Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z MINUTES JANUARY 19, 2006 ORM F EQUEST R RAVEL T P&Z LANNING ONING M INUTES 19 E. Main (PO Box 280) Phone: 208-359-3020 x326 Rexburg, Idaho 83440 Fax: 208-359-3024 www.rexburg.org planning@rexburg.org January 19, 2006 Commissioners Attending: City Staff and Others: Rex Erickson – Council Member Kurt Hibbert – P&Z Administrator Winston Dyer– Chairman Stephen Zollinger – City Attorney Ted Hill Mary Ann Mounts John Millar – Public Works Director Mike Ricks Charles Andersen Emily Abe – Secretary David Stein Thaine Robinson Joe Laird Mary Haley Randall Porter Chairman Dyer opened the meeting at 7:04 pm Introduction of Emily Abe as the new Planning and Zoning Coordinator/Secretary. Roll Call David Stein, Mary Ann Mounts, Charles Andersen, Joseph Laird, Winston Dyer, Randall Porter, Thaine Robinson, Ted Hill, Michael Ricks, Mary Haley 1. Minutes: A. Planning and Zoning meeting – December 29, 2005 Corrections: None Mary Ann MountsThaine Robinson motioned to approve the minutes for December 29, 2005. Winston DyerRandall PorterMary Haley seconded the motion. , , and abstained. Motion carried. None opposed. B. Planning and Zoning meeting – January 5, 2006 Corrections: - P. 1 – Under Presentation by Clint Galbraith – change “interest cabinets” to “Interwest Cabinets” - P. 2 – Under Mary Ann Mounts’ comments – change “encourage it to stay there or grow” to “discourage growth, because growth is limited.” - P. 2 – Under Randall Porter’s comments – change “why would we complicate things” to “why it would complicate things” - P. 2 – Under Mary Ann Mounts’ comments – change “would be light industrial” to “should be light industrial.” - – P. 7Under David Stein’s comments – change “planning and developments” to “planned unit developments” in both sentences. 1 Mary Ann Mounts Charles motion to approve the minutes for January 5, 2006, as amended. Andersen seconded the motion. Motion carried. None opposed. 2. Public Hearings: None 3. Unfinished/Old Business: City Attorney Stephen Zollinger publicly apologized to Bill Moss for something Mr. Zollinger said at the public hearing held on December 29, 2006. During the hearing Mr. Moss sought permission to give Commissioner Robinson testimony in both the neutral and the opposed section of the testimony. When asked City Attorney Zollinger whether that was allowed, Attorney Zollinger replied in what he characterized as a “tongue in cheek” fashion that he “thought it was appropriate to allow people to behave schizophrenically.” Attorney Zollingerclarified that it was not his intention to imply that he thinks Mr. Moss suffers from any mental delusions. It was simply his “quick and sometimes sarcastic way” of saying that people are allowed to have different opinions on the same issue. Attorney Zollinger wanted the Committee to know that he holds Mr. Moss’s opinions in great respect. He does not consider him to be lacking in mental capacity. After apologizing to Mr. Moss privately, Attorney Zollinger wanted the commissioners to know that it was not his intent to ridicule Mr. Moss. He apologized to the commissioners if they had been misled by what he had said. Chairman Dyer acknowledged that the statement was misleading and asked that the December 29 meeting minutes be corrected. 4. New Business: A. Final Plat for Harvest Heights, Division 2A Chairman Dyer asked that the final plat be designated as “Division 2A” instead of “Division A, Phase 1.” Chairman Dyer also declared a direct conflict of interest with this matter. In order to insure complete impartiality he requested that the commissioners select their own chair to lead the discussion for the issue. Thaine Robinson was selected to act as chair. Presentation by Richard Smith: Mr. Smith explained why the division 2 has been divided into two parts. Since there currently has been discussion and a certain amount of controversy as to how and when developed lots are going to be subject to property tax in the legislature, they want to complete one road in the spring and start the other road, along with its improvements, this summer. They suspect that if they report the entire plat, the law may require taxation on anything recorded with respect to improvements on the lot. Currently he falls under the agriculture exemption, and intends to stay under the agriculture exemption on the property that he continues to farm. This is the reason they have come with half of the plat at this time. This is the section of the plat that they are going to record, and that is the section they are going to construct immediately this spring. He said there have been virtually no changes since the preliminary plat was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mr. Smith then responded to the questions from the Public Works Review. 2 Question 1: Lot 2 Block 3 is a non-conforming lot. What is to happen to his lot? Will it be owned in common or sold? Richard Smith pointed out the area that will be owned and maintained by the Homeowner’s Association. This area will be heavily landscaped and will have walkways through it. This area is not big enough for a city park, so it will be a common area for subdivision use. Mary Haley asked where the house is that was started before the road. Mr. Smith pointed out two houses under construction, which are both in phase 1. There is no construction in phase 2. Mr. Smith discussed the two non-conforming lots on the final plat. One non-conforming lot will be associated with another lot, and the other non-conforming lot will be a common grass area. Question 2: The area North of Lot 19 Block 2 must be added into the subdivision plat. Richard Smith explained that the parcel in question is owned by the LDS church. The new University President’s home will be constructed there. There is some concern that, as drawn, this parcel is not included in phase 1 or in phase 2. Mr. Smith explained that there is no legal requirement to identify the property by lot and block number. He explained that they could certainly deal with this issue at a later date if they need to, but requested that the piece of property stand alone for now. Charles Andersen excused himself from any discussion on the matter because of his responsibilities with that particular lot. City Attorney Zollinger clarified that everyone needs to understand that the proposal will create an island, but there will be not legal impediment caused by it. He said that the response from the LDS church signified that it would be a significant hurdle to go back and try to put the land into the subdivision. The City has no real interest in seeing that done. Usually subdivisions take in the church as part of the subdivision, because the church will pay for a lot of the roads. This is simply a lot that was adjacent to a subdivision, and a second subdivision has now been platted around it. It would have been more efficient for record keeping purposes to catch this in advance and include it in the second phase. However, there is no legal requirement for this to be done. Mary Haley asked about the remaining questions on the public works review. Kurt Hibbert replied that all the concerns are being, or are in the process of being worked out. Mary Ann Mounts pointed out a problem with Mountain View Drive, since there is already a street named Mountain View Drive. Mr. Smith replied that they have to think of a different name for the street. City Attorney Stephen Zollinger asked if the President’s house subject to the CCRs (Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions). Mr. Smith replied that about 78% of the property is subject to the CCRs, but that the church has been told that they need to sign off on them. Mr. Smith also explained the nature of the CCRs as additional conditions for subdivision to comply with in addition to the city ordinances. 3 Randall Porter asked if the plan would be established as RR2. Richard Smith replied that the whole Kurt Hibbert area is zoned as RR2. Randall asked about the lot size requirement, and clarified that the ordinance book is wrong, and that the minimum lot size is actually one-half acre, not two acres. Randall Porter then encouraged Mr. Smith to keep the lighting low in the neighborhood and to use the high pressure sodium lights, which are more of an amber color. Thaine Robinson then asked Mr. Smith to indicate which streets are on the seven percent grade. Winston Dyer pointed out which these would be. Mary Ann Mounts motioned to approve the final plat for Harvest Heights, Division 2A. Randall Porter seconded the motion. Charles Andersen abstained. Motion carried. None opposed. B. Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment Timeline Chairman Dyer explained to the newer commissioners that the commission has done extensive work on the comprehensive plan in terms of public participation and surveys, etc. They focused on the comprehensive plan map itself so they would have a standard to compare the proposals against and make sure they were consistent with where they wanted to go. There is also a written text of the comprehensive plan that has not yet been completed. One of the big concerns there was that they needed stated goals and visions from the City Council to work into the document. They needed to make sure the document was cohesive, integrated and would lead them in the right direction. Since the public was interested and concerned that the process was a little one-sided, the Mayor formed a committee to look at finishing up the comprehensive plan text document. For whatever reasons, the committee had difficulty getting together and moving that forward. When the comprehensive plan had been before the Council for reading and acceptance it was tabled and has been tabled since November 2004. They now want to move forward with the amendment process. Kurt Hibbert presented the new approach for the development of the comprehensive plan text. The City Council has decided to meet early once a month to work specifically the comprehensive plan to get the policy direction going. They started the night before (January 18, 2006) with a SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) on the recreation area required in the comprehensive plan. Mr. Hibbert has committed to bring the City Council’s work back to the Planning and Zoning Commission so they can discuss and follow up on what the Council has done. Mr. Hibbert explained that the SWOT analysis is used to identify major concerns, which are then used as the basis Kurt and Chairman Dyer for forming the policy to address those major concerns. then illustrated how the analysis is used to write the policies. The process should move fairly quickly. There was a lot of concern in City Council that the work completed by the P&Z Commission over the last couple years not be lost, since some people really saw improvement in the plan. Kurt said that they want to compile the input they have gathered into a document that they can take to a public hearing and bounce it off the public to see if it is representative of what they want the community to be in the future. The Council will meet at least monthly, so the commission can review their work the next day, and comment on what has been completed. They are going to have to move quickly, since there are fourteen major land-use areas that they have to deal with by the local planning land-use act. They will have to cover two or three every meeting to be able to accomplish this. 4 Charles Andersen asked if there would be any combined Council-Commission meetings involved. Kurt replied that he suspected that the Council would want to do that at one point. Mary Ann Mounts mentioned that she hopes they will work with the Community Search Conference and involve the information gathered at those meetings. Chairman Dyer asked if the City Council identified any other specific tasks that they wanted from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Kurt replied that they want their input, but they mostly want the Commission to review the work done by staff and identify any omissions or commissions they find in th the documents. He explained that the plan must be written on a 5 grade reading level, and must give a broad idea of what the goals and objectives of the city are. The details can then be put into the ordinances, not in the comprehensive plan. The comprehensive plan is not a regulatory document. Chairman Dyer pointed out that the comprehensive plan map is open again for proposed amendment on February 17, 2006. Since the comprehensive plan is a basis for judging the new petitions that come in, he wondered if they needed to finish the text amendments before they could process the changes to Kurt Hibbert the map. explained that some petitions for map changes would be processed, but the focus should be on the text changes. He said that there are some pressing petitions that have waited for five months. Those petitions will have to be processed before the comprehensive plan is completed. Kurt Hibbert then explained that they cannot act on the map until February 17, and then they would Randall Porter have a span of 45 days to amend the plan. asked for an outline that the Council is using Kurt to proceed with the amendment process. handed out copies of this outline to the commissioners. Rex Erickson commented that the work that has been done by the commissioners will not be thrown out, but will be added upon. There are fourteen different areas that still need the SWOT analysis. These will be added in each area to what has already been accomplished. Kurt Hibbert added that he is working on pulling all the work completed in the past together to format and structure it better. It is too rough for review at this time. 5. Non controversial Items Added to the Agenda: A. Annual Commissioners Training Kurt Hibbert announced that there is an annual commissioners training in Pocatello put on by the Idaho Association of Cities and Counties. The training will update them on what is going on in Legislation and Policy around the state. Traditionally, the city has sponsored the commissioners in attending these events. He encouraged the commissioners to contact him if they were interested and he will try to get a Chairman Dyer budget for them to attend. added that this meeting will review the open meeting laws, the state’s statutes on planning and zoning, what the commission’s charge is, etc. It is very helpful, especially for newer commissioners, to help them understand their roles, what they are trying to do, what they can and cannot do, and some issues that will keep them out of legal trouble. B. Letter to the Commissioners from Louis Clements Chairman Dyer said that he appreciated the very nice letter of compliments that Louis Clements took the time to write. He said it was a great payday to have the letter in their packets for this meeting. 5 6. Tabled requests: st A. Rezone request from MDR1 to CBC at 330 West 1 South – (Interwest Cabinet) Kurt Hibbert explained that the clock is ticking, and the commission had decided that it would necessitate a comprehensive plan change request and a rezone. They must wait for that for six months, and then they will process the application after February 17, 2006. The applicant is aware of that, and he shouldn’t be held up in construction as long as they stuck to the calendar with the application. Mary Ann Mounts Michael Ricks motioned to take this issue off the table. seconded the motion. Motion carried. None Opposed. There was general discussion on the issue, including talk about changing the zone along the railroad Kurt Hibbert tracks to light industrial. commented that rezoning the area along the railroad track to light industrial would conflict with the current comprehensive plan. This would require a comprehensive plan change, which would not be able to be accomplished until February 17, 2006. Charles AndersenRandall Porter motioned to re-table this issue. seconded the motion. Motion carried None opposed. . Mary Ann Mounts left at 8:29 pm 7. Report on Projects: None 8. Compliance: Follow up on complaints – Staff A. Natalie Powell – Compliance Officer Kurt Hibbert reported about the new Compliance Officer, Natalie Powell. (The city has changed “enforcement” to “compliance,” since their goal is to bring people into compliance, not to enforce them.) The goal is for her to periodically prepare and present a report to the commission on her activities. This will help them know what she has cleared up, and what issues she is working on. She has already cleared a lot of things up just by going out and working with property owners to get things done. She is very good, she is very aggressive, and people like her. She is the person who takes the complaints and reports to Kurt and the building department for technical support. This system seems to Michael Ricks be working well. added that although Natalie is in training on Thursday nights, she is going to try to come introduce herself to the commissioners at a future meeting. Chairman Dyer commented that they have had to deal with some significant compliance issues lately. nd The commissioners then discussed a few of these issues. It was found that Help-You-Sell’s sign on 2 John Millar East is actually in conformance to the city’s ordinance. Also, is looking into making the Natalie Powell lights at Smith Park more conforming. is investigating the Valley Wide Co-Op property. 9. Building Permit Application Report: 2005 Total Building Permits – Discussion Kurt Hibbert lead a short discussion on the 2005 Building Permit Application Report. The valuation for 2005 was in excess of $68 million. This is the most the City of Rexburg has ever had. The previous 6 record was near $58 million. Most of the growth was in Single Family Residential. Kurt added that the growth was pretty much outside of the University and temple construction, so the City had a great year as far as investment in the community. Heas Up: Kurt Hibbert explained that there would be a public hearing in the February 2 meeting on the Copper Creek Conditional Use Permit. A public hearing had already been held, but the notification had not been published. The commission must hold another public hearing on the permit. Minutes from the last public hearing will be provided on February 2 for reference. Chairman Dyer encouraged the commissioners to carefully review the rezone request on 280 East Main Street (Liahona Inc.), since it is the first Residential Business District request. Meeting adjourned at 9:07 pm 7