that, after reviewing the surrounding area, it was apparent that the subject properties were inconsistent with adjacent high-density residential uses, and that the proposed change was a logical step aligned with existing development patterns and future planning. One neighboring property owner, Steve and Ingrid Clegg, participated online and expressed concerns regarding potential impacts of future high-density development, including building height, proximity, and lighting. Planning and Zoning Administrator Parkinson responded by explaining that city code required increased setbacks proportional to building height and required that lighting be contained on-site, preventing impacts to adjacent properties. He also clarified that no specific development plans had been submitted at this stage, as the current request was limited to a comprehensive plan amendment and future zoning considerations. No individuals spoke in opposition to the request, and no neutral comments were provided. Staff also noted that written correspondence received from a neighboring property owner indicated support for the proposal. Chairperson Sally Smith then closed the public hearing at 6:58 PM and brought the item back to the Commission for discussion. Commissioner Discussion: Commissioner Bruce Casper asked for clarification on the exact location of the property, referencing nearby landmarks, and the applicant confirmed the general location. The Commission then moved into discussion. Commissioner Aaron Richards expressed appreciation for the number of individuals who spoke in support of the proposal, noting that such support was uncommon. The commissioner stated that, from a development perspective, the request was straightforward and made sense given the existing infrastructure, surrounding high-density residential uses, and the continued growth of the nearby university population. Commissioner Randall Kempton (Vice Chair) commented that the comprehensive plan is intended to be a living document and that adjusting the designation to match the surrounding high-density residential area was reasonable and appropriate. Following discussion, a motion was made. MOTION: Motion to recommend City Council approve for the comprehensive plan amendment changing the designation located at approximately 509-539 S 5th W, from commercial to high-density residential, the reason being it’s consistency with neighboring land uses, alignment with city planning goals, and adequate infrastructure. 31:00 Action: Approve, Moved by Randall Kempton, Seconded by _______Brian Thackeray_______. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. Commissioner Discussion on the Motion: None VOTE: Motion carried. (Summary: Yes= 8, No= 0, Abstain= 0). Yes: Randall Kempton (Vice Chair), Sally Smith (Chairperson), Aaron Richards, Bruce Casper, Brian Thackeray, Dan Hanna, Tammy Geddes, Rick Robinson No: None Abstain: None June 17, 2026, the application was presented to the City Council.