3.I. 7:00 PM PLT25-001: PRELIMINARY PLAT for Hope Lutheran Subdivision. S ½ of Section 21, Township 2 North, Range 38 East. Generally located north of E 1st Street, east of Nixon Avenue, south of Parkwood Street, west of Hoopes Avenue.

[3.I. 7:00 PM PLT25-001: PRELIMINARY PLAT for Hope Lutheran Subdivision. S ½ of Section 21, Township 2 North, Range 38 East. Generally located north of E 1st Street, east of Nixon Avenue, south of Parkwood Street, west of Hoopes Avenue.]

TONIGHT IS THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR HOPE LUTHERAN SUBDIVISION. AND I GUESS WE WILL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT. SO IS THERE AN APPLICANT FOR THIS ONE? YES. PERFECT. AND WHEN YOU COME, JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, YOU KNOW THE DRILL. THANKS. BARRY LANE WITH CONNECT ENGINEERING, 2295 NORTH MILLSTONE HIGHWAY, SUITE SIX, HERE IN IOWA MILLS. SO THIS THIS PRELIM PLAT THAT WE HAVE BEFORE YOU TODAY IS A SMALL THREE LOT PLAT. THIS IS AROUND THE AREA OF THE EXISTING HOPE LUTHERAN CHURCH SCHOOL. YOU CAN SEE ON ON THIS SHEET HERE THAT IT'S IT CURRENTLY HAS ABOUT WHAT, NINE LOTS, 8 OR 9 LOTS ON THERE. A LOT OF THOSE LOTS WERE CONSIDERED A ILLEGAL LOT SPLITS NOT PLATTING. SO IN DOING THIS WE'RE TRYING TO HELP CLEAN UP WHAT ALREADY HAS BEEN DONE. WITH THIS AS WELL. SO YOU'LL SEE IN THE. MARY PLAT THAT THE NEW PREMIUM PLAT IS, IS NOW BROKEN DOWN INTO JUST THREE LOTS. SO ONE LARGE LOT WITH THE CHURCH. WITH PLANS TO EXPAND THAT. AND THEN TWO ADDITIONAL LOTS TO THE NORTH. AND TO THE NORTHWEST WITH THIS PLAT ALSO. GALLUP STREET WILL BE EXTENDED. OVER IN CONNECT TO HOOPES AVENUE, YOU'LL SEE THAT CURRENTLY JUST DEAD ENDS THERE. AND THERE'S THE NEED TO CONTINUE THAT ON. THERE'S NO HOME TURNAROUND. NO CUL DE SAC, NO NOTHING THERE. SO I BELIEVE THE PLAN ALWAYS HAS BEEN, AND WE HAVE BEEN DIRECTED BY STAFF TO CONTINUE THAT ROAD THROUGH THERE. AND WE DID HOLD A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING AND IN THAT, IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING, THE BIGGEST CONCERNS THAT CAME FROM THAT WAS TRAFFIC.

IF THIS CONTINUATION OF GALLUP CONTINUES ON, THAT THERE WILL BE MORE THROUGH TRAFFIC ON THERE, WHICH IS PROBABLY TRUE. AT THE SAME TIME, LIKE I SAID, WE'VE BEEN DIRECTED BY CITY STAFF TO DO SO AND, AND THINGS ALWAYS WILL BE THAT WAY. TOTAL OVERALL ACREAGE IS ABOUT JUST OVER SEVEN AND A HALF ACRES, 7.652 ACRES. FOR THE ENTIRE THING AND ALL, ALL THREE LOTS WILL BE ABLE TO HAVE ROAD FRONTAGE AND BE CONSTRUCTED LOTS. SO WITH THAT I WOULD STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS IF THERE ARE ANY. ANY QUESTIONS? I ACTUALLY HAVE ONE QUESTION. SO THIS PRELIMINARY PLAT, IS IT TO HELP I'M ASSUMING IS TO FIX SOME OF THOSE ILLEGAL SPLITS. YEAH. SO THE PLAN IS THAT THEY THE CHURCH HAS WANTED TO EXPAND. AND IN ORDER TO DO SO IN THE FINAL PLAT AND PLANS, WHICH ALSO HELPS CLEAN UP THOSE ILLEGAL ONES. SO KIND OF DUAL PURPOSE. OKAY. AND I'M ASSUMING THEN THAT, YOU

[00:05:06]

KNOW, ANY ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT ON THIS LOT IS REQUIRING THE EXTENSION OF GALLUP OVER TO.

WHOOPS. YEAH. THAT'S KIND OF THE PLAN HERE. YEAH. SO THERE WILL BE THERE WILL BE TWO DIFFERENT.

SO THIS LOT LINE RIGHT THERE. SO THE SOUTHERN LOT ANY ADDITIONS OR IMPROVEMENTS TO THIS LOT WOULD REQUIRE THE ADDITION OR IMPROVEMENT I SHOULD SAY TO. WHOOPS SIDEWALK I THINK THEY'RE ALREADY KIRKWOOD GUTTER BUT SIDEWALK THERE. AND THEN ONCE THIS LOT UP HERE DEVELOPS THAT THAT WOULD TRIGGER THE NEED FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THAT. SO THAT ROAD WILL NOT CONTINUE ON UNTIL THAT LOT GETS THE ONE ADJACENT. CORRECT. OKAY. YEP. WHICH AGAIN, THINGS CAN ALWAYS CHANGE. BUT CURRENTLY THERE IS NO PLAN FOR THAT RIGHT NOW. OKAY. YEAH. ALL RIGHT. OH, COMMISSIONER SCOTT. SO IS THE PLAN THAT THAT ROAD THEN CONTINUATION OF GALLUP THEN WOULD BE DEDICATED. IT WILL BE DEDICATED RIGHT OF WAY. YEP. YES. OKAY. THE PUBLIC STREET.

SO. ALL RIGHT, WELL, IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, THEN WE'LL HAVE CITY STAFF. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. THE REQUESTED ACTION FOR THIS PROJECT IS TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE. SO THE HISTORY ON THE PROPERTY. IT WAS ANNEXED IN 1979 WITH AN INITIAL ZONE OF R1 AND R2. SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU SEE IN OUR CURRENT ZONING MAP. AND THIS PORTION. SO THIS LARGER PORTION IS WAS PLATTED IN 1979 AS PART OF THE R&B PARK EDITION. BUT THE REST OF THIS, AND ACTUALLY THIS LITTLE NUB ON THE SIDE, IS ALSO PLATTED. BUT THE REST IS NOT PLATTED. THE PRIMARY PURPOSE, AS MR. BANE INDICATED, IS REALLY TO ALLOW THE PHASING OF THE PLAT.

IF YOU PLAT PROPERTY IN PHASES, YOU'RE REQUIRED TO DO A PRELIMINARY PLAT. AND WHAT THIS DOES IS IT ALLOWS THE HOPE LUTHERAN PROPERTY TO DEVELOP. THEY WOULD LIKE TO EXPAND THEIR SCHOOL. IT ALLOWS THEM TO DO THAT WHILE NOT PLANNING THIS SECTION UNTIL THEY'RE READY TO ACTUALLY DEVELOP IT. THE PRELIMINARY SITE CONSISTS OF APPROXIMATELY 7.6 ACRES WITH THREE BUILDABLE LOTS. THE LARGEST LOT. LOT ONE NEXT TO THAT. ONE HERE. SO THIS LOT ONE IS JUST GOING TO CONTINUE TO BE OCCUPIED OCCUPIED BY HOPE LUTHERAN CHURCH AND SCHOOL. LOT TWO AND THREE. LOT THREE IS ALREADY IS ALREADY PLATTED, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE PLANNING ON COMBINING THE TWO LOTS THERE. AND THIS ONE CORNER LOT. THERE IS A THIS DOES PLAN TO CONNECT GALLUP STREET RIGHT HERE WHICH CONNECTS WITH THERE. AND WHOOPS. THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REQUIRES THE EXTENSION OF PREVIOUSLY PLOTTED STREETS. GOLF STREET HAS WAS ORIGINALLY PLANNED TO CONNECT ALL THE WAY TO HITT ROAD. THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN AND IT HERE. BUT BECAUSE WE HAVE THE STREET AS ALREADY PLATTED, A DEAD END ROAD, WE DO NEED IT TO BE TO CONTINUE THE ALTERNATIVE.

THE ONLY REAL ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE WOULD BE A CUL DE SAC. BUT. LOOKING AT THE NEEDS OF THE AREA. THIS AS WELL AS THIS IS WHAT WAS CHOSEN TO JUST CONNECT THROUGH. THE AND ALSO CONNECTING IT GIVES LOT TWO FRONTAGE BECAUSE OUR ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN DISCOURAGES DIRECT ACCESS FROM A MAJOR COLLECTOR ONTO RESIDENTIAL LOTS.

SO THIS LOT TWO WITHOUT THAT WOULD NEED TO HAVE ACCESS ONTO. WHOOPS. WHICH WE WOULD PREFER TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF ACCESSES DIRECTLY ONTO. AS MR. BATE MENTIONED, THERE WAS A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING HELD. THERE WERE INCLUDING THE APPLICANT SITE THAT WERE IN ENGINEERING.

THERE WERE SEVEN PEOPLE IN ATTENDANCE. WITH THEIR CONCERNS WITH THE TRAFFIC. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IDENTIFIES THIS AREA AS GENERAL URBAN, WHICH DENOTES RESIDENTIAL AREAS

[00:10:02]

WITH A MIX OF COMMERCIAL AND SERVICE USES CAN BE MEAN TO RESIDENTS. THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT DOES IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND ALSO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE. STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OR SUBDIVISION AND THEN HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NO.

OKAY. YOU'RE GOOD FOR NOW. ALL RIGHT. SO NOW I'D LIKE TO OPEN IT UP FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM. I JUST WANT TO SAY A FEW THINGS BEFORE WE GET STARTED. WHEN YOU COME UP, PLEASE JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS. TRY AND KEEP IT BRIEF TO ABOUT FIVE MINUTES. AND IF SOMEONE COMES UP AND THEY SAY SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE YOU WERE GOING TO SAY, YOU CAN COME UP AND JUST SAY DITTO OR OR, YOU KNOW, ADD SOMETHING ELSE. THIS IS MOSTLY A TIME FOR US, FOR US TO HEAR JUST FEEDBACK FROM YOU GUYS. UNFORTUNATELY, IT'S NOT LIKE A Q&A. BUT YOU KNOW, ANY CONCERNS THAT YOU MAY HAVE, WE WILL TRY TO ADDRESS AFTER WE HEAR FROM YOU GUYS. IF THERE IS ACTUALLY THAT'S EVERYTHING. SO LET'S GO. LET'S GO. GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED. ACTUALLY I'M JUST GOING TO ADD TO IF IT'S A SITUATION WHERE YOU AGREE WITH SOMEBODY AND YOU'RE SAYING YES HERE, HERE, THIS IS A RECORDED MEETING. WE DO TRY TO KEEP A LEVEL OF DECORUM. KIND OF TREAT IT LIKE A HEARING THAT YOU WOULD HAVE AT THE COURTHOUSE. SIMILAR TO THAT. SO JUST ASK THAT WE HAVE A LEVEL OF DECORUM HERE. AND IF YOU AGREE WITH SOMEBODY, JUST SILENTLY AGREE. OR IF YOU DISAGREE WITH SOMEBODY. AGAIN SILENT DISAGREEMENT. BUT THANK YOU. THAT'S THE ONE THING I MISS. SO APPRECIATE IT. OKAY. YOU MUST ALL BE HERE FOR SOMETHING ELSE THEN. SO. OKAY.

SO IF THERE'S NO ONE WANTING TO COME UP, THEN I GUESS WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. SINCE THERE'S NO OTHER REBUTTAL OR, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T NEED ANY REBUTTAL FROM THE APPLICANT, SO I GUESS WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT AMONGST OURSELVES. SO HOW DOES EVERYONE FEEL ABOUT THIS ONE? IT SEEMS PRETTY CLEAR CUT. STRAIGHTFORWARD. OKAY. SOUNDS GOOD. I PERSONALLY ACTUALLY LIKE THAT THE ROAD CONNECTS THROUGH. I THINK THAT'S HELPFUL. IT HELPS OUT THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC. SO. ALL RIGHT. I WOULD OPEN UP TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR SUBDIVISION. ANYONE WANT A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT. TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. COMMISSIONER SCOTT CANTU. HI, TYLER. I MEAN, I MOTION PASSED. PERFECT. SO NOW I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THE REASON STATEMENT AND RELEVANT CRITERIA. ANYONE? I'LL MAKE A MOTION. OKAY. FOR THE CRITERIA. SORRY. OH, YEAH. I'M MAKING SURE THIS IS THE RIGHT ONE. SORRY. AGAIN. SECOND TIME. WE HAVE TWO TONIGHT, SO I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS ONE FOR THE NEXT ONE. NO, IT'S FOR THIS ONE. YEP. THIS IS THE RIGHT ONE. HERE WE GO. SO JUST READ THAT. I MAKE A MOTION TO OFFER THE APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE REASON. STATEMENT OF RELEVANT CRITERIA AND STANDARDS FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF SUBDIVISION LOCATED NORTH OF EAST 12TH STREET. EAST OF NIXON AVENUE, SOUTH OF STATE STREET, AND WEST OF HOOPES AVENUE. PERFECT. ANYONE WANT TO SECOND THAT? I'LL SECOND. ROLL CALL.

VOTE. COMMISSIONER SCOTT. CANTU. I. I, I MEAN, I. MOTION PASSED. PERFECT. SORRY I TALKED TO YOU ABOUT SO GETTING EXCITED. PERFECT. LET ME JUST ACTUALLY, I'LL DO THIS LATER. OKAY. OKAY.

[3.II. 7:00 PM PLT25-003: PRELIMINARY PLAT for Westbrook Estates. Part of the S ½ of Section 10 and the N ½ of Section 15, Township 2 North, Range 37 East. Generally located north of W 17 N, east of the Great Western Canal, south of the East Lateral Canal, west of Bramble Lane.]

SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO GO TO OUR NEXT ITEM. WHICH IS THE. THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR WESTBROOK ESTATES. NORTHWEST TOWN. SO DO WE HAVE AN APPLICANT FOR THAT. DO YOU. GOOD EVENING. GILMORE JENKINS WITH 11 ENGINEERING LOCATED AT 101 SOUTH PARK AVENUE HERE IN IDAHO FALLS. ON THIS ONE, THIS PROJECT. WE WERE HERE TOWARDS THE END OF LAST YEAR FOR ANNEXATION, INITIAL ZONING. THAT

[00:15:04]

WAS APPROVED BY COUNCIL TO BE ANNEXED AND ZONED AS R-1. WE'RE HERE TODAY WITH THE PRELIMINARY PLAT. POSE A SUBDIVISION THAT FITS IN THAT R-1 ZONE. FOR CONTEXT OF LOCATION. THIS IS.

NORTH OF 17TH, NORTH WEST OF THE AIRPORT. NORTH OF THE SILVERLEAF SUBDIVISION. IT'S. SEE. ITS SHAPE IS DELINEATED BY CANALS THAT BORDER THE NORTH, EAST AND WEST SIDES. AND THEN 17TH NORTH IS HERE. AND THEN THIS LAKE HERE IS ESSENTIALLY THE CANAL AND THE CANALS EASEMENT FOR MAINTENANCE ON THAT LITTLE STRETCH THERE. NO, THE PARCEL IS. THERE'S THE YEAH. THE SLIDE THE AIRPORT IS HERE, AS I MENTIONED. SO WE ARE WEST OF THE AIRPORT. SO THE PARCEL IS A LITTLE OVER 52 ACRES. IT LANDS IN ALL OF THE SPECIAL AIRPORT ZONING OVERLAY REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH FOR ADDING RESTRICTIONS AND THINGS THAT WAY. DIVING INTO IT HERE. THIS IS GOING TO HAVE ON THIS LAYOUT WE HAVE 182 OR 180 BUILDABLE LOTS. WE'VE GOT SOME NON BUILDABLE LOTS WHERE WE HAVE STRATEGICALLY TRIED TO PLACE OUR PONDS IN THESE AREAS WHERE THE SHAPE OF THE ROCK DID NOT REALLY LEAVE ABILITY TO. KEEP GOOD ROAD FRONTAGE ACCESS. WE HAVE TO HAVE PONDS ANYWAY TO HANDLE THE STORM DRAINAGE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT. AND SO WE STRATEGICALLY TRIED TO PLACE THOSE THERE. THEIR ROADS IN THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL ALL BE LOCAL WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THIS HERE. WORKING WITH STAFF IS DETERMINED THAT THIS WOULD NEED TO BE A COLLECTOR BASED ON THE CITY MASTER PLANNING, WHILE THE REST OF THE ROADS WOULD BE 60 FOOT WIDE RIGHT OF WAY. LOCAL STREETS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THAT ONE BEING 70. THE 17TH IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE BROUGHT UP TO THE MASTER PLAN CATEGORY OF MAJOR COLLECTOR. PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICULAR SHARED PRIORITY WOULD BE THE INTENT THERE WITH ALSO ANY IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED AS DETERMINED IN COORDINATION WITH THE CITY ENGINEER BASED ON THE TRAFFIC STUDY. AND I'LL TALK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE MORE IN A MINUTE. ONLINE ALLOWS LOT 67,000FT■!S AND LESS. THE LOTS ARE. RESTRICTED TO BE ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY, IN WHICH CASE THEY MAY BE SMALLER AS LONG AS THE LOTS CAN KEEP THEIR. ALL THE REST OF THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS AND THE ZONING SETBACKS. LOT COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS. THINGS OF THAT NATURE. CURRENTLY, IT'S A BEAUTIFUL FIELD. AND IT WILL BE DEVELOPED. I WANTED TO DISCUSS THE TRAFFIC STUDY A LITTLE BIT. WE DID SOME AS PART OF THE APPLICATION AS TRAFFIC STUDY WAS DONE PRIOR TO THE ANNEXATION AND ZONING. IT WAS PERFORMED BY EAGLE ROCK ENGINEERING. THAT DID AN EXCELLENT JOB. AND IT WAS BASED ON A LAYOUT THAT THAT WAS BASED ON THE R2 THAT WE HAD REQUESTED AT THE TIME. AND MY REASON FOR BRINGING THAT UP IS THAT A LOT, THE DWELLING COUNT THAT WAS ASSUMED AS PART OF THE REPORT WAS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN WHAT WE HAVE NOW. AND I JUST WANT TO PUT INTO PERSPECTIVE THE DIFFERENCE. MARKER ON THE PAGE. I APOLOGIZE, FOLKS. LET'S BE. BETTER. HERE. ALL RIGHT. SO THE. TOTAL TRIPS PER DAY BASED ON THE 180 SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS THAT WILL BE IN THERE, IS PROJECTED TO BE 1315 ON A WEEKDAY. THAT'S TOTAL TRIPS. THAT'S 50% IN, 50% OUT. PEAK HOURS WILL OBVIOUSLY BE SMALLER THAN THAT. THE THIS IS

[00:20:09]

ABOUT 35% FEWER TRIPS THAN THE STUDY WAS BASED ON. AND MY REASON FOR POINTING THAT OUT IS THAT WE HAD THE DEVELOPER OPTED TO CONTINUE TO USE THIS STUDY, AND I'VE POINTED THAT OUT JUST TO STATE THAT WE ARE STILL WITHIN THE REALM OF WHAT THAT STUDY PROVIDED. WE DID NOT EXCEED THE TRIP GENERATION OF THAT BASED OFF OF. WITH THAT, I WILL STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. ANY QUESTIONS? I HAVE ONE QUESTION. I'M LOOKING AT THE ACTUALLY PROBABLY TOO LATE TO ASK THIS QUESTION. SO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO REFRESH MY MEMORY WHEN WE WHEN WE ANNEX THIS. I'M SEEING ON THE MAP HERE, THERE'S LIKE ONE TINY LITTLE SECTION ALONG 17TH NORTH THAT IS NOT OH, I UNDERSTAND. I SEE WHY I'M ANSWERING MY OWN QUESTION. OKAY. NEVER MIND.

OKAY. YEAH. BECAUSE THE ROAD, LIKE WE NORMALLY ANNEX BOTH SIDES OF THE ROAD. RIGHT? RIGHT.

BUT THERE'S THIS. YEAH. RIGHT. CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY WE'RE NOT ANNEXING ON BOTH SIDES? BECAUSE THERE'S THAT ONE COUNTY PIECE. THAT SLIM COUNTY PIECE BETWEEN THE ROAD AND THEN THOSE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND SILVERLEAF. SO IS THAT PREVENTING US FROM ANNEXING BOTH SIDES, ESSENTIALLY. AND I'M SURE STAFF CAN WEIGH ON THIS A LITTLE MORE, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WE ANNEX FOR THE FULL RIGHT OF WAY AT THE TIME THAT THE ADJACENT GROUND ANNEXES. SO UNTIL THAT GROUND ANNEXES IT, IT WON'T BE REQUIRED UNLESS THE CITY AND THE COUNTY WORK SOMETHING OUT.

THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. I'M SURE STAFF COULD WEIGH IN ON THAT FURTHER. OKAY. THANK YOU.

OKAY. I THINK YOU ARE FREE. NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM CITY STAFF. THANK YOU. COMMISSION. ALL RIGHT. SO AS A REMINDER FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT, THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS DECIDING BODY FOR THIS TONIGHT. AND SO IT IS REQUESTED ACTION TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR WESTPARK ESTATES. I'M JUST GOING TO ADD A COUPLE THINGS. THIS THIS WAS RECENTLY ANNEXED WAS ANNEX R-1, WHICH IS SINGLE DWELLING RESIDENTIAL. AND THAT WAS DONE IN JULY OF 2024. THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OVER 52 ACRES. AND THESE LOTS ARE INTENDED TO BE SINGLE UNIT ATTACHED HOMES. AND THOSE ARE PERMITTED IN THE R-1 ZONE. THE ASTERISK THAT YOU'LL SEE IN THAT USE TABLE IS THAT THE MAX THAT THESE ATTACHED HOMES CAN BE IS THREE. SO THE MAJORITY OF THESE HOMES ARE INTENDED TO BE WHAT WE CALL TWIN HOMES. SO THOSE ARE TWO SINGLE UNIT ATTACHED HOMES ON THEIR OWN LOTS WITH A SHARED WALL. AND THEN SOME OF THESE MIGHT BE THREE. SO EACH UNIT IS ON ITS OWN LOT. THERE'S GOING TO HAVE SHARED WALLS. THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE IS 7000FT■S AS YOU GO THROUGH THE PLAT. A LOT OF THOSE LOTS ARE SMALLER THAN 7000FT■S. BUT THE ZONING ORDINANCE DOES ALLOW AN 11 TO £0.06 THAT IF IT IS IF IT'S IF IT'S ATTACHED, IT CAN IT DOESN'T HAVE TO MEET THAT MINIMUM REQUIREMENT. JUST HAS TO MEET ALL THE SETBACKS. OKAY. A COUPLE EXTRA THINGS I WANT TO POINT OUT. THERE ARE HOMES FACING WEST 17TH NORTH, WHICH IS A MAJOR COLLECTOR. BUT ALL THOSE HOMES WILL HAVE TO HAVE ACCESS ON THE ROAD BEHIND IT, WHICH IS STURGEON STREET. SO THEY WILL NOT HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO WEST 17TH. THERE'S TWO ACCESSES FOR THIS SUBDIVISION. AND OF COURSE THIS IS BEING THE TRAFFIC STUDY IS BEING REVIEWED BY THE CITY ENGINEER. STAFF REVIEWS ARE CONTINUING. REVIEWS ARE CONTINUING AS WELL. FOR THE TRAFFIC STUDY. IT DOES INDICATE THE ABILITY TO MAINTAIN WHAT THEY CALL AN A GRADE LEVEL OF SERVICE. THE STUDY DOES INDICATE POTENTIAL TURN LANE WARRANTS. AND IF REQUIRED, WHEN IT HITS THAT WARRANT, THAT'S USUALLY ADDRESSED AT THE TIME OF FINAL PLAT. AND IT IS COORDINATION WITH BONNEVILLE COUNTY, AS MUCH OF WEST 17 NORTH IS A COUNTY ROAD. A COUPLE OTHER THINGS. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOES IDENTIFY THIS AS SUBURBAN. YOU'LL SEE HERE SUBURBAN. AND THAT TRANSIT AREA VERY CONTAINS VARIOUS HOUSING TYPES. IT'S GOING TO INCLUDE DETACHED ATTACHED SINGLE UNIT DWELLINGS. THE COMP PLAN SAYS THAT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHOULD INCLUDE A MIX OF HOUSING TYPES, PRICE POINT AND SIZES AND SHOULD NOT BE EXCLUSIVELY DETACHED SINGLE DWELLING UNITS. I THINK AND THEN FOR YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THE BOUNDARIES. SO YES, THE POOL ROAD IS PANICS. THE PRELIMINARY PLAT JUST HAS THAT BOUNDARY OF WHAT WAS INCLUDED. YOU KNOW, THEY'D BE RESPONSIBLE OR

[00:25:05]

RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR FRONTAGE FOR THAT ROAD IMPROVEMENTS. SO STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE PRELIMINARY PLAT DOES FIND THAT IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE SUBDIVISION. AND THEN I'LL ALSO ADD YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE'S STUB ROADS ADDED. THOSE STUB ROADS ARE TO MEET THE BLOCK LENGTH REQUIREMENTS IN ORDER TO CREATE THAT CONNECTIVITY. SO THAT'S WHY YOU SEE THE ROADS. THEY DO MEET ALL PLAN REQUIREMENTS. SO AGAIN STAFFERS REVIEW THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FINDS IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SUBDIVISION AND THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE. AND IT DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT. SO ANY QUESTIONS? ANY QUESTIONS. ANY. OKAY. THE NORTH SOUTH ROAD AT THE CENTER OF THE PROPERTY. LOOKS LIKE IT TERMINATES AT THE CANAL RIGHT NOW, BUT HAS A THAT'S INTENDED TO EVENTUALLY BE A PASS THROUGH THERE. I THINK ACTUALLY RIGHT NOW IT HAS A TURNAROUND. IT'S MEANT FOR LIKE A TURNAROUND. SO IT WOULD MEAN IT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO STOP THROUGH. BUT IT MEETS THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FOR THAT LENGTH OF ROAD WITH THE TURNAROUND THERE. THANK YOU. YEAH. I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. SO YOU'RE GOING TO I SORRY I ASK THIS EVERY TIME THE SINCE WE ANNEXED BOTH SIDES IS THE DEVELOPER REQUIRED TO. AND I DON'T KNOW WHICH CLASSIFICATION OF ROADWAY THIS IS BUT ARE THEY REQUIRED TO WIDEN BOTH SIDES OF THE ROAD OR THAT BE DONE WITH IMPACT FEES, OR IS THERE A MIX OF BOTH? WHAT DOES THAT RENAULT'S CLASSIFIED AS A MAJOR COLLECTOR, WHICH WOULD FALL ON THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DEVELOPER. SO THEY'D BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR SIDE? I DON'T BELIEVE THE OTHER SIDE WOULD BE DONE. SO TYPICALLY, AND THEY WOULD DO IN A MANNER. THEY WOULD DO BOTH SIDES FOR THEIR FRONTAGE. THEY WOULD DO CURB TO CURB, JUST TO THE STORM, DRAINAGE AND ALL THAT WORKS.

TYPICALLY THEY ONLY DO SIDEWALK ON THEIR SIDE OF THE ROAD. OKAY. GOTCHA. AND SO THEY'LL DO THAT ON. OKAY. ALONG THEIR SECTION OF THE OF JUST THEIR FRONTAGE. SO HOW DOES THAT PLAY INTO THEN THIS LITTLE WEIRD PIECE I WAS TALKING ABOUT. UNLESS THAT MAP IS JUST LIKE AN OLDER MAP, BUT THERE'S LIKE THIS TINY. I WISH I HAD A REMOTE. DO YOU SEE IT? RIGHT? A RIGHT TO LEFT DOWN, NOT TO THE RIGHT. TO THE. THIS RIGHT HERE. SO I THINK, YES, THAT LITTLE GUY RIGHT THERE IS SHOWING THAT IT'S LIKE NOT ANNEXED ON THE OTHER SIDE. WHY WHY IS THAT. SO THAT ACTUALLY IS ANNEXED. SO WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IS THIS BLACK DASHED LINE IS THE CURRENT CITY BOUNDARY. AND SO THIS WAS THERE'S THIS IS JUST RIGHT AWAY THAT WHEN SILVERLEAF WAS DEVELOPED, THEN IT WAS PLATTED. AND SO THAT WAS WHAT YOU'RE SEEING THERE. THE OTHER THE REST OF 17TH HAS BEEN JUST PRESCRIPTIVE USE AS A COUNTY PARCEL, BUT IT HAS BEEN ANNEXED INTO THE CITY. OKAY. SO THAT WHOLE STRETCH WILL BE ONE. CLASS THAT THAT WILL CORRECT ITSELF. AND I'M GETTING GRANULAR HERE, BUT I APPRECIATE YOU WORKING WITH ME. SO I THINK THE QUESTION IS CLEAREST ON THE FIRST MAP SLIDE WHERE WE CAN SEE THAT THERE'S NO ZONING OVERLAY ON THAT. YEAH, I SEE THAT'S WHERE I GOT CONFUSED BECAUSE THERE'S YEAH, THERE'S NO COLOR THERE JUST BECAUSE IT'S RIGHT OF WAY.

WE DON'T TYPICALLY COLOR THEM RIGHT AWAY. I UNDERSTAND OKAY. OKAY. EASY. OKAY. ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? STAFF? NO, THE ONLY ONE. OKAY. SO NOW WE WILL OPEN IT UP FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. SAME THING AS LAST TIME. JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS. KEEP IT BRIEF. AND PLEASE REMAIN A OR. PLEASE HAVE A GOOD LEVEL OF DECORUM AND. YEAH, THAT'S THAT'S IT. SO THE TIME IS YOUR GUYS'S. THERE WE GO. I'M GONNA GO. I THOUGHT YOU ALL WERE HERE FOR THIS ONE. ALL RIGHT. BECAUSE WE HAD A BIG CROWD FOR WHEN WE ORIGINALLY ZONED THIS. SO I THOUGHT, OKAY.

OH, HERE WE GO. SHERRY. CLARK, 1644 NORTH MARCHESA LANE. WE WERE SENT A LETTER THAT SAID WE COULDN'T COME AND TALK TO YOU GUYS, THAT WE HAD TO SUBMIT IT LAST FRIDAY AS A TESTIMONY. AND SO I DIDN'T KNOW THIS WAS A QUESTION ANSWER. AND I DON'T THINK ANYBODY ELSE DID. THAT IS ON OUR ROAD BECAUSE WE ARE RIGHT NEXT TO 17TH NORTH. SO CAN WE DO A QUESTION? ANSWER.

[00:30:04]

UNFORTUNATELY, NO. BUT IF YOU HAVE SOME CONCERNS THAT YOU HAVE, WE CAN TRY AND ADDRESS THEM. IF YOUR QUESTION OR IF YOUR CONCERNS AREN'T ADDRESSED, THEN WHAT WE CAN DO IS WE CAN POINT YOU IN THE DIRECTION OF YOU CAN REACH OUT TO EITHER CITY STAFF OR THE APPLICANT, AND THEY'RE ALWAYS MORE THAN WILLING TO TALK YOU THROUGH SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS. JUST, YOU KNOW, DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. RIGHT? WELL, WE'VE BEEN HERE THROUGH ALL OF THE MEETINGS THAT HAVE BEEN GOING ON BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN VERY CONCERNED. WE LIVE RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET. AND WHEN WE SAW AN R ONE RATING, WE THOUGHT, HEY, WE'LL LOOK JUST LIKE SILVERLEAF. THIS DOESN'T LOOK LIKE SILLY, BUT THE CONCERN I HAVE IS THAT THE COMPANY THAT'S GOING TO DEVELOP THIS IS ONLY GOING TO UPGRADE THE ROAD RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE SUBDIVISION. AND WE HAVE 26 WEST AND 35TH WEST ON BOTH SIDES THAT COME IN TO THAT 17TH NORTH. THIS IS A FARM ROAD. AND IF YOU ONLY WIDEN THAT PORTION, THIS IS GOING TO BE REALLY HARD FOR 180 UNITS TO GET IN AND OUT OF THAT SPACE. THAT'S MY CONCERN, IS THAT THE CITY HASN'T EVEN CONTACTED THE COUNTY TO SEE WHAT THAT'S GOING TO COST, WHICH IS I'M SURPRISED TO DO A TRAFFIC STUDY. I WOULD THINK THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO CONTACT THE COUNT, SINCE THEY BOTH COME IN THERE AND THEY'RE BOTH GOING TO COME OUT ON THE 26TH AND 35TH. SO THAT'S MY CONCERN. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY.

THANK YOU. MY NAME IS MATT DIXON. 841 WATERLOO. I'M THE ONE THAT ACTUALLY OWNS THIS PLACE.

AND. I DO HAVE A FEW CONCERNS ABOUT TRAFFIC. WE TAKE EQUIPMENT DOWN THIS ROAD AND IT TAKES UP BOTH LANES, AND, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T SEE. PEOPLE THROWING STUFF IN THE CANALS. IT'S A BIG PROBLEM. IT MESSES UP OUR PALMS AND EVERYTHING. AND. YEAH, I'M MOST WORRIED ABOUT TRAFFIC.

TRAFFIC? 17 NORTH IS HORRIBLE ALREADY. THE ROAD IS IN HORRIBLE CONDITION. AND. AND YEAH, THE PROPERTY NEXT TO IT IS NOT BEING REDEVELOPED. ASSISTED. THAT'S JUST MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS TRAFFIC. I THINK. THANK YOU. SOMEONE ELSE. ALL RIGHT. PERFECT. SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND IF THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO SAY ANYTHING IN REGARDS TO WHAT THEY'VE HEARD TONIGHT, YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO. PERFECT TIME TO DO THAT. THANKS. GILMER JENKINS WITH HARPER LIMITED ENGINEERING, ONE SOUTH PARK AVENUE. AND AGAIN. AND I, I APPRECIATE THE PUBLIC COMING AND LETTING US KNOW THEIR CONCERNS. I DO APPRECIATE THAT THE PUBLIC IN THE IDAHO FALLS AREA IS AN ACTIVE PUBLIC. THE. ROAD WIDENING AND THINGS OUTSIDE OF THE DIRECT FRONTAGE OF THE SUBDIVISION. IS NOT NECESSARILY REQUIRED BY ORDINANCE. THE TRAFFIC STUDIES ARE MEANT TO DETERMINE THE EFFECT OF TRAFFIC BEYOND THE EXTENTS OF THE FRONTAGE AND THE THIS WE DID SUBMIT THE TRAFFIC STUDY OF THE CITY. THE CITY HAS A COPY. IF THE PUBLIC WOULD LIKE TO REACH OUT TO OUR OFFICES, I'D BE HAPPY. I'M HAPPY TO EXPLAIN TO THEM AND TRY AND HELP UNDERSTAND THAT. HELP WITH UNDERSTANDING THAT TRAFFIC STUDIES WORK. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS THE RIGHT THING FOR IT, BUT THE STUDY WAS DONE. THE ROADWAY ITSELF WAS DETERMINED NOT TO GO BELOW THE LEVEL OF C, THE INTERSECTIONS AT EITHER END OF THIS BLOCK OF 17TH

[00:35:07]

WERE LOOKED AT WITH, AS KATELYN MENTIONED, RECOMMENDED POTENTIAL FOR LEFT TURN LANES AT BOTH OF THOSE INTERSECTIONS. AND AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, AS WE WORK THROUGH PHASING AND ACTUAL FINAL PLAT DESIGN WITH THE CITY ENGINEER WILL DETERMINE THE TIMING OF MILOS FORMAN'S. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS? NO. I DID LOOK AT THE TRAFFIC STUDY. AND BASICALLY IT SAYS THAT ALONG WITH THE TURN WARRANTS ARE MET, BUT THEY AREN'T NECESSARILY REQUIRED. IS THAT. YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I READ TOO. SO COULD I HAVE COME? AND I KNOW YOU'RE NOT THE TRAFFIC STUDY GUY, SO I KNOW YOU'RE DOING YOUR BEST. I HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF. YEAH. FOR SURE. DID YOU HEAR HIS QUESTION? I DID. SO. PASHTO AND ITD HAVE STANDARDS THAT THEY HAVE COME UP WITH BASED ON. IT'S ALL STATISTICS ESSENTIALLY. BUT THERE'S RATIOS OF CAPACITY THAT DIFFERENT DIMENSION LANE WIDTH TIES INTO IT. WHETHER IT'S A TWO WAY STOP OR A FOUR WAY STOP, ALL THESE THINGS TIE INTO IT. BUT WHEN WE LOOK AT THESE WARRANTS, SOMETIMES A WARRANT CAN BE MET BUT MAYBE DOESN'T ACTUALLY IMPROVE THE TRAFFIC. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU COULD HAVE. IT'S YOU COULD HAVE 65% OF YOUR TRAFFIC TURNING LEFT. BUT ON A CERTAIN LANE. BUT THAT'S 80% OF THE TOTAL TRAFFIC IN THE INTERSECTION. THERE'S REALLY NO NO DELAY BECAUSE NO ONE'S WAITING FOR ANYBODY. SO EVEN THOUGH THE RATIO AND THE PERCENTAGE SAYS, HEY, THIS IS MET BASED ON SOME EMPIRICAL SYSTEM THAT WAS COME UP WITH. REALITY IS, IT'S NOT ACTUALLY HINDERING THE OVERALL FLOW OF TRAFFIC IN THAT CASE. AND THAT'S WHY THE WARRANTS ARE MET. BUT THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY REQUIRED. AND IT WILL BE THE CITY ENGINEER WILL HAVE A LOT OF SWAY ON ON HOW THAT'S INTERPRETED, ON WHETHER OR NOT HE DETERMINES THAT IT'S REQUIRED BASED ON HIS INTERPRETATION OF THAT, DOES THAT DOES THAT HELP? IT DOES. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE I SIT DOWN? THANK YOU FOR THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. SO NOW, I GUESS IS THE TIME FOR US TO DISCUSS IT AMONGST OURSELVES. AND THEN ALSO, I'M ASSUMING WE CAN STILL ASK THE STAFF QUESTIONS IF WE NEED. I HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION. READING THE TRAFFIC. STUDY THE IN THE CONCLUSIONS AND 1.2.4. IT SAYS FOR EVERY SCENARIO, THE LEVEL OF SERVICE IS A GRADE OF A. IF I'M READING THIS CORRECTLY, IS THAT SAYING IT'S A GRADE OF A? AFTER THESE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE BUILT OUT? OR AM I MAKING ANY SENSE HERE OR IS IT A GRADE A ALREADY BEFORE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS? IT WOULD BE WITH THE SCENARIOS IDENTIFIED IN THE STUDY. CORRECT. OKAY. GOTCHA. SO OKAY.

THAT MAKES SENSE. SO SWEET. OKAY. OKAY. I'LL JUST MAKE MY COMMENT. I'M ONE OF THE ONES WHO WAS OPPOSED TO THE R-2 ORIGINAL ZONING. AND FRANKLY, I'M NOT THRILLED TO SEE THIS BECAUSE LIKE MANY PEOPLE, I HATE TO SEE OUR LANDSCAPING BEING GOBBLED UP. NEVERTHELESS, I BELIEVE THAT DEVELOPER HAS MET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY WITH ITS WITH THE R-1 ZONING. AND CERTAINLY THERE ARE CONCERNS ABOUT 17TH NORTH, BUT. THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT THAT.

AND HOPEFULLY THE PEOPLE WILL DRIVE A LITTLE MORE CAREFULLY AND THE ROADS WILL BE IMPROVED.

YOU KNOW, WITH USE. SO I'M GOING TO VOTE FOR THIS PROJECT. COMMISSIONER ISLER. YES. IT WAS

[00:40:04]

BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION THAT I DON'T THINK WE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING. I, I THOUGHT I HEARD IT CLOSED, BUT JUST IN CASE, I'LL SAY IT AGAIN, JUST TO MAKE SURE. WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING NOW. BUT OKAY. I ALSO HAVE ANOTHER. THANK YOU. ARE YOU. YOU'RE GOOD. OKAY. I ALSO HAVE A QUESTION. ANOTHER QUESTION. I'M SORRY. WHEN WHAT'S THE PROCESS FOR. SO OBVIOUSLY THE CITY CAN ONLY REQUIRE THE DEVELOPER TO WIDEN SECTIONS THAT THEY ARE ADJACENT TO. BUT OBVIOUSLY WE'RE OUT IN THE COUNTY, SO PEOPLE HAVE TO DRIVE ON COUNTY ROADS TO GET TO THESE SECTIONS. WHAT IS THE PROCESS OF, I GUESS, DO WE NOTIFY THE COUNTY THAT THIS IS HAPPENING? DO DOES THE COUNTY HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY NEED TO DO? LIKE WHAT? BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE CREATING THESE WEIRD BOTTLENECKS AND IT'S NOT JUST HERE. IT HAPPENS ALL OVER TOWN ON PERIPHERALS. WHAT'S THE GENERAL PROCESS, YOU KNOW, OVER TIME OF WHAT? TO CLOSE THOSE GAPS AND MAKE IT MORE CONGRUENT OVER TIME? OR WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? SO I GUESS YOU'RE CORRECT. THE CITY ONLY HAS JURISDICTION WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES. WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY, ESPECIALLY IN RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION OUTSIDE OF MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES. WE DO WORK REGULARLY WITH BONNEVILLE COUNTY. BONNEVILLE COUNTY IS AWARE OF THIS PROJECT. WE TALK MONTHLY ABOUT ANNEXATIONS AND PROJECTS THAT ARE COMING THROUGH THE SYSTEM AND COORDINATE THOSE THINGS. TYPICALLY, THE TRAFFIC STUDY WOULD INDICATE IF THERE WAS ANY OFF SITE IMPROVEMENTS, IMPROVEMENTS THAT WERE BEYOND THE PROJECT'S BOUNDARIES. AND THEN THOSE WOULD GET INCORPORATED INTO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AT TIME OF FINAL PLAT. IF THERE ARE OFF SITE IMPROVEMENTS AND THOSE ARE WITHIN A COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY, WE WOULD ALSO COORDINATE THOSE WITH THE COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TO MANAGE THOSE. SO THEY HAD THEIR INPUT INTO THAT AS WELL. COOL. AND THEN ANOTHER QUESTION WHEN IT COMES TO LIKE, LET'S SAY DURING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ACTUAL PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, TRASHING THE CANAL, THINGS CLOGGING UP, YOU KNOW, DRAINS AND STUFF. HOW WOULD ONE GO ABOUT IF THAT IS AN ISSUE, HOW WOULD THEY GO ABOUT RESOLVING IT? WOULD THAT BE WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT WITH THE CITY OF IDAHO FALLS, OR IS THAT A CANAL COMPANY THING, OR IS THAT A BONNEVILLE COUNTY THING? WHAT? SO, I MEAN, I HEARD DURING CONSTRUCTION AND DURING CONSTRUCTION. I MEAN, THE DEVELOPER IS WORKING WITH THE CANAL COMPANY AS WELL BECAUSE THE CANAL COMPANY HAS THEIR EASEMENTS. AS FAR AS TRASH FLOWING IN AFTER CONSTRUCTION IS OVER, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THE CANAL COMPANY WOULD NEED TO ADDRESS WITH ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS. IT WOULD BECOME A CIVIL ISSUE BETWEEN THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS. GOTCHA. BUT DURING CONSTRUCTION, THE CITY IS PROBABLY RIGHT. THE CITY IS WATCHING AND MAINTAINING THAT THE CONSTRUCTION OCCURS IN A WAY THAT'S NOT GOING TO LEAD AND CAUSE ISSUES. OKAY. YES, WE COULD DEAL WITH THAT IF THAT OCCURRED. SOUNDS GOOD. OKAY.

THANK YOU. NOW THAT WE'VE GOT THAT OUT OF THE WAY, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS THAT ANYONE NEEDS TO MAKE? NO. OKAY. SO I WOULD IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION? OH.

I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR WESTBROOK ESTATES. IS DECIDED. ANYONE WANT TO SECOND THAT? SECOND. PERFECT. WE'LL TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE, PLEASE. COMMISSIONER SCOTT CANTU. I, I TYLER. I MEAN I. MOTION PASSED. PERFECT. SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO DO THE REASON STATEMENT OF RELEVANT CRITERIA AND STANDARDS. DOES ANYONE WANT TO DO A MOTION FOR THAT? I'LL MAKE A MOTION. OH YOU HAVE RIGHT THERE. OKAY. YEAH. I'LL MAKE THE MOTION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF WESTBROOK ESTATES, LOCATED GENERALLY NORTH OF WEST 17TH, NORTH EAST OF THE GREAT WESTERN CANAL. THE REASON STATEMENT. OH. I'M SORRY. YES. THE MAKE THE MOTION FOR THE REASON STATEMENT OF RELEVANT CRITERIA AND STANDARDS FOR THE APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT OF WESTBROOK ESTATES, LOCATED GENERALLY NORTH OF WEST 17TH. NORTH EAST OF THE GREAT WESTERN CANAL. SOUTH OF THE EAST LATERAL CANAL AND WEST OF THE ROUNDABOUT LANE. PERFECT. DOES ANYONE WANT TO SECOND THAT? SECOND. PERFECT. WE'LL TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. COMMISSIONER SCOTT. CANTU. I TYLER I MEAN I. MOTION PASSED. PERFECT. SO JUST DO THIS REAL QUICK. SURE. AWESOME. OKAY. NOW

[3.III. 7:00 PM RZN25-001: REZONE. Rezone from LC, Limited Commercial to I&M, Industrial and Manufacturing. Generally located north of E Anderson Street, east of Boge Avenue, south of Stanley Street, west of N Holmes Avenue.]

[00:45:07]

WE ARE GOING TO GO TO OUR THIRD ITEM OF THE EVENING, WHICH IS THE REZONE FROM LC TO EIENDOM.

9.95 ACRES. IN THE STOCK OF HOMES THAT ARE GOING NORTH OF TOWN. SO IS THERE AN APPLICANT? JUNE FURMAN WITH ROCK ENGINEERING 1331 FREMONT AVENUE. YEAH, THIS ONE'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. WE ARE TRYING TO REZONE THIS FROM LIGHT COMMERCIAL TO IAM. WE ARE SHOWING THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH TO THE NORTH AND WEST OF US AND TO THE EAST ACROSS HOMES. AND ACCORDING TO THE COMP PLAN AMENDMENT, IT DOES SAY THAT FOR FUTURE LAND USE IT WILL BE GENERAL URBAN AND INDUSTRIAL, WHICH WE WILL FIT WITHIN THAT. YEAH. THAT'S IT. OKAY. PERFECT.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? NO. I HAVE ONE QUESTION. SORRY. DO DOES THE APPLICANT ALSO OWN THE NORTHWEST CORNER? LITTLE CORNER RIGHT THERE. NO. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY NEXT QUESTION IS WHY AREN'T WE JUST REZONING ALL OF IT. BUT OKAY. SOUNDS GOOD. EASY ENOUGH. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. GUESS WE'LL HEAR FROM CITY STAFF NOW. SO THERE'S NOT A LOT TO TALK ABOUT WITH THIS ONE. I CAN GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF THE HISTORY. IT'S BEEN AG LAND FOR THE ENTIRE TIME THAT IT'S BEEN IN THE CITY. WE'VE SEEN A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT ON THE FRINGE. WE HAVE INDUSTRIAL, FAIRLY SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF INDUSTRIAL TO THE WEST AND THE NORTH. THIS WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THAT PATTERN OF DEVELOPMENT. AND STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE COMMISSION MAKES A RECOMMENDATION TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE. OKAY.

ANY QUESTIONS? ANY QUESTIONS? NO. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I'D LIKE TO OPEN IT UP FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. SAME RULES AS LAST TIME. ALL RIGHT. NOTHING. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, SO I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND NOW TALK ABOUT IT AMONGST OURSELVES. PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. EASY ENOUGH. I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THAT LITTLE PIECE ALSO JUST BEING LEFT OVER LLC. DOES THAT CONSTITUTE A THEN BEING LIKE A SPOT ZONE OR IS IT BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY EXISTING AS THAT ZONE? IT JUST KIND OF IS JUST THAT WAY. HOW DOES THAT WORK WHERE IT'S EXISTING? IT WOULDN'T BE CONSIDERED A SPOT ZONE. IT BASICALLY IS A REMNANT, BUT IT IS THE SAME OWNERSHIP AS THIS OTHER PARCEL TO THE NORTH THAT IS ZONED INDUSTRIAL. SO I MEAN, THE ASSUMPTION WOULD BE IS THAT PARCEL DEVELOPS, THEY WOULD MOST LIKELY SEEK A REZONE AT THAT TIME OR JUST USE THE CURRENT ZONING ORDINANCE. COULD BE COULD BE. YES. SOUNDS GOOD. BUT IT'S NOT A CONCERN FOR YOU GUYS. NO. OKAY, THEN. I'M GOOD. OKAY. AWESOME. WELL, WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION. OKAY, PERFECT. MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL. A REGIONAL TELENET. PERFECT. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SECOND THAT? I'LL SECOND. PERFECT. WHAT? WE'LL DO A ROLL CALL. VOTE. COMMISSIONER SCOTT CANTU. HI, ISLER. I MEAN, I MOTION PASSED. PERFECT. NOW. WE ARE GOING TO DO THE. REZONE FROM R-1 SINGLE DWELLING

[3.IV. 7:00 PM RZN25-002: REZONE. Rezone from R1, Single Dwelling Residential to R3, Multiple Dwelling Residential. Generally located north of Wheeler Street, east of Pincrest Golf Course, south of Lincoln Road, west of Royal Avenue]

RESIDENTIAL TO R-3. ITEM NUMBER FOUR. NEXT, JUST EAST OF PINE CREST. AND WE HAVE AN AFTERNOON'S. PERFECT. FOR VERY VAIN WITH CONNECT ENGINEERING, 2295 NORTH YELLOWSTONE FALLS. SO THIS PROPERTY, WE'LL ZOOM OUT A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THE MAP. THIS PROPERTY IS SOUTH OF LINCOLN AND JUST EAST OF THE OF THE GOLF COURSE. YOU CAN SEE ON THE. ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP THAT

[00:50:05]

THAT THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION DESIGNATION IS GENERAL URBAN TRANSECT. YOU CAN SEE THAT THE CURRENT ZONING IS R1 PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. DIRECTLY TO THE NORTH IS LC. SO YOU RIGHT NOW YOU CURRENTLY HAVE COMMERCIAL ABUTTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. IF. ZOOMED OUT, KNOWING THAT IF WE WERE TO SEE AS ZOOMED OUT ZONE MAP, YOU WOULD SEE THAT THESE PROPERTIES ON THIS SIDE. THERE WE GO. THESE PROPERTIES ON THIS SIDE. THE CURRENT SUBDIVISION IS ZONED R1.

AND THEN THESE PARCELS NEXT TO THEM I BELIEVE THIS ONE IS R3. AND THEN THIS ONE IS LC WHICH KIND OF FOLLOWS THAT STEP ZONING. GOING TRANSITIONING FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO YOUR MEDIUM OR HIGH DENSITY TO YOUR COMMERCIAL. THAT'S THE SAME TRANSITION THAT THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR HERE AS WELL. GOING FROM YOUR R1, YOUR SINGLE FAMILY TO R3 TO YOUR LLC. THESE LOTS HERE CURRENTLY ARE ABOUT JUST UNDER TWO AND A HALF ACRES TOTAL 2.4 ACRES. THERE WE DID HOLD A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING, WHICH THERE WAS ONE NEIGHBOR THAT CAME, THESE ONES RIGHT HERE, RIGHT ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY. CONCERNS OF TRAFFIC, OF COURSE. CONCERNS OF ACCESS TO THEIR LOT WHILE CONSTRUCTION IS GOING. SO WE TALKED TO THEM ABOUT THAT. ALSO THE CONCERNS ABOUT ROCK BECAUSE THERE IS ROCK AND HOW DO THEY, YOU KNOW, BLAST OR CHIP OR DO THAT. WITH ROCK. SO REGARDLESS OF WHAT GETS DEVELOPED IT, THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO HAVE AN INTERESTING TIME REMOVING ROCK. BUT THEY KNOW THAT AND THEY'RE WILLING TO TAKE ON THAT BURDEN FOR THEM.

WITH THAT, ALLOWING THE ZONE CHANGE ALLOWS FOR THIS PIECE OF INFILL THAT HAS BEEN A STRUGGLE TO INFILL BECAUSE OF THE ROCK THERE AND THE COST THAT IS ASSOCIATED WITH ROCK. COULD POTENTIALLY ALLOW FOR SOME GOOD INFILL TO ACTUALLY HAPPEN INSIDE THE CITY. IN REGARDS TO TRAFFIC, WE DID HAVE A PRE DESIGN MEETING WITH THE CITY ON THIS AND WE TALKED TO THEM ABOUT CONTINUING CONTINUING THE THIS ROAD THAT LOOPS THAT WOULD CONTINUE OUT. SO THAT THE THESE HIGHER DENSITY. ZONE OR LOTS WOULDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION TO GET UP TO VERNON AND THEN UP TO LINCOLN. SO THERE WOULD BE AN EASY WAY FOR THEM TO GET UP AND OUT OF THE SUBDIVISION ONTO A MAJOR ROAD. THE COMP PLAN FOR GENERAL URBAN DON'T DENOTES IT AS A AS A MIX OF COMMERCIAL AND SERVICE USES. CONNECTIVITY TO RESIDENTIAL. THESE ALSO CONTAIN A WIDE VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES. INCLUDING SMALL SINGLE UNITS, DUPLEXES, TRIPLEXES, FOURPLEXES, AND COURTYARD APARTMENTS. BUNGALOW COURTS, TOWNHOMES, MULTIPLEXES AND LIVED WORK UNITS. SO CURRENTLY WITH THE R1 ZONE, IT'D BE VERY HARD TO MEET THAT GENERAL URBAN DESIGNATION.

WHEREAS THE R3 ZONE THAT WE'RE SEEKING FOR FALLS IN LINE BETTER WITH THAT COMP DESIGNATION ON THERE. YOU KNOW, THERE IS SOME WALKABILITY TO YOU KNOW, FRED MYERS IS CLOSE. THERE'S OTHER COMMERCIAL PROPERTY IN THE AREA THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE SOME WALKABILITY FACTORS TO IT. AND ALLOW FOR MORE SEE MORE HOUSING TYPES IN IN THIS AREA RATHER THAN JUST A STRAIGHT R1, AND THEN HAVE A GOOD TRANSITION TO THE COMMERCIAL ZONES ABOVE. I THINK THAT'S THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT THERE ARE ANY. YEAH. JUST FOR MY OWN INFORMATION, THE PROBLEMS WITH THE ROCK. HOW DOES THAT AFFECT THE DEVELOPMENT AND WHAT DO THEY HAVE TO DO. ARE WE TALKING BLASTING TO BE ABLE TO DEVELOP THIS. SURE. SO FOR THE ROCK BECAUSE THAT THAT ROAD IS NOT DEVELOPED YET. NOT BUILT YET. THE DEVELOPER WILL HAVE TO BUILD

[00:55:04]

THAT ROAD AND EXTEND UTILITIES. THROUGH THAT ROAD. AND THE STRUGGLE COMES MOSTLY GETTING UTILITIES SEWER AND WATER. WATER HAS A SIX FOOT MINIMUM BURIED DEPTH. SO IN DOING THAT, WE AND THE CITY DON'T NECESSARILY DESIGNATE HOW THEY DO IT. SO TYPICALLY THE CONTRACTOR DEVELOPER WILL DO THE MOST COST EFFECTIVE WAY. WHETHER THAT IS BLASTING OR WHETHER IT'S CHIPPING AND REMOVING THAT ROCK OUT. SO AGAIN NOT NOT NECESSARILY. WE'RE NOT GOING TO TELL THEM HOW TO DO IT. IT JUST HAS TO BE DONE. I WE HAD A PROJECT TO THE EAST OF THIS THAT WAS NOT SURROUNDED BY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND WAS A LONG STRETCH THAT THAT NEEDED TO BE BLASTED. I, I FIND IT HARD THAT THEY WOULD BLAST IN THIS AREA. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE FOR THEM, BUT AGAIN, THEY COULD, I GUESS LONG ANSWER SHORT, THEY WOULD PROBABLY EITHER BLAST OR HAVE TO CHIP IT AND EVERYTHING. SO THE CONCERN ABOUT MY NEIGHBORS MIGHT INVOLVE NOISE DURING CONSTRUCTION, DUST, ALL THAT KIND OF THING MORE THAN WOULD NORMALLY BE EXPECTED. IN CONSIDERATION TO THE ZONE OR TO THE ROCK? BECAUSE OF THE ROCK. IS THIS GREATER ISSUE FOR THE NEIGHBORS? BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF NOISE AND DUST, MORE THAN THEY WOULD IF THE ROCK WEREN'T THERE? POTENTIALLY, YEAH, THERE'S POTENTIAL FOR MORE DISTURBANCE WITH ROCK INVOLVED.

YES. AGAIN, REGARDLESS IF THIS IS R-1 ZONE OR R3 ZONE, THE ROCKS THERE AND THE ROAD'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE PUT IN. YES, BUT BUT I WOULD I WOULD SAY MOST LIKELY THERE IS MORE MORE DEGREE OF DIFFICULTY AND POTENTIALLY MORE SOUND OR DISTURBANCE TO NEIGHBORS BECAUSE THERE IS ROCK THERE, YOU KNOW. AND, AND IN DOING AND IN AND IN WITH THAT BEING THERE, THE DEVELOPER ONE COSTS MORE TO DO SO. AND TWO, THE CONTRACTOR HAS TO TAKE MORE STEPS TO BE ABLE TO MITIGATE THAT AS WELL. SO IT'S I, I THE CITY THE CITY'S NOT JUST FROM WHAT I HAVE EXPERIENCED. THE CITY IS NOT WELL, THERE'S ROCK THERE. IT'S HARDER TO FLOG THE CITY. STILL, IT'S GOING TO HOLD THEM TO STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS OF DUST ABATEMENT AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT. STILL GREAT. THANK YOU. YEAH. YEAH, BUT I THINK YOU'RE ADDRESSING IT A LITTLE BIT ALREADY. BUT I THINK THE WE'RE LOOKING AT AN ISSUE OF ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY HERE, WHERE THE LOTS ARE GENERALLY NOT BUILDABLE AT THE CURRENT ZONING, JUST ECONOMICALLY. YEAH. IT MAKES IT WITH, WITH THE ROCK AND THE EXTRA THAT NEEDS TO COME WITH THAT. IT'S VERY HARD TO BE ABLE TO BUILD THAT ROAD WITHOUT ROCK, LET ALONE WITH ROCK, AND PUT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THERE. YEAH.

OKAY. AND WHICH SHOWS AS THIS HAS SAT VACANT FOR A LONG. TIME. OKAY. I THINK YOU'RE GOOD FOR NOW. AND NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM CITY STAFF. THANKS. SO THE REQUESTED ACTION THIS EVENING IS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REZONE FROM R-1 SINGLE DWELLING RESIDENTIAL TO R-3.

MULTI-FAMILY, MULTIPLE DWELLING RESIDENTIAL TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL. I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND GIVE YOU JUST A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY WITH THIS PROPERTY. IT WAS PLATTED IN 1950 AND ANNEXED INTO THE CITY IN 1951, WITH AN INITIAL ZONING OF RESIDENTIAL. I REQUEST TO REZONE THE PROPERTY FROM R1 TO R2 WAS DENIED IN 1978. THE 1978 REZONE WAS PART OF A LARGER AREA THAT INCLUDED THE COMMERCIAL ZONING OR COMMERCIAL ZONING REQUEST AS WELL. IT APPEARS FROM THE MINUTES THAT THE COMMISSION AND NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBORS HAD MORE CONCERN WITH THE COMMERCIAL ZONING AT THE TIME THAT RESULTED IN THE DENIAL, AND IT'S REMAINED R1 EVER SINCE. SO STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE APPLICATION AND FIND THAT THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AS MARY MENTIONED, IS GENERAL URBAN, AND HE DID A GREAT JOB KIND OF EXPLAINING THAT TRANSECT TO THE PUBLIC IN THE COMMISSION THIS EVENING. SO I WON'T REPEAT THAT UNLESS YOU ASK ME TO. OKAY. BUT WHILE IT DOESN'T MEET ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, STAFF FEELS IT MEETS THE INTENT FOR THE REASONS THAT I'LL LIST IN THIS STAFF REPORT.

THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A COMPLETE APPLICATION FOR THE REZONE JANUARY 30TH OF 2025. AND

[01:00:03]

PER CODE, THEY DID DO A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING, WHICH WAS HELD ACCORDING TO SECTION 11 6-8 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE. AGAIN, THE REQUEST IS TO GO FROM OUR IS TO CHANGE THE PROPERTY ZONE TO R3. THE PROPERTY ISN'T CURRENTLY CONTIGUOUS TO R3 ZONES, BUT AS BARRY MENTIONED, THERE ARE SEVERAL DIFFERENT ZONES IN THIS AREA. AS YOU CAN SEE, WE HAVE THE R1. JUST NORTH OF THAT IS LC, WHICH IS LIMITED COMMERCIAL. LIMITED COMMERCIAL ALLOWS FOR A RESIDENTIAL DENSITY OF 35 UNITS PER ACRE. TO THE WEST WE HAVE PARK. THIS IS PINECREST GOLF COURSE. AND THEN OVER HERE, AS I MENTIONED, IS R3. SO THERE IS R3 AS A ZONING DESIGNATION IN THE AREA. AND JUST NORTH OF THAT WE HAVE MORE R3 AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING. SO THERE'S A VARIETY OF ZONES IN THIS AREA. SO AS I WAS MENTIONING, THE PROPERTY IS NOT CONTIGUOUS TO R3, BUT THERE'S A VARIETY OF ZONING DISTRICTS IN THE AREA, WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL URBAN TRANSITS IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE EXISTING R1 ZONE WOULD NOT ALLOW THE VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES COMPLEMENTING THE GENERAL URBAN TRANSECT. THE R2 OR HIGHER DESIGNATION IS NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT HOUSING UNITS BEYOND SINGLE UNIT RESIDENTIAL. THE DESCRIPTION OF THE GENERAL URBAN SPECIFICALLY LISTS BELLAIRE AS AN EXAMPLE OF THE URBAN GENERAL URBAN TRANSECT. THE PROPERTY IS NORTH. NORTH OF THIS IS LC, WHICH IS LIMITED COMMERCIAL, AND IT'S COMMON FOR THE ZONING DESIGNATION TO TRANSITION FROM A LOWER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO A HIGHER DENSITY DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. AND I MENTIONED THAT BECAUSE AGAIN, I'LL JUST REPEAT THIS. THE LC ZONE ALLOWS FOR HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AT 35 UNITS PER ACRE. R3 WOULD BE A GREAT BUFFER BETWEEN THE R1. THEN YOU'D HAVE R3 AND THEN THE LC, WHICH IS A, SO YOU'D HAVE A TRANSITION OF THE DIFFERENT DENSITIES.

SO THE ZONE IS SITUATED OR SORRY I'M GOING TO START OVER HERE. THE R3 ZONE PROVIDES FOR THAT RESIDENTIAL ZONE WHICH IS CHARACTERISTIC OR CHARACTERIZED BY THE VARIETY OF DWELLING TYPES WITHIN A DENSER RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT. THE ZONE IS SITUATED ALONG OR NEAR A MAJOR STREET, SUCH AS A COLLECTOR AND ARTERIAL, AND AN ARTERIAL. AS BARRY MENTIONED, JUST NORTH OF THIS IS LINCOLN. YOU CAN JUST BARELY SEE IT IN THE VERY TOP. WELL, THAT'S THE INDUSTRIAL ZONE, AND NORTH OF THAT WOULD BE ANYTHING. IT'S ALSO GENERALLY LOCATED NEAR PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES. STAFF GENERALLY WOULD NOT RECOMMEND A HIGHER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO TRAVEL THROUGH THE LOWER DENSITY NEIGHBORHOOD, AND ACCESS TO AND ACCESS TO A MAJOR STREET NETWORK. BUT AS BARRY MENTIONED AGAIN, I'LL JUST REPEAT THIS. THERE IS A PROPOSAL AT THE MOMENT FOR WEBSTER. I THINK THAT'S WEBSTER WEAVER, WEBBER TO EXTEND OVER TO VERNON AND THEN UP TO LINCOLN. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED NEAR LINCOLN, WHICH IS A PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL. AND THIS AREA HAS THE POTENTIAL TO BE LOCATED NEAR PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS TO COMMERCIAL SERVICES. THE IMPACT ON THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD IS FURTHER REDUCED DUE TO THE SMALLER LOT SIZE. WHICH WILL LIMIT THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS THAT CAN BE CONSTRUCTED THERE. THE R3 ALLOWS FOR SINGLE DWELLING UNITS, AND THE R3 ACTS AS A BUFFER BETWEEN THE R1 AND LC ZONE, AS I MENTIONED, THE AVERAGE LOT SIZE AND RESIDENTIAL IN FOR THE RESIDENTIAL LOTS IN BEL AIR, ONE AND TWO IS 7200FT■. THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE IN AN R1 ZONE IS 7000FT■S. 11 OF THE LOTS IN BEL AIR DIVISION ONE AND TWO HAVE ASKED FOR VARIANCES FOR SETBACKS. SO THAT TELLS US THAT MAYBE THE SIZE AND SHAPE OF THE LOTS WEREN'T VERY. CONGRUENT WITH THE R1 ZONE, WITH THE REQUIRED SETBACKS. THE APPLICANT ALSO INDICATES THAT THEY WILL HAVE A LAVA ROCK ON PROPERTY, WHICH MAKES IT CHALLENGING FOR THE SINGLE UNIT RESIDENTIAL REZONING. THE PROPERTY TO R3 WILL PROVIDE MORE HOUSING OPTIONS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THESE LOTS. AND I'M SORRY, I

[01:05:06]

DIDN'T MEAN TO GO INTO THAT MUCH DETAIL, BUT IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM FOR YOU. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY, GOOD. THE EXTENSION OF WEBBER. WEAVER.

WOULD THAT BE PLANNED OUT DURING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT STAGE? I'M NOT SURE. WE WOULD REQUIRE A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE EXTENSION OF WEAVER, BUT IT WOULD REQUIRE A FINAL. CLAVIUS.

OKAY, GOTCHA. SO. BECAUSE TO ME, ZONING IN R3 KIND OF HINGES ON, LIKE, BEING ABLE TO GET BETTER ACCESS TO. WHAT IS THAT, VERNON? AND SO, IN ORDER. SO ESSENTIALLY, IF A PRELIMINARY PLAT CAME OUT AND IT DIDN'T HAVE THE EXTENSION OF WEBBER ON THERE, IS THAT A POINT WHERE WE COULD. DISCUSS THAT ESSENTIALLY DURING THE FINAL PLAT APPLICATION PROCESS? THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT THE BOARD COULD DISCUSS. OKAY. BECAUSE OR OR WHAT ABOUT EVEN PRELIMINARY PLAT? BECAUSE WHAT I'VE NOTICED IS A LOT OF FINAL PLAT STUFF IS PURELY JUST LIKE, YEP, THIS IS ALMOST 99% OF WHAT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT SAYS. WE'RE JUST KIND OF NOW DOING THE FINAL PLAT STUFF. SO TO ME, IT WOULD REALLY NEED TO SHOW UP IN THE PRELIMINARY PLAT STAGE, BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE A LOT OF THINGS CAN BE. THAT'S JUST HOW I FEEL ABOUT THAT. I MEAN, IS THAT A POINT WHERE IT COULD BE DONE THERE AS WELL? THAT'S. YES. HOWEVER, I DON'T KNOW. I'M NOT SURE WE WOULD REQUIRE A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THIS, SO IT WOULD NEED TO BE DONE WITH THE. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. GOTCHA. BECAUSE IT'S NOT A SUBDIVISION I UNDERSTAND NOW. YEAH. OKAY. SO WITH THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, WE'RE TALKING MORE STREET NETWORK. YEAH. THIS IS SUCH A SMALL EXTENSION THAT I'M NOT SURE WE WOULD CONSIDER IT AS WORK. RIGHT. I UNDERSTAND. OKAY. I'M THINKING BIGGER, YOU KNOW, TYPE OF SUBDIVISION. BUT BECAUSE YOU'RE SAYING BECAUSE THIS IS SMALLER, YOU COULD PROBABLY GET IT ALL DONE WITHIN A FINAL PLAT. CORRECT. THAT MAKES SENSE. AND THEN IT MAKES THE PROCESS QUICKER. OKAY, THAT SOUNDS COOL. OKAY. THAT WAS MY ONLY QUESTION.

SO YEAH, I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IN SOME SPOTS THE AREA IS DRAWN AS ONE BOX AND SOMETIMES SOMETIMES AS THREE ON OUR MAPS. THIS IS NOT A REQUEST TO COMBINE THESE LOTS INTO ONE LARGE ONE. IT'S GOING TO STAY AS NOT AT THE MOMENT. NO, IN FACT, THESE LOTS ARE BROKEN UP INTO THREE SQUARES BECAUSE THEY'RE BEING ASSESSED AS ONE LOT, BUT THEY'RE ACTUALLY, I BELIEVE, TEN LOTS HERE. THANK YOU. YEAH. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION, WE'RE DISCUSSING LOTS FOUR THROUGH FIVE OF BLOCK NINE, LOTS THREE THROUGH SEVEN OF BLOCK FIVE AND SIX AND LOTS TEN AND 11 OF BLOCK 11. AND THEN THE RIGHT OF WAY. SO WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY TALKING ABOUT THREE INDIVIDUAL LAWS. WE'RE ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT MULTIPLE LOTS. OKAY. AND THEN AS A FOLLOW UP TO THAT, WE'VE DISCUSSED THE EXTENSION OF WEBER STREET A COUPLE OF TIMES, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'VE ADDRESSED ROYAL AND ROLAND HERE. IS ARE THOSE ALSO PLANNED TO BE EXTENDED HERE OR THOSE CORRECT. THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE EXTENDED. AND IT'S ALREADY PLATTED RIGHT AWAY. SO THE DEVELOPER WILL HAVE TO FINISH CONSTRUCTING THOSE TWO. AND WEAVER. YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. AWESOME. OKAY. I THINK WE'RE GOOD FOR NOW, SO I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING. SAME STANDARDS AS BEFORE. ALL RIGHT. I GUESS WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND. WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT AMONGST OURSELVES. SO I REALLY LIKE THE IDEA OF THIS R3 MAKES SENSE. SOMETHING YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER IS, IS THAT LC, WHICH IS JUST TO THE NORTH. ANYTHING THAT'S RESIDENTIAL IS HELD TO R3 STANDARDS. SO EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT THE SAME ZONE. ON A RESIDENTIAL SIDE, IT IS, YOU KNOW, ONE STEP ABOVE WHAT R3 WOULD BE. R3 ALSO IS PURELY RESIDENTIAL AND NOT COMMERCIAL.

SO THAT'S ONE NICE AVENUE AS WELL. SO I LIKE THIS. INFILL IS GOOD. LET'S USE UP PROPERTY THAT WE ALREADY HAVE WITHIN THE CITY AND NOT EXPAND OUT. SO THIS IS THE TYPE OF STUFF I LIKE TO SEE.

[01:10:04]

AND AS AN ECONOMIC, YOU KNOW, PROSPECTIVE. YEAH, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO RAISE THE DENSITY IN ORDER TO MAKE THOSE ROADS WORK BECAUSE THAT LAVA ROCK IS NOT IT'S VERY PROHIBITIVE. THERE'S A REASON WHY IT LOOKS LIKE THEY WERE GOING, GOING, GOING. AND THEN THEY HIT THE ROCK AND THEY'RE LIKE, OH, MAYBE WE'LL FIGURE THIS OUT LATER. AND NOW WE'RE 75 YEARS LATER. SO THIS IS THIS IS A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. YEAH. ANYONE ELSE? I JUST AGREE ON EVERYTHING.

COMMISSIONER EILER SAID MY CONCERNS WITH THE REZONE WOULD JUST BE ON DIRECTING HIGHER DENSITY TRAFFIC THROUGH AN EXISTING, LOWER DENSITY NEIGHBORHOOD. I THINK WITH THE, YOU KNOW, THE IDEA THAT WEAVER STREET WILL GET COMPLETED AS PART OF THAT DEVELOPMENT. AND I DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS. OKAY. PERFECT. ALL RIGHT. WELL, WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION. PERFECT. I MOVE THAT WE. OH, WAIT. I'M SORRY. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? OH. I'M SORRY. YEAH. SORRY. YEAH, I'M MESSED UP. YEAH. GO FOR IT. I WAS RIGHT THE FIRST. YEAH. I MOVE THAT WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REZONE FROM R-1 SINGLE DWELLING RESIDENTIAL TO R3. MULTIPLE DWELLING RESIDENTIAL TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FOR. OH, MY GOODNESS, THIS IS LONG. YOU DON'T HAVE TO READ ALL THAT. GREAT. YEAH. THIS PROPERTY.

YEAH. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SECOND THAT? I'LL SECOND IT. PERFECT. WE'LL DO A ROLL CALL.

VOTE. COMMISSIONER SCOTT. HI, CANTU. I EILER, I MEAN, I. MOTION PASSES. PERFECT. SO NOW

[3.V. 7:00 PM PUD24-003 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT for Petersen Place Habitat for Humanity. SW ¼ of Section 15, Township 2 North, Range 37 East. Located north of Broadway, east of the Great Western Canal, south of Stella Drive, west of Ernest Drive.]

WE'RE GOING TO GO TO THE LAST PUBLIC HEARING OF THE EVENING, WHICH IS THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR PETERSEN PLACE, HABITAT FOR HUMANITY. AND WE WILL FIRST HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT. HI, I'M CONNOR ERB, REPRESENTING HL, LOCATED AT 101 SOUTH PARK AVENUE IN IDAHO FALLS. WE'RE PRESENTING AGAIN FOR THE PUD, FOR A HABITAT FOR HUMANITY PROJECT KNOWN AS PETERSON PLACE, LOCATED AT THE WESTERN EDGE OF THE IDAHO FALLS PROPERTY. PRINCIPALLY IN A 1.44 ACRE LOT. THE GENERALIZED CONCEPT OF THE PROJECT IS JUST TO PROVIDE A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT HOUSING OPTIONS UNDER THE DIRECT CONTROL OR UNIFIED CONTROL OF HUMANITY. GET TO WHERE ACTUALLY SHOWS WITH A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT BUILDINGS THAT WILL BE PHASED OUT IN MULTIPLE DIFFERENT PHASES. THE REASON WE ARE BACK HERE TODAY IS THIS WAS ALREADY APPROVED ONCE IS THERE WAS AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE DENSITY OF THE HOUSING HERE. IT WENT FROM 73 UNITS TO 87 UNITS. STILL WITHIN THE DENSITY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ZONE AND STILL MAINTAINING THE SAME AMOUNT OF ROUGHLY THE SAME AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING. JUST A LITTLE BIT OF VARIATION THERE.

AND THE OTHER THING THAT ADJUSTED AS A RESULT OF THAT IS THE PHASE LINE BECAME A LITTLE BIT CLEANER, AS OPPOSED TO HAVING ONE OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS, THESE LITTLE POD SHAPES THAT YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO SEE HERE PARTIALLY CUT OFF IN THE PHASE LINE. NOW IT JUST CLEANLY CUTS, AND ONLY THREE POD NEIGHBORHOODS WILL BE PRODUCED IN THE FIRST PHASE. SO FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. PERFECT. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? NO. OKAY. I HAVE ONE QUESTION. COULD YOU ROUGHLY TELL ME WHERE THE ADDED DENSITY WAS PLACED? IS IT KIND OF JUST SCATTERED OUT EVENLY OR WHAT? WHAT WAS KIND OF THE THOUGHT BEHIND THAT OR THE NEED BEHIND THAT? THERE WAS AN ADJUSTMENT TO A HANDFUL OF THE BUILDINGS TO MOVE FROM DUPLEX BUILDINGS TO FOURPLEX BUILDINGS, ALONG WITH A PAIR OF SINGLE FAMILY BUILDINGS BEING COMBINED AND TURNED INTO A DUPLEX. THOSE ARE LOCATED IN POD NEIGHBORHOODS ONE THREE AND THEN, I BELIEVE, SEVEN AND EIGHT. SO TWO OF THEM IN THE FIRST PHASE HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED. AND THEN IN THE THIRD PHASE, SOME HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED.

OKAY. PERFECT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. I THINK YOU'RE GOOD FOR NOW. WE WILL HEAR FROM CITY STAFF NOW. THANK YOU. MENTIONED. YES. THIS MIGHT FEEL LIKE A LITTLE BIT LIKE DEJA VU FOR YOU BECAUSE THE COMMISSION DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR THIS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT IN JUNE OF 2024. AND SO IT IS COMING BACK TO YOU TONIGHT. IT IS A REQUESTED ACTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE AMENDED PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR PETERSON PLACE.

[01:15:03]

HABITAT FOR HUMANITY TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL. SO THIS WAS SUBMITTED IN APRIL AND THE COMMISSION LOOKED AT IT IN JUNE, AND THE CHANGE WAS FROM 73 UNITS TO 87. THE ZONING ORDINANCE DOES OUTLINE, AND I INCLUDED IT IN YOUR PACKET WHAT IS CONSISTED OF A MINOR CHANGE AND A MAJOR CHANGE. AND THIS FELL UNDER A MAJOR CHANGE BECAUSE IT WAS MORE THAN AN INCREASE OF 5% OF UNITS.

IT DID HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO BE LOOKED AT AGAIN. WITH THAT SAID, THE CHANGE IS VERY SUBTLE IN THE LAYOUT. IT'S SO SUBTLE IN THE LAYOUT. I WON'T TELL YOU HOW LONG IT TOOK ME TO FIND THE DIFFERENCE. AND SO REALLY, THE CHANGE REALLY IS OVER HERE. AT THIS LAST END OF THAT, SOME ADDITIONAL PARKING WAS ADDED. AND THOSE FOOTPRINTS THOUGH DID STAY THE SAME. THOSE DUPLEXES BECAME FOURPLEXES. AND THE PARKING ALREADY HAD ADDITIONAL PARKING. SO THE PARKING THAT THEY ADDED REALLY THERE'S STILL THEY STILL HAVE ADDITIONAL PARKING IN THIS ONE. IT STILL MEETS ALL THE REQUIREMENTS. IT'S STILL GOING TO BE PHASE THE SAME WAY. AGAIN. IT'S JUST THAT INCREASE OF UNITS THAT HAD TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE COMMISSION. AND THIS WAS AND I INCLUDED I INCLUDED ALL THE ELEVATIONS IN YOUR PACKET. BUT THIS IS WHAT THE FOURPLEX IS, THE NEW ELEVATION. THAT'D BE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT YOU SAW IN JUNE. I'M TRYING TO THINK RIGHT NOW. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE, I GUESS, THEN, FROM JUNE, IS THAT A FINAL PLAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED AND IT IS IN REVIEW, AND HAVE SEEN THAT AS WELL. THE PRELIMINARY PLAT IS FULLY APPROVED. IT'S GONE THROUGH ALL THE TECHNICAL REVIEWS AND REALLY THE CHANGE IN THIS IS NOT CAUSING A LOT OF TECHNICAL CHANGES AS WELL TO THE TO THE PUD THROUGH THE STAFF. SO OTHER THAN THAT, IF YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM. IS THE FOURPLEXES AND THE. SO THESE ARE THIS FOURPLEX. IT'S YOU KNOW OVER YOU KNOW IT'S A FOUR STORY OR TWO STORY. ARE THE UNITS ON THE SECOND STORY TECHNICALLY THEIR OWN LOT ESSENTIALLY LIKE IT'S LIKE IT'S OWN PRIVATE, LIKE IT COULD BE. HOW AM I TRYING TO EXPLAIN THIS? I MEAN, THIS IS VERY WHAT, LIKE OWNERSHIP OF IT? YEAH. SO DOES EACH UNIT HAVE ITS OWN OWNERSHIP OR IS IT JUST THE WHOLE BUILDING IS JUST ONE OWNERSHIP? CURRENTLY THEY'RE THEY'RE NOT. IF IT WAS IF THEY'D HAVE TO CONTEMPLATE IT AT A LATER DATE IF THEY WANTED TO DO IT THAT WAY. OKAY. SO IT IS JUST ONE OWNER FOR THE WHOLE THING. IT WOULD IT WOULD BE FOR NOW, I BELIEVE. AND IT'S POSSIBLE THAT HE CAN CONSIDER. OKAY, I'LL LET MY AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING. YOU CAN YOU CAN READ ABOUT THAT RIGHT. RIGHT NOW THE FINAL PLAT IS THE LARGE LOT. AND THEY'RE REALLY THEY'RE PLANNING THE ROADS. YEAH. FOR THE PAD. OKAY. SOUNDS GOOD. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? NO. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, SO NOW TIME FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING AGAIN. SAME STANDARDS AS BEFORE. JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND BE HAPPY TO HEAR FROM YOU. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO ANYONE.

GOING ONCE, TWICE. OKAY. I GUESS YOU ALL JUST WANT TO WATCH A SHOW TONIGHT, SO THAT'S GREAT.

PERFECT. SO. OKAY, THEN I GUESS WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND. YEAH, IF YOU WANT TO COME BACK UP HERE AND. YEAH, ADDRESS THAT OWNERSHIP THING. YEAH. OWNERSHIP OF INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS IS NOT NECESSARILY THE WAY THIS IS LAID OUT. THIS IS MEANT TO BE A COMPLETELY HABITAT FOR HUMANITY CONTROLLED, UNIFIED LOT. SO EACH INDIVIDUAL BUILDING WILL BE THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE WILL HAVE LIKE A SHARE IN THE SYSTEM THAT HABITAT FOR HUMANITY HAS. WE'LL HAVE SOME VOTES ON THE WAY. THE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE CONTROLLED OR WHAT UTILITIES ARE ESTHETIC BENEFITS ARE THERE. WHATEVER ELSE THEY DECIDE TO DO WITH SOME OF THEIR AMENITIES, LIKE SHOP THAT WILL BE AVAILABLE AFTER CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE, BUT HOUSES ARE NOT INDIVIDUALLY OWNED IN THE STRICT SENSE. IT IS UNIFIED AND CONTROLLED. SO WHETHER IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY HOME THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD OR IT'S ALL THE WAY TO THIS FOURPLEX AND IT'S ALL OWNED BY HABITAT FOR HUMANITY, BUT IT'S MORE OF LIKE A SHARE BASED. YES. OKAY, SO IT'S NOT LIKE YOUR TYPICAL APARTMENTS. NO. OKAY. GOTCHA. COOL. I PRETTY SURE I THE LAST TIME YOU GUYS WERE HERE, I UNDERSTOOD, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT WAS CLEAR FOR THE RECORD, SO. OKAY.

PERFECT. THANK YOU. OH, ONE MORE QUESTION. SO HOW MANY? I'M SORRY. SO HOW MANY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ARE THERE NOW VERSUS BEFORE? LIKE WHAT INCREASED THE MOST OF. AND SO YOU MADE

[01:20:07]

FOURPLEXES. THERE WASN'T FOURPLEXES BEFORE, BUT NOW YOU HAVE FOURPLEXES. IS THERE STILL THE SAME AMOUNT OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES? OR IF SOME OF THOSE HAVE BEEN TURNED INTO TWIN HOMES? THERE WAS A REDUCTION OF TWO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT WERE PAIRED TOGETHER AND TURNED INTO A FOURPLEX. OKAY, THE COUNT RIGHT NOW IS 35 COTTAGE HOMES, SO THERE'S A SMALLER 23 SINGLE UNITS AND SEVEN FOURPLEX BUILDINGS REPRESENTING 28 UNITS. ONE MANAGEMENT HOUSE. CORRECT.

THE FIRST PHASE WOULD BE DEVELOPED TO HAVE 30 UNITS IN TOTAL. OKAY. PERFECT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. OKAY. I THINK WE'RE ALL GOOD. DO YOU GUYS HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY? NO. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, WELL, THEN I WILL GO AHEAD AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION. YES, SIR. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE AMENDED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR PETERSON PLACE. HABITAT FOR HUMANITY TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? PERFECT. ROLL CALL PLEASE. COMMISSIONER SCOTT. I, CANTU I. I MIA. AYE. MOTION PASSED. OKAY. OKAY. SWEET. NOW

[4.I. 7:00 PM PLT25-002: FINAL PLAT for Fairway Estates Division No. 30. SE ¼ of Section 31, Township 3 North, Range 38 East. Located on the NE corner of Cypress Creek and Sage Lakes Boulevard.]

WE ARE ON TO OUR BUSINESS ITEMS. NO MORE PUBLIC HEARINGS. SO FOR ITEM NUMBER SIX, THE FINAL FAIRWAY STATES DIVISION NUMBER 30. THIS I WORK I HAVE A PROFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIP WITH THE DEVELOPER. SO I'M GOING TO RECUSE MYSELF. AND I'M GOING TO HAVE COMMISSIONER CANTU RUN THE SHOW. SO EVERYONE THANK YOU. OH WAIT BEFORE YOU DO THAT. BUT SO I GUESS THIS IS THE BUSINESS ITEM FOR THE FINAL PLAT, FAIRWAY ESTATES DIVISION 30. IS THERE NOT GOING TO BE THAT THERE IS.

ONCE AGAIN CONNOR ERB REPRESENTING HL AT 101 SOUTH PARK AVENUE. WHAT I'M PRESENTING HERE IS A FINAL PLAT FOR A SINGLE RESIDENTIAL UNIT TO BE DEVELOPED AS PART OF FAIRWAY ESTATES DIVISION 30. THE LOT IS. LET ME GET TO THE RIGHT PAGE YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO SEE. THE LOT IS A TWO POINT OR 0.293 ACRES LARGE, LOCATED IN BLOCK 30, DIVISION 30, AND IT'LL BE CALLED LOTS TWO OF HER WORK AND HER CITY'S UNDERSTANDING. WE'VE MET SETBACKS AND SIZING ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS TO DEVELOP THIS AREA. ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU. CAN WE HEAR FROM THE STAFF? YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO THIS IS LIKELY THE EASIEST THING THAT I'VE EVER BROUGHT BEFORE THE BOARD FOR THE COMMISSION. BUT I CAN EXPAND ON IT. I CAN TAKE THE NEXT 45 MINUTES, BUT I WON'T.

IT'S A SINGLE LOT LIKE THE APPLICANT SPOKE ABOUT. IT IS IN AN R2 ZONE. SO THERE THERE COULD BE MORE THAN ONE HOUSING UNIT. BUT WE HEARD THAT THERE WAS GOING TO BE ONE. OTHERWISE, I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD THERE. IT SEEMS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. SO WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR ANY COMMENTS OR. OKAY. HEARING NONE I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I.

I MOVED THAT WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT OF FAIRWAY ESTATES DIVISION 30 TO BRANDON CITY COUNCIL. THANK YOU. SECOND. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I DON'T KNOW, DO WE NEED A ROLL CALL? YEAH. NO. LET'S DO A VOICE. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. YEAH.

OKAY. MR. IMPECCABLE. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER CANTU, FOR HANDLING THAT FOR ME. AND I WANT TO GET IN TROUBLE AGAIN. OKAY, PERFECT. SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO GO TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, RESOLUTION

[4.II. 7:00 PM Snake River West Urban Renewal District: Resolution validating conformity of the First Amendment to the Urban Renewal Plan for the Snake River West Urban Renewal Project with the City of Idaho Falls’ Comprehensive Plan.]

VALIDATING CONFORMITY OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN FOR THE SNAKE RIVER WEST URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT. OKAY. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS, AND THANKS FOR STAYING UP LATE THIS EVENING WITH ALL YOUR ITEMS. I'M WADE SANNER I, I'M THE CDS DIRECTOR, BUT ONE OF THE

[01:25:02]

OTHER HATS THAT I WEAR IS I'M ACTUALLY THE DIRECTOR OF THE IDAHO FALLS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY. SO I REPRESENT THEM IN TERMS OF PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS AND THOSE TYPE OF THINGS. SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU DON'T TYPICALLY SEE. SO I'LL JUST WALK YOU THROUGH IT A LITTLE BIT.

WHAT THIS IS DOING IS WHENEVER A DISTRICT. SO THE IDAHO FALLS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY I SHOULD EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE BIT. IT'S NOT ATTACHED TO THE CITY. IT'S SEPARATE FROM THE CITY. SO IT'S A SEPARATE BOARD SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU ARE DOING HERE AS A COMMISSION. AND WHAT THEY DEAL WITH IS THEY DEAL WITH TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS. SO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A DISTRICT IS WHAT USUALLY A PROPERTY OWNER WILL COME BEFORE THEM AND REQUEST THAT THEIR PROPERTY OR GROUPS OF PROPERTIES WILL COMBINE AND COME BEFORE THE INFRA DISTRICT AND WANT TO BE INCLUDED. OR IF THE BOARD AND WANT TO BE INCLUDED INTO AN INFRA DISTRICT. AND WHAT THIS ALLOWS THEN IS IT ALLOWS THEM TO BE TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING. AND WHAT THAT DOES, IT'S THE REDEVELOPMENT TOOL THAT WE HAVE IN THE STATE OF IDAHO, SO THAT A PROPERTY WILL GET TAXED AT A BASE LEVEL. AND WHAT THE INCREMENT IS, IS WHAT THE FUTURE IS FOR A TIME FRAME FOR 20 YEARS IS WHAT IT IS BY STATE STATUTE. SO THAT INCREMENT, THEN WE CAN USE THAT. IT'S KIND OF LIKE A SPECULATION OF THOSE DOLLARS. WE CAN USE THOSE TO CONSTRUCT INFRASTRUCTURE. A LOT OF TIMES THE JOKE IS IN INFRA IS THAT WE USE IT A LOT FOR BLASTING ROCK.

THAT'S NOT ENTIRELY WHAT WE DO. WE DO WE CAN PUT IN SEWER LINES, WE CAN DO STREETS, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND THOSE TYPE OF THINGS. SO ONE OF THESE GROUPS OF PROPERTY OWNERS, THERE'S THREE IN THIS CASE, THEY HAVE REQUESTED TO BE IN A NEW ERA DISTRICT. AND BACK IN THE WINTER OF FALL, WINTER, THIS AREA THAT WAS YELLOW WAS PART OF. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I GO THROUGH THIS CORRECTLY. IT WAS PART OF THE EAGLE RIDGE URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT. AND AS I SAID BACK IN THE FALL, THEY REQUESTED ACTUALLY TO THESE TWO PROPERTIES RIGHT HERE. THIS ONE AND THIS ONE ARE UNDER THE SAME OWNERSHIP. THEY WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THAT DISTRICT AT THE TIME. THAT PROPERTY OWNER HAS SOLD THE PROPERTIES, AND THE NEW PROPERTY OWNER WANTED TO COME IN SO THAT THEY COULD FINISH SOME OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR PIONEER ROAD. SO THAT'S WHY THEY REQUESTED TO DE-ANNEX FROM THE DISTRICT, NOT DE-ANNEX FROM THE CITY AS A WHOLE. SO THIS IS STILL IN CITY BOUNDARIES. THEY REQUESTED TO DE-ANNEX AND THEN CREATE A NEW DISTRICT WITH THIS TRIANGLE PIECE HERE AT THE BOTTOM, WHICH AT THE TIME, TO MAKE IT EVEN MORE CONFUSING, WAS NOT PART OF THE CITY, AND THEY ANNEXED INTO THE CITY SO THAT THEY COULD BE PART OF THIS URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT. THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE FUTURE IS THAT THESE TWO PROPERTIES WOULD BECOME MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING, AND THIS PROPERTY WOULD BECOME SOME TYPE OF MIXTURE OF COMMERCIAL USES, PROBABLY GOING TO BE A HOTEL AND RESTAURANT. JUST TO ORIENT YOU, THIS IS THE MOUNTAIN AMERICA CREDIT UNION CENTER JUST TO THE SOUTH. AND THEN WE HAVE A CANAL ON THE BORDER TO THE EAST.

SO THAT'S WHAT THIS IS BEFORE. THIS IS THE FIRST STEP IN ACTUALLY CREATING THAT DIFFERENT DISTRICT. AND ELIGIBILITY STUDY WAS CONDUCTED TO SEE IF, IF FINANCIALLY THIS COULD ACTUALLY BASICALLY HOLD THE WEIGHT OF THAT TAX INCREMENT. THAT ELIGIBILITY STUDY ALSO MAKES SURE THAT THE IF THE DISTRICT IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH IDAHO STATE STATUTE 52, 18 AND 50 2903, THE ELIGIBILITY STUDY WAS CONDUCTED CONDUCTED BY AN OUTSIDE CONSULTANT. THAT CONSULTANT FOUND THAT 11 OF THE 14 CRITERIA THAT ARE PART OF THE STATE STATUTE WERE MET. SO IF YOU CAN HAVE A MAJORITY, YOU USUALLY DON'T HAVE 100%, BUT A MAJORITY OF THEM WILL ALLOW YOU TO ACTUALLY CREATE THE DISTRICT, AND ALSO THAT IT FINANCIALLY COULD HOLD UP AS A DISTRICT AS WELL. SO THEN ONCE THAT ELIGIBILITY STUDY WAS DONE, THEN WE HAVE TO SEE WHERE WE'RE AT NOW. SO IN COMPLIANCE WITH IDAHO STATE STATUTE 52 008, IT'S REQUIRED THAT BASICALLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS DOES WHAT THE INTENT OF THIS URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT, DOES IT MEET THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN? SO I SHOW YOU THIS TRANSECT. THE TRANSECT FOR THIS AREA IS A MIXED USE

[01:30:06]