[00:00:07]
COUNCIL. THURSDAY, AUGUST 27TH AND REALLY WELCOME. I'M SORRY WE'RE A COUPLE OF MINUTES LATE.
I'M GLAD OUR CLOCK IS A COUPLE MINUTES SLOW. SO ANYWAY, WE'RE GLAD TO HAVE YOU HERE. IF YOU CAN, PLEASE ESTABLISH OUR QUORUM TO THE CLERK. GOOD EVENING, COUNCILOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRANCIS HERE. COUNCILOR RADFORD, PRESENT. COUNCILOR DINGMAN HERE.
COUNCILOR FREEMAN HERE. COUNCILOR LARSON HERE. COUNCILOR LEE HERE. THANK YOU.
MAYOR, YOU HAVE A QUORUM. AND ALSO WE HAVE MICHAEL HUFFMAN AND YUSUF HAFIDA ONLINE. OH, GREAT. ARE THEY HERE FOR THE. I BELIEVE THEY'RE HERE FOR THE CDS. OKAY. OKAY. SO THEY'LL BE PART OF A HEARING LATER. YES. WE WILL BE SURE TO REMEMBER THAT THEY ARE HERE. I WOULD ASK DIRECTOR HOLMES FROM OUR PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT TO LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TONIGHT. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
[Additional Item]
COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCIS HAS A POINT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SHARE WITH THE COUNCIL IN THE AUDIENCE TONIGHT. EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE, I TRY TO REMIND MYSELF TO PAUSE AND THINK ABOUT THE MEANING OF THAT PLEDGE, SINCE IT'S A PERSONAL, SOLEMN PROMISE THAT WE MAKE WHEN WE SAY IT. SO I PUT THIS STATEMENT TOGETHER. EVERY SO OFTEN, IT BECOMES IMPORTANT TO PAUSE AND REFLECT ON THE MEANING OF THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND THE WORDS LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. CERTAINLY, THESE FIVE WORDS ARE A GUIDE FOR GOOD. GOVERNMENT DECISIONS IN THIS REPUBLIC HAVE TO BALANCE INDIVIDUAL LIBERTIES WITH JUSTICE FOR THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE, AND ALL OF ITS MEMBERS. THE COUNTRY HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN THROUGH TIMES WHEN ONE GROUP OR ANOTHER HAVE BEEN SINGLED OUT FOR HATE AND DISCRIMINATION. AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL. WE'RE IN ONE OF THOSE TIMES NOW. THE PLEDGE IS A PERSONAL COMMITMENT NOT TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS HATE AND DISCRIMINATION. WORDS THAT DEMEAN OTHERS HAVE NO ACCEPTABLE PUBLIC SPACE IN THE PUBLIC SPACE OR PLACE. HAYWARD VIOLATE OUR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO OURSELVES AND OUR REPUBLIC. LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL IS A CITY GOVERNMENT COMMITMENT IN IDAHO FALLS. IT'S THE REASON THIS COUNCIL STANDS TO SAY THESE WORDS BEFORE EACH MEETING, MAKING THE PLEDGE OF COMMUNITY PERSONAL, SOLEMN COMMITMENT IS IN THE HANDS OF EACH INDIVIDUAL IN THE COMMUNITY, WITH THEIR CHOICE OF WORDS EVERY DAY. THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER FRANCIS. FOR THOSE WHO DON'T KNOW, MR. FRANCIS TAUGHT GOVERNMENT FOR I DON'T I DON'T WANT TO SAY 40 YEARS. IT COULD HAVE BEEN 60 YEARS, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF YEARS THAT IDAHO FALLS HIGH SCHOOL AND AND IS WELL RESPECTED FOR, FOR HIS UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT ALL OF THIS MEANS WHEN YOU PUT IT TOGETHER. SO WE APPRECIATE HIM BEING ON OUR COUNCIL. DO WE HAVE ANY STAFF RESPONSE TO ANY PRIOR COMMENT THAT CAME LAST[3. Staff Responses to Prior Public Comment and Other Updates]
WEEK? CHIEF JOHNSON? SO QUICKLY, QUICKLY, JUST A FEW FOLLOW UPS. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.SO THERE WAS A COMMENT ABOUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT AND HOW IF THE BOULDER DOESN'T HOLD THE SECOND AMENDMENT, I THINK IN GENERAL, IDAHO IS CONSIDERED A SECOND AMENDMENT FRIENDLY STATE.
THE SPECIFIC QUESTION I HAD TO DO WITH PROPERTY. THERE WERE A PAIR OF HANDGUNS THAT WERE FOUND ON SOMEONE'S PROPERTY, AND THEY FOUND THEM AND THEY TURNED THEM IN. AND IT WAS A QUESTION OF WHETHER YOU COULD THEN CLAIM THE HANDGUN UNDER THE FOUND PROPERTY CLAUSE. IF YOU FIND A BUNCH OF MONEY, YOU TURN IT IN A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME. UNDER IDAHO LAW, YOU CAN THEN CLAIM THAT MONEY AT THE TIME IN 2016 2017, THE OPINION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY WAS THAT GUNS WERE EXEMPT FROM THAT FOUND PROPERTY LAW, AND THAT THEY WERE SOMETHING THAT IT EXEMPTED GUNS, EXPLOSIVES AND OTHER DANGEROUS CHEMICALS. AND SO THOSE SHOULDN'T BE RETURNED.
I DID ALSO CHECK WITH THE MR. JONES, OUR CURRENT CITY ATTORNEY, AND HE WENT AND RELOOKED AT THE LAW AND GUNS, EXPLOSIVES, THINGS LIKE THAT ARE EXEMPTED IN THAT FOUND
[00:05:02]
PROPERTY THING. SO WE'RE COMMITTED TO PEOPLE'S RIGHTS. BUT IN A SPECIFIC CASE OF FOUND PROPERTY, WE CANNOT TRANSFER OWNERSHIP OF GUNS OR EXPLOSIVES OR THINGS LIKE THAT TO, TO CITIZENS IF THEY FIND THEM. THE OTHER ONE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP WAS THAT HAD TO DO WITH TRAFFIC.SO THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST COMMON COMPLAINTS THAT WE GET AT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IS PEOPLE SPEEDING OR PEOPLE DOING SOMETHING THAT THEY THINK IS UNSAFE IN TRAFFIC IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS. AND I JUST WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE PEOPLE'S COMMENTS ABOUT THAT. WHAT THEY SEE IS VERY, VERY REAL. WITH THAT, I'VE MADE ABOUT 10,000 TRAFFIC STOPS IN 2025, AND WE'RE ON PACE TO MAKE ABOUT 10,000 TRAFFIC STOPS AGAIN IN 2020. SIX POINTS. ABOUT 20% OF EVERYTHING WE DO IS A TRAFFIC STOP. IN OTHER SETTINGS, WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT AVAILABLE TIME. WE CAN EXPAND THAT A LITTLE BIT, BUT WE HAVE TO DO MORE TRAFFIC STOPS WE'RE CURRENTLY DOING, AND 10,000 IS A LOT OF TRAFFIC STOPS. SO I JUST WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE PEOPLE'S FEELINGS THAT THERE ISN'T AN OFFICER ON THIS PARTICULAR INTERSECTION OR AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME, AS I WAS COMING TO THIS MEETING TODAY, HAD I BEEN ABLE TO SAY, I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE THE MEETING, I HAD TO WATCH A COUPLE TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS. IF I WAS TO STOP THEM, I WOULD NOT KNOW WHERE I WAS SUPPOSED TO BE. THE PEOPLE SEE POLICE OFFICERS NOT MAKING A STOP WHEN SOMEONE'S VIOLATING THE LAW. ODDS ARE THEY'RE ON THEIR WAY TO ANOTHER CALL AND THEY SIMPLY CAN'T DO IT ANYWAY. I JUST WANT TO GIVE THE FEEDBACK ON THAT, ON TRAFFIC STOPS. AND THE LAST ONE HAD TO DO WITH THE COMMON AND LICENSE PLATE READERS. SO JUST FOR AN UPDATE, OUR TWO WEEK AUDIT HAS BEEN IN PLACE AND WE ARE RANDOMLY SELECTING LICENSE PLATE SEARCHES EVERY TWO WEEKS. AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, OUR OUR LICENSE PLATE READER COMPANY THAT PROVIDES THAT FOR US. THEY FLAG THINGS THAT THEY THINK MAY, MAY BE SOMETHING THAT THEY THINK MIGHT, MIGHT BE OFF. ALSO, AS IT TURNS OUT, PRETTY MUCH EVERY MEDIA COMPANY IN THE REGION AND MOST OF THE COUNTRY ARE WATCHING US. AND WE'VE GOTTEN CONSTANT QUESTIONS ABOUT DIFFERENT USES, LICENSE PLATE READERS AS WE GO ON. AND WE'VE DONE DEEP DIVES IN EVERY SINGLE ONE THAT WE RANDOMLY SELECTED, PLUS THE ONES THAT PEOPLE POINTED OUT IN EVERY SINGLE CASE, THE THE SEARCH ON LICENSE PLATE READER SYSTEM HAS BEEN DONE ACCORDING TO POLICY AND COMPLY WITH THE LAW. SO WE'RE DOING REALLY GOOD THERE. AND WITH THAT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, CHIEF. WE APPRECIATE ALL OF THE FOLLOW UP THAT YOU ARE DOING. AND AND I KNOW THAT YOU BOTH ALSO REACHED OUT TO THE PERSON WHO GAVE THAT PUBLIC TESTIMONY. SO WE APPRECIATE THAT WORK. AND LOOKING TO ANY OTHER DIRECTORS, I THINK PRIMARILY WE DO GET
[4. Public Comment]
POLICE COMMENTS, WHICH DOES OPEN US UP NOW TO PUBLIC COMMENT. THIS WOULD BE THE TIME TO COME AND TALK ABOUT ANYTHING YOU WOULD LIKE TO TO COUNSEL. WE WON'T RESPOND, BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, WE HAVE OUR DIRECTORS IN THE ROOM. THEY WILL REACH OUT TO YOU AND THEN WE WILL HAVE OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM TO RESPOND TO US PUBLICLY. THAT ALLOWS US TO HAVE BE ABLE TO KEEP THE OPEN MEETING LAWS. CORRECT. EXCUSE ME. KEEP MAKE SURE WE'RE LEGAL WITH OUR OPEN MEETING LAWS. SO IF YOU ARE HERE FOR ANY OF THE LEGISLATIVE ITEMS LISTED LATER, NOW WOULD NOT BE THE TIME. BUT IF YOU WOULD JUST LIKE TO COME AND MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT, YOU ARE WELCOME TO THAT. AND WE WOULD ASK YOU TO GIVE YOUR NAME. YOU DON'T HAVE TO SAY YOUR ADDRESS.YOU JUST HAVE TO SAY WHETHER YOU'RE A RESIDENT OF IDAHO FALLS, AND TRY AND KEEP YOUR COMMENTS TO THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS STU EVANS AND I AM A RESIDENT OF IDAHO FALLS. I'VE BEEN FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. I'M PRESIDENT OF THE DESERT EAGLES MODEL AIRPLANE FLYING CLUB, AND I'M HERE WITH TY TOM, WHO'S OUR TREASURER. THE MODEL AIRPLANE FLYING CLUB IS AN ACADEMY OF ACADEMY OF MODEL AERONAUTICS, AMA GOLD LEADER CLUB. AND WE WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO VISIT AND HOPEFULLY GETTING TO KNOW US A LITTLE BIT BETTER. WE ARE A GROUP OF GREAT FOLKS WHO LOVE AIRPLANES AND REALLY LOVE FLYING MODELS OF THEM. WE ENJOY HELPING PEOPLE GET INTO MODEL AIRPLANE FLYING AND SUPPORTING THE LOCAL COMMUNITY. WE'VE BEEN AROUND FOR ABOUT 30 YEARS, AND OUR HOME HAS BEEN IN A GRAVEL PIT LEASED FROM BONNEVILLE COUNTY, AND LIFE WAS GOOD, BUT NOW THE GRAVEL IS NEEDED AND WE HAVE TO MOVE. WE. WE FEEL FORTUNATE TO HAVE BEEN ABLE TO MOVE TO NOISE PARK SINCE OUR ARRIVAL. WE'VE DISCOVERED HOW TRULY UNIQUE, POPULAR, AND IRREPLACEABLE THIS FANTASTIC FACILITY REALLY IS, AND WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO OUR FUTURE OUT THERE. NOISE PARK OFFERS US A LOCATION THAT FITS WHAT WE DO. WE CAN EASILY SATISFY FAA AND SAFETY REQUIREMENTS. WE ENJOY AN INCREASED ALTITUDE LIMIT OF 700FT. WE ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR REMOTE ID BY BEING RECOGNIZED AS AN FAA RECOGNIZED IDENTIFICATION AREA OR FREE OF. AND BEST OF ALL, WE CAN FLY FROM AN AMAZING FIELD WHILE STAYING OUT OF EVERYBODY ELSE'S WAY. OUR NEW FIELD WAS ONCE A SOCCER FIELD AT ROWLAND HALL SCHOOL IN SALT LAKE CITY. THE ARTIFICIAL TURF WAS ROLLED UP,
[00:10:02]
CUT UP AND TRUCKED UP TO ITS NEW HOME TO BECOME A SUPERB 400 FOOT BY 70 FOOT RUNWAY WITH PITS, SPECTATOR AND TRAINING AREA THAT WILL SOON BE THE ENVY OF THE RC WORLD. WE WANT TO THANK PJ HOME AND HIS FOLKS, ESPECIALLY JOSH STEVENS AND HOLLY PETTENGILL, FOR HELPING US WITH SUPPORT AND GUIDANCE. DO YOU WANT TO THANK ZACH JONES AND THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE FOR HELPING US WITH THE LEASE? THEY WERE A BIG HELP. AND THANKS TO ALL THE FOLKS AT NOISE PARK FOR WELCOMING US INTO THE COMMUNITY. AND FINALLY, WE WANT TO INVITE ALL OF YOU TO OUR OFFICIAL GRAND OPENING STARTING ABOUT 9:00 ON SATURDAY THE 29TH. THERE'LL BE FREE FOOD AND BUDDY BOX FLIGHTS. IF ANYBODY'S INTERESTED, BRING YOUR BRING YOUR FAMILIES. SO ONE SATURDAY, THE 19TH AND 29TH, THE 19TH. IT IS THE NINTH. IT IS THE 19TH. 19. OKAY. YOU HAVE A FLIER. AND THAT'S SO THAT'S THE RIGHT DATE. AND AGAIN, THANKS FROM THE DESERT EAGLES.WE APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT, MR. EVANS. I WAS OUT THERE A WEEK AGO AND I SAW THAT TURF. I THOUGHT WE BARELY HAVE TURF AT OUR HIGH SCHOOLS DROP OUT AT NOISE PARK. SO NOW I KNOW WHY.
SO IT'S A PRETTY WONDERFUL FIELD. IT REALLY IS. AND WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO A LOT OF YEARS OUT THERE. WE HOPE. THANK YOU. THANKS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY. THANK YOU. HELLO, JIM DALE, CITY RESIDENT. I JUST WANTED TO COME IN TONIGHT TO PERSONALLY THANK THE COUNCIL, THE MAYOR, THE CHIEF OF POLICE, EVERYBODY THAT WAS INVOLVED WITH HELPING US HASH OUT THAT LIQUOR ORDINANCE AND THAT SERVER TRAINING. I AM SUPER PLEASED WITH THE ORDINANCE. I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA. I JUST WANT TO THANK EVERYONE THAT HELPED AND EVERYONE THAT STRUGGLED THROUGH IT, THAT FINALLY FOUND SOMETHING THAT WORKS FOR EVERYBODY. SO THANK YOU GUYS SO MUCH FOR HEARING US, LISTENING TO US AND WORKING WITH US. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. MR. OKAY. LONG TIME RESIDENT OF IDAHO FALLS. AND YEAH, I'M PART OF THE DESERT EAGLES WITH STU. I JUST WANTED TO TELL YOU THAT FIELD IS JUST DAMN AWESOME. WE HAVE BEEN TOLD IT'S THE BEST FIELD IN IDAHO. PLUS, WE ARE THE ONLY FIELD IN THIS PART OF THE STATE. THE OTHER TWO CLUBS HAVE FOLDED UP. SO WHAT WE HAVE OUT THERE IS ONE OF A KIND AND IT'S ON CITY PROPERTY. AND THANK YOU BECAUSE WITHOUT YOU GUYS WE WOULD REALLY BE HURTING. SO I HOPE WE HAVE A LONG TERM RELATIONSHIP AND WE HAVE FUNDRAISERS EVERY YEAR, THE THIRD WEEK OF JULY, IF YOU WATCH, WE HAVE A PAINTBALL SHOOT AND WE RAISE THAT MONEY FOR THE FOR CHARITIES. SO MR. EDWARDS FORGOT TO TELL YOU THAT HE ALSO TEACHES A CLASS AT WHITE PINES HIGH SCHOOL EVERY YEAR. SO WE'RE INVOLVED IN THE KIDS. SO WITHOUT THAT FIELD OUT THERE, WE COULDN'T DO ANY OF IT. SO JUST THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS COLTON HATTON. I AM A RESIDENT OF IDAHO FALLS, AND I'M HERE TONIGHT REPRESENTING STRONGER IDAHO FALLS. I'D LIKE YOU TO THINK ABOUT THE DIFFERENCES IN PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC IN DOWNTOWN IDAHO FALLS AND 17TH STREET. FOR JUST A MINUTE. DOWNTOWN IS CHOCK FULL OF PEDESTRIANS, ACTIVITIES, OUTDOOR DINING, AND VIBRANCY. IT'S FULL OF LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT ARE THAT HIRE LOCAL WORKERS, EMPLOY ACCOUNTANTS WHO WORK IN IDAHO FALLS, AND CATER TO OUR SPECIFIC NEEDS IN THE COMMUNITY AND INTERESTS IN THE COMMUNITY. 17TH STREET, MEANWHILE, HAS VERY FEW PEDESTRIANS, NO CYCLISTS, NO CHILDREN PLAYING, NO TEENS HANGING OUT, NO FRIENDS MEETING UP, NO OUTDOOR DINING AND IS COVERED IN, FRANKLY SOULLESS BIG BOX STORES THAT SUCK MONEY OUT OF OUR COMMUNITY AND SEND IT TO EXECUTIVES AND FUND MANAGERS IN FARAWAY STATES WHO COULD NOT CARE LESS ABOUT OUR BEAUTIFUL CITY. THERE ISN'T SOME MAGICAL FORCE THAT MAKES ONE SO MUCH BETTER THAN THE OTHER. IT ALL COMES DOWN TO STREET DESIGN.
17TH IS WHAT'S KNOWN IN OUR CIRCLES AS A STROAD. A STREET IS A DESTINATION, A COMPLICATED PLACE FULL OF INTERACTIONS, BUSINESSES, PEDESTRIANS, AND CITY LIVES. A STREET IS A DESTINATION. A ROAD, ON THE OTHER HAND, IS A HIGH SPEED CONNECTION BETWEEN TWO PLACES.
YELLOWSTONE HIGHWAY, I-15 AND US 20 ARE ALL ROADS. THEY HAVE VERY FEW CONFLICT POINTS AND THEY ARE DESIGNED TO BE SAFE IN THE EVENT OF A MISTAKE AND OFFICIALLY MOVE LOTS AND LOTS OF CARS. 17TH STREET ATTEMPTS TO DO BOTH AND IS EXTREMELY BAD AT BOTH. IT TRIES TO COMBINE TWO FEATURES OF STREET AND A ROAD, WHICH IS WHY WE CALL IT A ROAD. AN INTENTIONALLY UGLY
[00:15:03]
PORTMANTEAU OF THE TWO WORDS. BY COMBINING THE COMPLEXITY AND COMPLEX CONFLICT POINTS OF A STREET WITH THE HIGH SPEEDS OF A ROAD, WE GET THE WORST OF BOTH WORLDS. STRODE'S LIKE 17TH ARE INEFFICIENT, UGLY, EXPENSIVE, FINANCIALLY UNSUSTAINABLE, AND MOST OF ALL, EXTREMELY DANGEROUS. OTHER ROADS IN THE CITY INCLUDE SUNNYSIDE, BANCHORY, WOODRUFF AND LINCOLN. WE HERE AT IDAHO FALLS STAND COMPLETELY FOR REMOVING THE STRODE FROM OUR CITY, CHOOSING TO EITHER CONVERT THEM TO A FULL STADIUM FULL OF BUSINESSES AND LIFE, OR TO A FULL ROAD TO EFFICIENTLY GET AROUND THE CITY. WE ALSO STAND COMPLETELY AGAINST THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW ROADS. 50 YEARS OF ROADS IN THE CITY HAVE FAILED TO PRODUCE RESULTS THAT SUSTAIN THEMSELVES WITH THEIR OWN TAXES, KEEP THE RESIDENT MINOR FALL SAFE. BY EMBRACING BETTER SAFETY DESIGN, THE CITY WILL SEE RENEWED ECONOMIC ACTIVITY, ESPECIALLY BY LOCAL BUSINESSES, BETTER AIR QUALITY CHILDREN AND TEENS THAT CAN NAVIGATE BY THEMSELVES WITHOUT BEING FORCED TO RELY ON THEIR PARENTS. THAT CHAUFFEURS AND A HEALTHIER, LIVELIER AND MORE LIVABLE CITY FOR ALL. THANK YOU. JUST IN TIME. THANK YOU, MR. HATTON. ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO GIVE PUBLIC COMMENT TONIGHT? OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THOSE WHO CAME FORWARD. IT LOOKS LIKE THE CHIEF CAN TAKE A WEEK OFF. SO. WE ARE NOW TO THE PART OF OUR AGENDA WHERE IT IS[4. Consent Agenda]
THE CONSENT AGENDA. SO IF WE ARE READY FOR A COUNCIL MEMBER, IF THEY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AND WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A DIRECTOR COME AND ADDRESS ANYTHING ON THE CONSENT AGENDA OR PULL ANYTHING OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT THEY DON'T APPROVE OF, NOW WOULD BE THE TIME TO DO THAT.OKAY. IF NOT, WE ARE READY FOR A MOTION ON THE CONSENT. I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE, ACCEPT OR RECEIVE ALL ITEMS IN THE CONSENT AGENDA ACCORDING TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS PRESENTED. DO YOU WANT ME TO READ THEM? YES, PLEASE. OKAY. THERE ARE FOUR ITEMS FOR PRESIDENT. WE HAVE THREE FOR MUNICIPAL SERVICES. WE HAVE THE TREASURER'S REPORT FOR MAY AND FOR JUNE OF 26. AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE THE SALE OF POLICE DEPARTMENT VEHICLES TO BANNOCK COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE.
AND FROM THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK, WE HAVE THE JULY 26TH LICENSING THAT INCLUDES 77 NEW BUSINESS PERMITS AND LICENSES, 13 RENEWED BUSINESS LICENSES, AND 20 NEW AND RENEWED CONTRACTOR LICENSES. OKAY, WE HAVE A FIRST ON THAT CONSENT, AND WE'RE READY FOR A SECOND, SECOND, FIRST, AND A SECOND. RADFORD. ALL RIGHT. LARSON. YES. FREEMAN. YES. FRANCIS I.
DINGMAN. YES. LEE. YES. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. AS WE MOVE THEN TO OUR REGULAR AGENDA, OUR
[5.A.1) Ordinance Adding Title 4, Chapter 2.1, Alcohol Server Training]
FIRST ITEM IS FROM OUR CITY ATTORNEY. AND THIS IS THE ALCOHOL SERVING TRAINING ORDINANCE. SO THIS ORDINANCE IS FAMILIAR TO COUNCIL. WE'VE HAD SEVERAL SESSIONS ON THIS. I THINK STRETCHING BACK TO MR. JONES. IS YOUR MIC ON? IT IS. OKAY. OKAY. BASICALLY WITH THIS ALCOHOL SERVER TRAINING ORDINANCE DOES, IF ADOPTED, WOULD REQUIRE SERVERS OF ALCOHOL AND CERTAIN SECURITY PERSONNEL THAT ARE INVOLVED WITH ALCOHOL ESTABLISHMENTS TO OBTAIN ALCOHOL SERVER TRAINING. AND THE AIM IS TO CREATE A MORE ENJOYABLE AND SAFER ALCOHOL DRINKING EXPERIENCE IN OUR CITY. AS WAS MENTIONED EARLIER DURING PUBLIC COMMENT, WE'VE HAD A LOT OF PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS PARTICULAR ORDINANCE, AND COUNCIL HAS RESPONDED. WE'VE WE'VE WE'VE AMENDED IT SEVERAL TIMES, ESPECIALLY WE'VE REDUCED THE PENALTIES. SO THERE'S AN ESCALATING PENALTY FROM INFRACTION TO MISDEMEANOR INSTEAD OF GOING STRAIGHT TO A MISDEMEANOR. ONE OF THE ONE OF THE MORE RECENT CHANGES JUST FOR THE FOR THE PUBLIC'S INFORMATION IS THAT THE THE ALTHOUGH THIS ORDINANCE, IF ADOPTED, WOULD TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY, THE REQUIREMENT TO HAVE ALCOHOL SERVER TRAINING WOULD NOT BECOME EFFECTIVE UNTIL NOVEMBER 15TH OF THIS YEAR. THE REASON FOR THAT IS TO ALLOW THE BUSINESSES IN OUR AREA TO COME UP TO SPEED AND HAVE EVERYBODY GET THAT ALCOHOL SERVER TRAINING. IN ADDITION, IT ALLOWS THE IDAHO FALLS POLICE DEPARTMENT TO GIVE THREE FREE TRAININGS SO THAT PEOPLE CAN GET THE ALCOHOL SERVER TRAINING FREE OF CHARGE IF THEY COME TO THOSE MEETINGS. IN ADDITION, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IDAHO FALLS POLICE DEPARTMENT WILL BE ADOPTING ONLINE CERTAIN ONLINE PLATFORMS THAT ALLOW FOR THIS ALCOHOL SERVER TRAINING TO BE DONE ONLINE, AND THAT THAT WILL BE ANOTHER OPTION FOR PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO OBTAIN THIS TRAINING.[00:20:05]
SO IT GIVES EVERYBODY PLENTY OF TIME TO BE ABLE TO GET THIS TRAINING DONE. IN ADDITION, I BELIEVE HOW MANY YOU KNOW, HOW MANY WE'VE HAD SO FAR TO DATE SERVER TRAININGS TO IDAHO FALLS POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS ALREADY HAD TWO TRAININGS WHERE THEY'VE BEEN ABLE TO CERTIFY PEOPLE. SO WITH THAT, I STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT COUNCIL MAY HAVE OR. I WANT TO. AS I SEE THEM PREPARING FOR THE MOTION, I WANT TO THANK OUR TWO LIAISONS TO THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT AND COUNCILOR JONES FOR ALL OF THE WORK THAT THEY CONTINUE TO DO ON THIS AND THE ALCOHOL ORDINANCE. I KNOW THEY ARE TAKING A LOT OF TIME. SO THANK YOU. AS YOU DO THIS MOTION, YOU WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT I'LL MAKE A MOTION, BUT I DO WANT TO ALSO SAY THAT WE IN WORKING THIS, WE'VE TRIED TO MAKE IT AS LITTLE IMPACT AS POSSIBLE ON LICENSE HOLDERS SO THAT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT NOT ONLY WILL DO THREE TRAININGS BEFORE NOVEMBER 15TH, BUT THEY'RE COMMITTED TO FOUR TRAININGS EVERY YEAR THAT ARE NO COST TO TO ANYONE IN THE CITY TAKING THEM. SO WITH THAT, I MOVE COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE, AMENDING TITLE FOUR BY ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 2.1 UNDER A SUSPENSION OF RULES REQUIRING THREE COMPLETE READINGS AND REQUEST TO BE READ BY TITLE AND PUBLISHED BY SUMMARY. AND I WANT TO MAKE ONE MORE QUICK STATEMENT. I FORGOT THE REASON. IT SAYS 2.1 WILL BE CLEARLY IN THE CITY CODE, A SECTION THAT SAYS SERVER TRAINING. IT'LL BE EASILY ACCESSED, ACCESSIBLE, AND THAT WAS DONE AT THE REQUEST OF THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT. THANK YOU. I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. FRANCIS I. FREEMAN. YES.DINGMAN. YES. LARSON. YES. RADFORD. I LI. YES. MOTION CARRIES. AND I'LL READ THAT IN AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF IDAHO FALLS, IDAHO, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF IDAHO, ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 2.1 TO TITLE FOUR TO ESTABLISH AN APPROPRIATE SERVER TRAINING PROGRAM, REQUIRE SERVERS OF ALCOHOL SECURITY PERSONS AND THEIR IMMEDIATE MANAGERS TO HOLD AND MAINTAIN A CERTIFICATE SHOWING COMPLETION OF AN APPROVED SERVER TRAINING PROGRAM. REQUIRE ALCOHOL LICENSE HOLDERS TO ENSURE THAT SERVERS OF ALCOHOL SECURITY PERSONS AND THEIR IMMEDIATE MANAGERS HOLD AND MAINTAIN SUCH CERTIFICATES, PROVIDE APPLICABLE DEFINITIONS AND PROVIDE PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS. CODIFICATION, PUBLICATION BY SUMMARY AND ESTABLISHING EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU. OUR NEXT ITEM IS
[5.B.1) Speed Limit Resolution - N Utah Ave from Broadway to Lindsay Blvd]
COMING TO US TONIGHT FROM PUBLIC WORKS. AND I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND HANDLE THAT THERE.OKAY. OH, OH, HE DID SEND SOMEONE. ALL RIGHT. NOW I'M NOT GOING TO SAY ANYTHING AT ALL.
NO YOU'RE ON NOW. BUT NO PRESSURE BECAUSE HE IS FILLING IN AND HE DOES DESIGN ROADS FOR COLBY. SO PUBLIC WORKS IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH A SPEED LIMIT OF 35MPH ON NORTH UTAH AVENUE BETWEEN BROADWAY AND LINDSAY BOULEVARD. CURRENTLY, THE SPEED LIMIT IN THAT SECTION IS, SAY, 25MPH FROM PAIN CARRY TO BROADWAY, THE SPEED LIMIT IS 35MPH, AND FROM LINDSAY, THE INTERSECTION OF UTAH, LINDSAY NORTH IS ALSO 35MPH. WE. WE DID DO A STUDY, A SPEED STUDY, AND THE SPEED STUDY RECOMMENDS THAT WE INCREASED THAT SPEED LIMIT FROM 25 TO 35 TO MATCH THE EXISTING SPEED LIMITS IN THE AREA, AS WELL AS MATCH THE CORRIDOR. THIS WAS DISCUSSED IN THE JUNE 22ND WORK SESSION, AND THERE WAS NO CONCERNS BY COUNCIL AT THE TIME, AND I'LL ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANY DISCUSSION? JUST ONE DISCUSSION. JUST I, I AM GOING TO SUPPORT THIS, BUT I DO WANT TO JUST TAKE THIS MOMENT TO SAY THAT GENERALLY 25 MILES AN HOUR SAVES LIVES. I THINK THE NUMBERS OF 1 OR 2 IN TEN THAT IF YOU'RE HIT BY A CAR AT 25 MILES AN HOUR, YOU'LL SURVIVE.
BUT WHEN YOU GO UP TO 35, IT IS MARKEDLY MORE DANGEROUS, LIKE 4 OR 6 IN TEN DIE. AND I THINK IN THIS CASE, THERE'S NOT A LOT OF PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY IN THIS SECTION. AND I THINK THAT'S WHY I'M NOT GOING TO STRONGLY OPPOSE. BUT I JUST THINK FOR US ALL TO THINK ABOUT THAT. AND THEN ALSO, MANY OF YOU HAVE HEARD ME SAY THIS BEFORE, THAT THE CONCERNS ABOUT THE 85TH PERCENTILE CONVERSATION, I'M JUST GOING TO THE BOTTOM AT EVERY MOMENT THAT WE BRING THAT UP. SO THAT'S NOT WHAT HAPPENED HERE, DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THAT. WE'RE TRYING TO BE CONSISTENT, AND WE'RE TRYING TO DO SOME THINGS TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND. BUT BUT IN GENERAL, I'D LIKE US TO CONTINUE TO LEARN HOW TO DO THESE SPEED STUDIES TO, TO HAVE
[00:25:03]
SAFETY BE AS MUCH OF AN ISSUE AS, AS MOVING CARS QUICKLY. AND COUNSELOR, I HAVE A QUICK COMMENT TO AND IT'S NOT, IT'S SORT OF ON TOPIC, BUT WHEN I'M LOOKING AT THE SPEED STUDIES FOR FOR THIS, I WAS THINKING THAT IT SEEMS 35 IS AWFULLY FAST FOR THE SECTION COMING INTO BROADWAY FROM THE ROUNDABOUT IN TERMS OF. THERE'S SO MANY ENTRANCES AND EXITS TO BUSINESSES. SO AT SOME POINT I THINK WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT SPEED AND SEE WHAT PEOPLE ARE DOING THERE. SO IT'S JUST A SUGGESTION LONG TERM FOR PUBLIC WORKS. BUT I SEE WHY WHEN YOU CROSS BROADWAY, IT DOES PICK UP SPEED. AND THERE'S THERE'S SEEMINGLY FEWER OF THOSE DRIVEWAY INTERSECTIONS THAN THERE ARE RIGHT IN THAT BUSY AREA AROUND WALMART. IT'S JUST MY THOUGHT. YEAH, I THINK, I THINK AS WE IDENTIFIED, THIS IS A, IT'S A TRUE GAP, RIGHT? BECAUSE YOU REALLY HAVE THIS LIKE BLOCK AND A HALF, THAT'S THIS, THAT'S THAT, THAT'S A SPEED LIMIT THAT, THAT AGAIN, I THINK GROWING UP HERE, I REMEMBER THE GREYHOUND BUS STATION BEING ON THAT CORNER. AND I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY WHY WE HAD IT, BECAUSE WE DID HAVE ALL THIS PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC. I READ THE GREYHOUND BUS HOME FROM COLLEGE. I SPENT MANY TIMES ON THAT INTERSECTION. SO I, I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY WHY I ACTUALLY THINK THE SPEED, THE AVERAGE SPEEDS THAT WE STUDIED HERE, I'M NOT SURE THEY'RE REALLY GOING TO CHANGE MUCH BECAUSE IT TAKES YOU A MINUTE TO SPEED UP, RIGHT? LIKE YOU'RE MAKING TURNS AND YOU'RE CROSSING. SO I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S ACTUALLY GOING TO BE MUCH OF A DIFFERENCE. BUT I DO THINK THAT IT'S BEEN WILDLY INCONSISTENT. AND I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, ONE MIGHT I, I KNOW I HAD SOMEONE SAY IT JUST FELT LIKE A SPEED TRAP, RIGHT? LIKE IT DIDN'T BECAUSE IT JUST DIDN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. AND OF COURSE, THAT WAS NEVER OUR INTENTION. SO I THINK THIS IS A SMART CHOICE. AND I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH A SPEED LIMIT OF 35MPH ON NORTH UTAH AVENUE FROM BROADWAY TO LINDSAY BOULEVARD, AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS. SECOND. FREEMAN. YES.RADFORD. HI, LEE. YES. DINGMANN. YES. FRANCIS I. LARSON. YES. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. OUR NEXT
[Items 5.C.1 & 5.C.2]
ITEM TONIGHT IS COMING TO US FROM IDAHO FALLS POWER. AND I HATE TO SAY THAT IT IS ANOTHER BID REJECTION, BUT IT IS SO FROM IDAHO FALLS POWER. WE WELCOME DIRECTOR FREDERICKSON MAYOR COUNCIL. UNFORTUNATELY, THAT IS WHY WE'RE HERE THIS EVENING, AND IT PROBABLY IS JUST AS EASY TO TALK ABOUT THESE TWO SPECIFIC BIDS TOGETHER. THE INTENT OF THIS WAS ACTUALLY TO BUY 212.5 SUBSTATION TRANSFORMERS AND ONE TURBINE TRANSFORMER.UNFORTUNATELY, WHEN WE RECEIVED THOSE BIDS, THERE WAS A GREAT DEAL OF RANGE IN THE COSTS SUPPLIED ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE. AND THEN ALSO, AS WE TRY TO DETERMINE AND ENSURE THAT IT MET THE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE FELT LIKE WE WERE LOOKING IN THAT BID, WE WERE UNABLE TO BASICALLY VERIFY THAT WE WOULD BE GETTING WHAT WE HAD SPECIFIED. AND SO OUR STAFF HAS TAKEN A LOOK AT THAT. REALLY, THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THEY HAD IS THAT IT'S NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY TO AWARD AT THIS POINT, BUT RATHER TO RECOMMEND REJECTION OF ALL BIDS RECEIVED ON THOSE TWO SEPARATE BIDS WITH THE INTENTION THAT WE WOULD CLARIFY ANY OF THE AMBIGUITY ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE SPECIFICATIONS AND PUT IT BACK OUT TO BID. THESE ARE THIS IS EQUIPMENT, ACTUALLY, THAT WE WOULD ANTICIPATE UTILIZING 2 TO 5 DECADES. AND SO AS EQUIPMENT WE WANT TO PUT INTO USE AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GETTING THE MOST THAT WE POSSIBLY CAN FOR THE DOLLARS THAT WE'RE GOING TO SPEND ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. BUT I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE. OKAY.
ANY QUESTIONS? JUST ONE COMMENT. I KNOW THAT I BROUGHT UP BEFORE ABOUT BID REJECTIONS, BUT I LIKE THE WAY YOU'VE BEEN APPROACHING THIS AND THAT YOU YOU MIGHT REJECT THE BID, BUT YOU'RE GOING BACK OUT TO STILL USE THE MARKET AND THE BENEFITS OF THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS. SO I, I THINK THAT'S FINE, BUT, BUT I DO I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT, THOUGH, AS WE LOOK AT THIS, IN THAT COVID ERA WHEN SO MANY OF OUR EQUIPMENTS BECAME LONG LEADS, THESE DID APPEAR TO BE A LOT SHORTER, BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF NEW ENTITIES IN THE MARKET TODAY THAT WE HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO EXPERIENCE WITH. AND SO I THINK WE'RE GOING TO BENEFIT FROM THE POSSIBILITY OF REBIDDING THIS AND ENSURE THAT WE GET THE EQUIPMENT THAT WE. SO IF I UNDERSTAND THAT RIGHT, IT'S THAT WHAT USED TO BE ACCEPTABLE AS BID SPECIFICATIONS MIGHT NEED A LITTLE MORE CLARITY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GETTING THE SAME THING. BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY NEW PLAYERS IN THE MARKET. IS THAT FAIR TO SAY? YES. WE HAD SOME RECENT CONVERSATIONS ABOUT SOME OF THE PROPOSALS THAT WE HAVE TO UPGRADE THE THE TRANSMISSION AND SUBTRANSMISSION WITH OUR 46 KV 69 KV. SO THESE TRANSFORMERS HAD THAT OPPORTUNITY WITH DUAL
[00:30:01]
WINDINGS. BUT AS WE EVALUATED THOSE, IT APPEARED THAT SOME HAD BEEN PERHAPS JUST THE 46 WITHOUT THE DUAL WINDINGS, SOME OTHERS WITH THE 69. AND SO THERE WAS SOME CONCERN ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. BUT THEN THERE'S A LOT OF THESE BIDDERS THAT WE REALLY HAVE NOT HEARD OF BEFORE IN THE PAST. SO WHETHER THAT'S A QUALIFICATION BASED ISSUE THAT WE'LL WORK THROUGH WITH OUR LEGAL DEPARTMENT AND ENSURE JUST THAT WE RECEIVE EQUIPMENT THAT'S GOING TO LAST THE THE TIME THAT WE NEED IT TO WHEN IT'S PUT INTO SERVICE. THANK YOU, DIRECTOR FREDERICKSON. COUNCILOR FREEMAN, I'D BE HAPPY TO MAKE THAT MOTION. MAYOR. I WOULD MOVE TO REJECT ALL BIDS RECEIVED FOR THE 12.5 SUBSTATION TRANSFORMER EQUIPMENT BID. SECOND. LARSON. YES. FRANCIS I. LEE. YES. YES. FREEMAN. YES. RADFORD. AYE.MOTION CARRIES. AND I WILL ALSO MOVE TO REJECT ALL BIDS RECEIVED FOR THE BULB TURBINE TRANSFORMER EQUIPMENT BID. SECOND DEMON. YES. RADFORD. LARSON. YES. LEE. YES. FRANCIS I. FREEMAN. YES. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. THANK YOU. OUR NEXT ITEM IS COMING TO US FROM DIRECTOR
[Items 5.D.1 - 5.D.4]
ALEXANDER. SHE IS THE DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL SERVICES, AND SHE IS HERE TO PRESENT ON THE BUDGET. TONIGHT IS THE NIGHT TO ADOPT THE CITY BUDGET. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL.I'M GOING TO ASK OUR CITY CLERK TO PULL UP A FEW SLIDES. SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO THIS EVENING IS JUST GO OVER A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT THE PROCESS WAS, AND THEN TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS EVENING. SO BELIEVE IT OR NOT, WE STARTED THIS PROCESS BACK ON FRIDAY, APRIL 10TH. WE WERE REQUIRED BY BONNEVILLE COUNTY TO SUBMIT OUR BUDGET HEARING, WHICH WAS AUGUST 13TH. SO THAT WAS ABOUT TWO THURSDAYS AGO. WE WERE REQUIRED TO REPORT THAT ON BY THE 10TH OF EVERY YEAR, AND IT LISTS WHAT DATE WE WERE HAVING OUR PUBLIC HEARING.
THAT DATE IS ALSO INCLUDED ON THE TAX ASSESSMENTS. IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR TAX ASSESSMENT, IT DOES SAY WHEN THE CITY OF IDAHO FALLS WILL BE HAVING THEIR PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BUDGET, AS WELL AS THE NUMBER TO CALL ON THURSDAY, JULY 30TH. WE DID THE TENTATIVE NOT TO EXCEED BUDGET AMOUNT AS REQUIRED BY STATE STATUTE. WE PUBLISHED THE PUBLIC NOTICE AND THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR OUR NOTICES FOR FOREGONE AND OUR HEARINGS FOR FOREGONE, AND THE FEES AND THE BUDGET ITSELF. TWO SATURDAYS WERE REQUIRED BY STATE STATUTE TO PUBLISH THEM TWO TWO WEEKS IN A ROW. WE PICKED SATURDAYS BECAUSE SATURDAYS SEEM TO BE A MORE REASONABLE TIME, WHERE PEOPLE ARE PERHAPS DRINKING THEIR TEA OR COFFEE AND LOOKING AT THE PAPER AND SAYING, OH, YOU KNOW, WE DO HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY. THE OTHER THE OTHER OPPORTUNITY WE HAVE IS WE'VE POSTED ALL OF THE BUDGET WORK SESSIONS THAT ARE ON THE VIDEO THERE ON OUR WEBSITE. YOU CAN LIVE STREAM AND YOU CAN ACTUALLY GO BACK AND WATCH THEM IF YOU SO CHOOSE TO DO SO, AS WELL AS ALL OF OUR PRESENTATIONS THAT WE GAVE DURING WORK SESSION. THOSE ARE ALSO ON OUR WEBSITE AS WELL. AND THEN FINALLY, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, WE DID CONDUCT OUR PUBLIC HEARING ON THURSDAY, AUGUST 13TH. WE CONDUCTED THE HEARINGS AND ALLOWED FOR OR PROVIDED FOR PUBLIC TESTIMONY FOR FEES FOREGONE AND BUDGET. SO THE FIRST ITEM THAT WE HAVE ON THE AGENDA IS THE 2026 FEE RESOLUTION, INCLUDING NEW FEES AND FEE INCREASES. WE ALSO HAVE THE RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1% LEVY OF FOREGONE REVENUE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2627, AS WELL AS A RESOLUTION TO TO APPROVE FOREGONE FOR ONE TIME CAPITAL.
SO I'M GOING TO GO OVER THAT A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE A LITTLE BIT OF IT CHANGED, AS I MENTIONED TO YOU DURING OUR PUBLIC HEARING, WE DID RECEIVE THE EVALUATION PROPERTY TAX VALUATION INFORMATION FROM THE COUNTY THAT WAS RECEIVED ON AUGUST 11TH. WE HAD OUR PUBLIC HEARING ON AUGUST 13TH. WE WENT OFF OF SOME ESTIMATES, OBVIOUSLY, TO BE READY FOR PUBLIC HEARING. AND WHAT WE DID FIND IS THAT WE WE, WE WERE ABLE TO RECEIVE A LITTLE BIT MORE MONEY IN PROPERTY TAXES THAN WE WERE EXPECTING. AND THAT WAS A LITTLE BIT UNDER 100,000. SO WHAT OUR ASSISTANT FINANCE MANAGER DID FOR US IS SHE ACTUALLY ADJUSTED THE 1% FOREGONE FROM $538,354 TO $540,078. SO THAT ALLOWED FOR THAT SHIFT FOR THE 1%. AND AGAIN, AS A REMINDER, THAT'S AN ONGOING BUDGET. IT'S ADDED TO THE BASE. AND THOSE THAT 1% ONGOING FOREGONE COVERAGE OF OUR PUBLIC SAFETY, IT COVERS LEGAL AS WELL AS OUR POLICE, POLICE DEPARTMENT, THE ONE TIME CAPITAL FOREGONE THAT WAS ADJUSTED DOWN. IF YOU SEE HERE FROM 350,000, AS WE SHARED IN OUR PUBLIC HEARING, TO ABOUT $250,116. AND SO THAT HAS BEEN
[00:35:08]
ADJUSTED. BUT THE GOOD NEWS IS THOSE BOTH OF THOSE ADJUSTMENTS DOES NOT CHANGE THE LEVY RATE.IT STILL IS WITHIN THE TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED BUDGET OF $393,000,483. EXCUSE ME. START OVER AGAIN. $393,483,954, OR 393.5 MILLION. AS WE HAVE BEEN PUBLISHING THIS WHOLE ENTIRE BUDGET PROCESS, AND THE TOTAL PROPERTY TAXES REMAINS THE SAME AT 54,098,846 OR ROUNDED TO 54.1 MILLION. SO THIS SLIDE HERE TALKS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE VALUATION. AND THERE'S AN INVERSE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE VALUATION AND THE LEVY RATES. SO AS YOU SEE HERE THE LAST AND I'M GOING TO USE THIS NEW CONTRIBUTORS. SO THIS BOTTOM LINE HERE 2026 2627. WE ACTUALLY HAD A BASE VALUATION OF 9 BILLION. ISN'T THAT COOL. SO THAT'S SO THAT'S WHY THAT THAT RATE WENT UP EVER SO SLIGHTLY. AND WE HAD TO ADJUST IT. IT INCREASED BY FROM LAST YEAR AS FAR AS THE BASE VALUATION. AND THE CHANGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 4.92%, WHICH GIVES US A LEVY RATE OF 0.00595362. I'M NOT GOING TO FINISH THE REST OF IT. SO IT'S ACTUALLY AN INCREASE OF A LITTLE UNDER 2%. SO I WANT TO TALK TO YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT. AND I WANT TO ALSO MENTION THAT THE PROPERTY TAX LEVY AMOUNTS THAT WE WERE GIVEN, THOSE ARE STILL ESTIMATES BECAUSE THERE'S STILL A PROCESS WHERE THE MARKET VALUES ARE ESTIMATED BY THE COUNTY. THEY'RE GIVEN TO US AS ESTIMATES, THE CITIES AND THEN THE STATE TAX COMMISSION IN SEPTEMBER FINALIZES EVERYTHING. SO WE MIGHT SEE A SLIGHT CHANGE, BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A MATERIAL CHANGE AS WE EXPECT. SO I JUST WANT TO POINT THAT OUT. AND THE FORGONE BALANCE, PARDON ME, STARTED AT $5,527,307 WITH THESE TWO FORGONE AMOUNTS THAT WE HAVE HERE AS PART OF OUR ADOPTED BUDGET, WILL DECREASE THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT TO ABOUT 4.7 MILLION. SO WITH THAT I'LL TALK REAL QUICK HERE. SO NEXT STEPS FOR THIS EVENING IS IS TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTIONS. WE HAVE TWO AS YOU SEE IN YOUR PACKET, THE FEES. THEY WILL BE EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1ST AND FOREGONE. WE HAVE TWO OF THOSE AS WELL, THE 1% AND THEN THE 110 CAPITAL. AND THEN WE DO THOSE IN ORDER THAT WAY, BECAUSE IT ALL CULMINATES INTO OUR BUDGET FOR THE 2627 FISCAL YEAR. AND THAT WOULD BE OUR LAST ITEM TO ADOPT THIS EVENING AS WELL. AND I WOULD STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY. OKAY. SO WE WILL, AS DIRECTOR ALEXANDER SAID, WE WILL TAKE THESE ONE AT A TIME AND WE WILL. AND SO WE WILL ALLOW FOR ANY DISCUSSION TO HAPPEN AMONGST COUNCIL OR ASK ANY QUESTIONS. BUT WE WILL BEGIN WITH THE FEE RESOLUTION AND THE FEE INCREASES FOR 2627. COUNCIL HAVE ANY DISCUSSION? OKAY, COUNCILOR RUTHERFORD, JUST ONE THING. I JUST THINK IT'S INCREDIBLE TO SEE THAT NUMBER $9 BILLION COME UP. THAT'S A 200% INCREASE FROM 2013. AND SO MANY OF US OWN PROPERTY HERE. AND THAT'S BEEN A DOUBLE EDGED SWORD WITH PROPERTY TAXES, MAYBE. BUT THE WEALTH THAT'S BEEN CREATED FROM 2.9 TO $9 BILLION IN THIS COMMUNITY IS PRETTY INCREDIBLE.
AND AND A LOT OF THAT HAS TO DO WITH OUR HOME VALUES, BUT ALSO BUSINESS VALUES AND THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF OUR COMMUNITY. AND I JUST THINK IT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD PAUSE AND BE PROUD OF AS A, AS A GROUP. AND, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THOSE MILLIMAN STUDIES WHERE WE WERE ONE OF THE HIGHEST RANKED CITIES IN THE NATION KIND OF SHOWS THAT SOME OF THESE THINGS ARE WORKING.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COUNCILOR RUTHERFORD. AND THAT IS WE GET TO THIS POINT. WE A BUDGET OF 393 MILLION. AND WE HAVE A FEW COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS UP HERE, BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS AND MONTHS. SO WE'VE HAD THOSE QUESTIONS, WE'VE HAD THOSE DISCUSSIONS, AND NOW IT WILL BE RELATIVELY STRAIGHTFORWARD, I BELIEVE. YES, THAT'S A GREAT POINT. THANK YOU. COUNCIL PRESIDENT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT. I'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO ADOPT THE 2026 2027 FEE RESOLUTION AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS. SECOND. DINGMAN. YES. FREEMAN. YES. FRANCIS I. BRADFORD. I. LEE.
YES. LARSON. YES. MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT. OUR NEXT MOTION IS ABOUT THE 1% FOREGONE.
[00:40:03]
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COUNCIL. ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO MOVE TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 1% LEVY OF THE 2026 2027 FOREGONE AMOUNT OF $540,078, AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS. SECOND, LEE. YES. DINGMAN. YES. FRANCIS I. FREEMAN. YES. LARSON. YES. BRADFORD. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT. OUR NEXT MOTION COUNCIL IS RELATED TO THE FOREGONE BALANCE FOR FIRE AND PARKS AND REC USE. OKAY. SEEING NO OTHER ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, I'M GOING TO MOVE TO APPROVE THE 2026 2027 RESOLUTION, ADOPTING $250,116. THE CITY'S FORGONE BALANCE FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE OF FUNDING ONE TIME CAPITAL PROJECTS FOR FIRE AND PARKS AND RECREATION, AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS. SECOND. FREEMAN. YES, BRADFORD. A. LARSON. YES.DINGMAN. YES. LEE. YES. FRANCIS. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. SO BEFORE YOU DO THIS ONE, I DO HAVE ONE COMMENT BECAUSE I, I GET THE CHANCE TO WRITE A NEWSPAPER ARTICLE EVERY WEEK IN THE POST REGISTER. AND SOMETIMES WHEN YOU PUT PEN TO PAPER, YOU BECOME MORE APPRECIATIVE OF THINGS BECAUSE YOU'VE HAD TO REALLY THINK THROUGH THINGS. AND AS I PREPARED TO WRITE DOWN WHY WE HAVE A $393 MILLION BUDGET IN THE CITY OF IDAHO FALLS, IT MADE ME INCREDIBLY APPRECIATIVE OF OUR FOUNDING FATHERS YEARS AND YEARS AGO, WHO DECIDED THAT THE RESIDENTS OF IDAHO FALLS NEEDED TO BE THE OWNERS OF OUR DESTINY. THAT'S HOW I LOOKED AT IT AS I WAS WRITING THIS, THAT WE HAVE A POWER COMPANY. SO ALL OF YOUR POWER BILLS, IF YOU'RE FROM THE CITY OF IDAHO FALLS, THEY'RE RUNNING THROUGH OUR BUDGET AND WE HAVE AN AIRPORT. AND SO ALL OF THOSE LANDING FEES ARE RUNNING THROUGH OUR BUDGET. ALL OF OUR PASSENGER FEES ARE RUNNING THROUGH OUR BUDGET. BUT IT REALLY MEANS THAT WE ARE THE OWNERS. THESE ARE OUR INVESTMENTS. AND, AND WE OWN WE OWN A POWER COMPANY. WE OWN AN AIRPORT. WE OWN A WATER SEWER TREATMENT. WE OWN THE WATER. AND I THINK THAT THAT'S REALLY AMAZING THAT WE DO THAT AS A CITY THAT WE REALLY HAVE. WE'RE STANDING ON THE SHOULDERS OF SOME PEOPLE WHO DECIDED TO BE OWNERS. AND I THINK THAT TO COUNCIL MEMBER BRADFORD'S POINT ABOUT HOMEOWNERSHIP AND TRYING TO GET INTO THE MARKET, THAT THIS IS WHAT THEY DID. AND WE OWN THESE ASSETS. THEY'RE THEY'RE THE CITY OF IDAHO FALLS RESIDENTS ASSETS, NOT THE CITY COUNCILS, BUT EVERY RESIDENT OF IDAHO FALLS IS A SHAREHOLDER. AND AS I WENT TO THE POWER, I KEEP FORGETTING WHAT I WAS AT BECAUSE THERE WAS LIKE NORTHWEST POWER. AND THEN THERE'S THE ENERGY POWER. BUT THERE WERE A LOT OF THE INVESTOR OWNED UTILITIES WHO WERE THERE, AND I AND IT WAS SO NICE TO THINK OUR INVESTOR OWNED. WE ARE THE SHAREHOLDERS. WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT THIS MONEY IS NOT GOING TO INVESTOR OWNED SHAREHOLDERS. IT'S COMING TO THE RESIDENTS OF IDAHO FALLS IN THE RATES THAT WE PAY IT 7%, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, JUST ABOUT THE CHEAPEST IN THE NATION. SO ANYWAY, PEN TO PAPER, YOU DON'T HAVE TO READ THE ARTICLE. I JUST TOLD IT TO YOU. SO COULD I MAKE ONE COMMENT TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT? BECAUSE I KNOW FALLS IS ARGUABLY THE MOST COMPLICATED CITY IN THE STATE OF IDAHO. WITH THE NUMBER OF DEPARTMENTS WE HAVE AND THE SERVICES THAT WE PROVIDE THAT OTHER CITIES DON'T. SOME SOME CITIES HAVE A FEW OTHER SERVICES THEY PROVIDE THAT WE DON'T. BUT NOBODY DOES MORE SERVICES HAS MORE DEPARTMENTS THAN THE CITY OF IDAHO FALLS IN THE STATE OF IDAHO. SO WE'RE VERY PROUD OF THAT. YES. WE'LL START WITH COUNCILOR LARSON AND THEN RADFORD. IN SPEAKING OF THE THINGS THAT WE OWN AND THOSE TWO THAT COME UP ARE ELECTRIC, THE POWER DEPARTMENT AND THE AIRPORT. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THEIR RECORD, THE EFFICIENCIES, THE GROWTH, THE DEMAND THAT WE HAVE AT THE AIRPORT, IT SEEMS LIKE NOT TOO MANY MONTHS GO BY THAT WE GET A CALL FROM SOME AIRLINE THAT WANTS TO, TO SEE IF THEY CAN FLY INTO AND OUT OF IDAHO FALLS. I THINK THAT'S A REAL COMPLIMENT TO THE FOLKS WHO RUN THOSE ON A DAY TO DAY BASIS. AND AGAIN, WE'RE WE'RE VERY BLESSED AS THE COMMUNITY TO NOT ONLY HAVE OWNERSHIP, BUT HAVE QUALITY LEADERS THAT MAKE THOSE BE SO EFFICIENT AND A PLACE THAT PEOPLE WANT TO GO AND DO AND BE. THANK YOU. AND I'LL JUST ADD THAT TO COUNCILOR FREEMAN'S POINT. THERE WAS A SOCIAL MEDIA POST THAT WAS GOING AROUND THAT HAD JUST TAKEN THE DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES IN IDAHO'S JUST TOP LINE BUDGET NUMBER AND DIVIDE IT BY THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS. AND AND IT MADE SOME CITIES LOOK LIKE THEY WERE SPENDING A LOT OF TAX DOLLARS THAT AND THAT WE WERE BEING INEFFICIENT. BUT WHEN YOU
[00:45:06]
TAKE OUR PROPERTY TAX DOLLARS, AS OPPOSED TO JUST THE TOP LINE NUMBER, FROM FEES, FROM ENTERPRISE SERVICES AND OTHER THINGS, THE CITY OF LITTLE FALLS HAS MANAGED INCREDIBLY WELL, AND SOME OF THE LOWEST RATES IN TAXES, BUT ALSO FINDING A WAY TO TAKE CARE OF OUR NEEDS BECAUSE WITH A 3% INFLATION EACH YEAR, I MEAN, SORRY, 3% IS OUR LIMIT FOR OUR TAXING INCREASES, BUT WE HAVE INFLATION RATES THAT EXCEED 2% AND HAVE BEEN AS HIGH AS EIGHT AND 9% IN THE LAST FEW YEARS. I THINK WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO NAVIGATE THIS FAR BETTER THAN I WOULD HAVE IMAGINED A DECADE AGO, WITH THE PROBLEMS THAT THAT BRINGS IN TERMS OF HAVING THE LIMITS WHEN WHEN INFLATION OUT, OUT PACES OUR OUR ABILITY TO FUND THE PROGRAMS. AND SO I'M GRATEFUL THAT THIS GROUP HAS WORKED SO HARD ON THESE THINGS. AND THE STAFF AND, AND ALL OF US OVER THE YEARS HAVE KIND OF TRIED TO FIND WAYS TO FUND THINGS OUTSIDE OF JUST PROPERTY TAXES THROUGH FEES FOR SERVICES AND FOR GRANTS. AND THE MANY WAYS THAT WE BRING VALUE TO THIS COMMUNITY THAT YOU ARE NOT PAYING FOR THROUGH YOUR PROPERTY TAXES. WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT A $50 MILLION PROPERTY TAX BILL FOR ALL RESIDENTS, AND THEN WE HAVE A BUDGET OF $393 MILLION OF SERVICES, I THINK THE COMMUNITY IS GETTING A PRETTY GOOD VALUE.I KNOW. SO NOT TO FORGET THE FIBER COMPANY AND THE AQUATIC CENTER AND THE FRONTIER CENTER.
I DON'T WANT TO LEAVE ANYBODY OUT NOW. SO THE GOLF COURSES. YEAH. SO ANYWAY, ALL OF THAT RUNS THROUGH OUR BUDGET. ALL RIGHT. SEEING NO ADDITIONAL COMMENT HERE. I'LL MOVE TO ADOPT THE 2026 2027 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET FOR 393,000,480. WOW, $483,944. AND APPROVE THE ATTACHED APPROPRIATIONS ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING MONIES TO AND AMONG VARIOUS FUNDS UNDER A SUSPENSION OF THE RULES REQUIRING THREE COMPLETE AND SEPARATE READINGS AND REQUESTS TO BE READ BY TITLE AND PUBLISHED BY SUMMARY. SECOND. LEE. YES. DINGMAN. YES. FRANCIS I. FREEMAN. YES. LARSON. YES. RADFORD. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. SO WE NEED TO READ THAT BY TITLE. I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME HERE. DIRECTOR ALEXANDER, DO YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE THE ORDINANCE WITH YOU? THANK YOU. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1ST, 2026, APPROPRIATING THE SUM OF $393,483,954. TO DEFRAY THE EXPENSES AND LIABILITIES OF THE CITY OF IDAHO FALLS FOR SAID FISCAL YEAR, SPECIFYING THE OBJECTS AND PURPOSES FOR WHICH SAID APPROPRIATIONS ARE MADE.
AUTHORIZING A LEVY OF SUFFICIENT TAX UPON THE TAXABLE PROPERTY, PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES. DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO FILE CERTIFIED COPIES OF THIS ORDINANCE WITH THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND IDAHO SECRETARY OF STATE AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU. OKAY. OUR NEXT ITEM THEN IS COMING TO US FROM
[5.E.1) Mediation request from surrounding property owners for the Willows Place Townhomes Planned Unit Development.]
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, AND THIS IS A MEDIATION REQUEST FROM THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES FOR THE WILLOWS PLACE TOWNHOMES, EXCUSE ME, TOWNHOMES. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. I WILL BE RELATIVELY SHORT ON THIS ITEM. WE HAD A REQUEST THAT IS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET BY EMAIL FROM MACK AND TERRY SMITH REGARDING A MEDIATION REQUEST FOR A TOWNHOME. THAT REQUEST WAS SUBMITTED AND ON AUGUST 18TH, JUST BY WAY OF A LITTLE BIT OF A BACKGROUND ON THAT, THE WILLOWS PLACE SUBDIVISION PUD WAS APPROVED ON AUGUST 6TH,[00:50:03]
AND A WRITTEN DECISION DETAILING THE REASONINGS. THE REASONS STATEMENT WAS AFFIRMED ON AUGUST 13TH AND THEY SUBMITTED THIS REQUEST ON THE 18TH OF AUGUST. ALSO INCLUDED WITH YOUR PACKET. SO I INCLUDED THE EMAIL REQUEST AND THEN ALSO THE SECTION OF CODE REGARDING MEDIATION JUST FOR YOUR REFERENCE. AND WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE. I ALSO HAVE LEGAL HERE WITH ME AS WELL, THE EXPERTS. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THIS IS NOT A QUASI JUDICIAL HEARING, AND I'M REALLY MEAN UNLESS THERE'S SOME REASON I SHOULDN'T, SINCE IT'S ONLY ABOUT AS I READ IT, IT'S ABOUT PROCEDURAL ERRORS AND SEVERAL INACCURACIES AND INFORMATION MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC. SO WHERE DO I STAND? SO IT'S NOT A QUASI JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A HEARING TONIGHT, BUT IT IS STILL A QUASI JUDICIAL MATTER. AND SO I THINK I WOULD ADVISE THAT BOTH YOU AND COUNCIL MEMBER LEE RECUSE YOURSELF FROM THIS VOTE. SO WHEN IT COMES TO THE VOTE, WE WILL RECUSE OURSELVES. YEAH. AND FROM THE DISCUSSION BECAUSE AND, AND FROM THE FROM THE DISCUSSION. OKAY. SO I WILL RECUSE MYSELF. ON ADVICE OF ATTORNEY. I WILL DO THE SAME.THANK YOU COUNSELOR. OKAY, SO THIS IS A MEDIATION REQUEST. AND IF YOU FEEL LIKE SOME OF THE. FOR THE REMAINING COUNSELORS, I GUESS. COUNCILOR JONES, WILL YOU PLEASE. I KNOW WE HAD DIRECTOR CENTER PRESENT THIS TO US, BUT REALLY THE ONLY THING WE ARE DOING IS WHETHER OR NOT COUNCIL WANTS TO CONSIDER MEDIATING WITH THE CITY AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
CORRECT. OR TERRY AND MAX, WHAT THEIR SPECIFIC MEDIATION. YES. AND THE STANDARD IN OUR CODE IS COUNCIL MAY ORDER MEDIATION IF COUNCIL BELIEVES THE MEDIATION MAY RESOLVE THE DISPUTE. SO THE WORD MAY IN MAY ORDER MEDIATION. THAT PUTS IT WITHIN THE DISCRETION OF COUNCIL AND COUNCIL'S DISCRETION IS INFORMED BY THE STANDARD OF. IF COUNCIL BELIEVES THE MEDIATION MAY RESOLVE THE DISPUTE. AND SO IT'S JUST THIS IS JUST A PURELY DISCRETIONARY CALL BY COUNCIL.
THE DISPUTE COULD BE CONSTRUED AS BOTH WHAT THEY PUT IN THEIR REQUEST FOR MEDIATION, AS WELL AS THE ARGUMENT THAT THEY MADE. THAT WAS WHAT I WAS HEARING IS WHAT SPECIFICALLY THE DISPUTE I THINK YOU COULD GATHER FROM FROM THEIR ARGUMENT, REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION, THAT THAT WOULD BE THE THAT COULD BE FAIRLY CONSIDERED THE DISPUTE. OKAY. THANK YOU. ARE WE READY FOR A DISCUSSION? MOTION FROM COUNCIL. WE WOULD BE EITHER APPROVING OR DENYING THE MEDIATION REQUEST SUBMITTED BY TERRY SMITH REGARDING THE WILLOWS PLACE TOWNHOME PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. I HAVE A QUESTION. WHEN I READ THROUGH THIS, IT MADE ME THINK THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK THROUGH THE PROCESS AGAIN OF IF THEY DID DO MEDIATION, WOULD. WE WOULD HAVE TO DO ANOTHER HEARING OF THE PUD. I MEAN, WHAT'S THE PROCESS IF WE DID GRANT THIS? AND THAT WOULD BE THE PROCESS. IF MEDIATION LED TO A CHANGE OR SUBSTANTIAL IF IT CAME TO A SUCCESSFUL MEDIATION. CORRECT. AND HAVE WE HAD ANY INDICATION FROM THE DEVELOPER? NO, THE DEVELOPER I WE HAVEN'T HAD TO MY KNOWLEDGE, WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY CONTACT WITH THE DEVELOPER ABOUT. WELL, I THINK WE HAVE LET THE DEVELOPER KNOW OF THE MEDIATION REQUEST, BUT I DON'T I DON'T THINK THE AS WADE, AS THE DEVELOPER KNOW, WE HAVE INFORMED HIM OF THE MEDIATE, JUST AS YOU SAID, IT'S NOT RESPONDING. YES, HE'S AWARE OF IT. OKAY. SO, MR. JONES, THE REQUESTED MEDIATION LETTER. THAT'S IN OUR PACKET. IT IT SIMPLY STATES WE REQUEST A MEDIATION. THIS REQUEST IS BASED ON THE FACTS THAT THERE WERE PROCEDURAL ERRORS. WE WERE NOT REPRESENTED AS AFFECTED PERSONS IN THE MEDIATION BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL AND BEAR HUNTER HOLDINGS, LLC, AND THERE WERE SEVERAL INACCURACIES AND INFORMATION MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC. BUT THAT'S ALL THAT WE HAVE. IS THAT CORRECT? AS FAR AS THE SUBMISSION? CORRECT. CAN YOU GIVE US SOME INSIGHT AS TO HOW WE SHOULD WEIGH THIS? WELL, THIS COUNCIL'S DECISION, AND AGAIN, IT'S DISCRETIONARY. SO IT'S IT'S JUST IF COUNCIL THINKS THAT THERE'S A DISPUTE THAT'S CAPABLE OF BEING RESOLVED THROUGH MEDIATION, AND IF MEDIATION WOULD RESOLVE THAT, IF IT COULD BE HELPFUL, IF NOT, THEN THEN COUNCIL, MAYBE I
[00:55:07]
COULD. I MEAN, AS I READ THROUGH THIS, OBVIOUSLY IT WAS QUASI JUDICIAL. SO WE HAVEN'T HAD THE CONVERSATION, BUT I FEEL LIKE THERE IS A MISUNDERSTANDING OF WHAT HAPPENED IN MEDIATION WITH THE. EVEN THOUGH COUNCILOR FRANCIS SAID MANY TIMES, WHAT DID HAPPEN WHEN THE CITY COUNCIL GAVE OUR THEIR. I'M SORRY I DID NOT VOTE AND I AM NOT ON THE COUNCIL. BUT AS THE COUNCIL GAVE THEIR WRITTEN STATEMENT OF RELEVANT CRITERIA. AND THEN WE HAD COUNSELORS GO IN AND MEDIATE ON ON OUR BEHALF. THERE WERE SPECIFIC THINGS THAT THE COUNCIL WANTED, YOU KNOW, SAID, WE DON'T LIKE ABOUT THIS. IT WAS IN OUR RECENT STATEMENT OF RELEVANT CRITERIA. AND THEN MEDIATION OCCURRED. DENSITY, AFFORDABLE HOUSING WERE NOT PART OF THAT MEDIATION BECAUSE THAT WAS NOT PART OF OUR REASON STATEMENT OF RELEVANT CRITERIA.WHAT CAME BACK TO THE COUNCIL WAS A NEW PLAN, NOT BASED ON I MEAN, IT IT FOLLOWED THE MEDIATION THAT WAS PRESENTED, BUT IT WASN'T CREATED. YOU KNOW, EVERY SINGLE CHANGE THAT THEY MADE WASN'T IN RESPONSE TO MEDIATION. THEY WHAT THEY CAME BACK WITH WAS THEIR PLAN. IT WAS NOT THE CITY'S PLAN. AND THAT IS WHY THEN WE HELD THE SUBSEQUENT HEARINGS BECAUSE WE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THEY WERE GOING TO PRESENT TO COUNCIL. AND AND THEN WE DECIDED WHETHER WE LIKED THAT ONE OR NOT. BUT IT WASN'T IT WASN'T ALL OF THOSE SUBSEQUENT THINGS ON DENSITY AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND, AND RIGHT OF WAY. NONE OF THAT WAS REALLY IN. IN THE RECENT STATEMENT OF RELEVANT CRITERIA. AND WE, YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH WE LISTENED TO PEOPLE TALK ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND WHATNOT, IT JUST WASN'T PART OF THE, THE OVERALL DECISION. SO MY OPINION IS THAT THERE, YOU KNOW, WASN'T A PROCEDURAL ERROR IN THAT. AND I ALSO DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE WHATEVER INACCURACIES. OF THEM I DON'T THINK THAT IT AFFECTED THE OUTCOME. I THINK THAT THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS GOING TO BE A RETENTION POND, WHETHER IT WAS, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THE WATER WAS GOING TO BE ABLE TO BE RETAINED ON THE NEW OWNER'S PROPERTY. ALL OF THAT. BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THAT ACTUALLY WOULD HAVE MADE A DIFFERENCE IN WHETHER OR NOT THIS DEVELOPER WAS ALLOWED TO DEVELOP ON THEIR LAND. AFTER WE HAD REJECTED THE ORIGINAL PUD TWICE, AND THEY CAME BACK WITH A REVISED. THAT'S JUST MY OPINION ON IT. COULD I ASK MR. JONES A QUESTION, PLEASE? SO IN THE IN THE REQUEST, IT SAYS THIS REQUEST IS BASED ON THE FACTS THAT THERE ARE PROCEDURAL ERRORS. WE WERE NOT REPRESENTED AS AFFECTED PERSONS IN THE MEDIATION BETWEEN THE CITY OF IDAHO FALLS OR THE IDAHO FALLS CITY COUNCIL AND BEAR HUNTER HOLDINGS. WERE THEY ENTITLED TO REPRESENTATION AT THAT MEETING? SO THIS IS WHY WE FOLLOWED THE PROCESS OF HAVING COUNCIL MEMBERS, LEE AND FRANCIS RECUSE THEMSELVES, BECAUSE THERE IS A DUE PROCESS, PROHIBITS EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS AND WHAT THEY HAD DURING THAT MEDIATION PROCESS WAS EX-PARTE COMMUNICATIONS. AND THAT'S WHY THEY RECUSED THEMSELVES EACH AND EVERY TIME. SINCE THEN, ON THE VOTE AND THE DELIBERATIONS, AND BECAUSE I DID RESEARCH ON THIS, YOU KNOW, AHEAD OF TIME AND CAME ACROSS A DISTRICT COURT OPINION WHERE A CITY HAD SAID, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING MEDIATION. HOW CAN WE DO THIS DISTRICT AS PART OF THAT? PART OF THE PROCESS THAT THE DISTRICT COURT RECOMMENDED WAS, IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO THIS, YOU NEED TO ONE ONE POTENTIAL WAY IS TO RECUSE THE COUNCIL MEMBERS OR THE. I THINK IT'S COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR THAT PARTICULAR CASE. SO THAT'S ONE WAY TO TO DO IT WHERE YOU CAN, YOU CAN YOU CAN HAVE COUNCIL MEMBERS OR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PARTICIPATE. BUT ONE OPTION TO RESPECT THE DUE PROCESS RULES IS TO HAVE THEM RECUSE THEMSELVES. AND THAT'S THE PROCESS THAT WE FOLLOWED HERE. AND, MR. JONES, I MEAN, MY UNDERSTANDING ALSO IS THAT WE WE HELD THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THE PUBLIC SAID THINGS THAT THEY DIDN'T LIKE ABOUT THE PV. CORRECT. AND THEN AND THAT WAS REPRESENTED IN AS FAR AS WHEN THE ITEMS THAT COUNCIL AGREED WITH THE PUBLIC THAT WAS REPRESENTED IN MEDIATION. YES.
WELL, THE MEDIATION, RECENT STATEMENT OF RELEVANT CRITERIA, THE PIECES THAT WE AGREED WITH THE PUBLIC WAS REPRESENTED IN THE MEDIATION THROUGH THE WRITTEN STATEMENT OF RELEVANT CRITERIA. YES. AND I WILL NOTE THAT THE THE IDAHO CODE PROVIDES FOR MEDIATION AND MEDIATION PROCESS. AND PART OF THAT IS HAVING AFTER MEDIATION SESSION, HAVING A PUBLIC
[01:00:04]
HEARING, WHICH WE HELD. OKAY. I'M GOING TO QUOTE FROM THIS AGAIN. WE WERE NOT REPRESENTED AS AFFECTED PERSONS IN MEDIATION. AND MY QUESTION REMAINS, ARE THEY WERE THEY ENTITLED TO REPRESENTATION OR DID THEY ALREADY RECEIVE THE REPRESENTATION AT THE PUBLIC HEARING? THEY WERE ABLE TO PRESENT THEIR CASE AT THE PUBLIC HEARING THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY PREVIOUSLY TO THE MEDIA. BUT I THINK COUNCIL COUNCIL MEMBER FREEMAN'S ASKING YOU, IS THAT WAS THERE SOMETHING THAT WE DID THAT OR I GUESS, WERE WE SUPPOSED TO ALLOW ANY RESIDENT TO JUST SHOW UP TO THE MEETING IN THE FORMAL MEDIATION MEETINGS? MY OPINION THAT CERTAINLY I'VE NEVER SEEN IT BEFORE. THAT COULD BE A WAY WE COULD HAVE DONE IT, AND THEN WE WOULDN'T HAVE HAD TO RECUSE COUNCIL MEMBERS LEE AND FRANCIS. SO THAT'S THE THAT'S THE TIE THAT I THINK MAYBE NOT EVERYONE'S GETTING. OKAY. SORRY. BUT YEAH, IT'S OKAY. THERE THERE WERE VARIOUS OPTIONS. ONE COULD HAVE BEEN TO HAVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD, ALL THE NEIGHBORHOOD ABLE TO PARTICIPATE, BUT IT JUST SEEMED LIKE MEDIATION WOULDN'T BE PRACTICAL IN THAT SORT OF FORMAT. YOU'D HAVE THREE DIFFERENT PARTIES EFFECTIVELY.AND SO IN THIS CASE, THE MEDIATION IS, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD, SORT OF NON-BINDING, RIGHT? IT'S SORT OF LIKE IN GOOD FAITH, WE, WE, WE WILL PROCEED GOING DOWN A ROAD AND THEN IT COMES BEFORE THIS BODY. AND, AND WE'RE THIS IS THE DECISION THAT CREATES.
CORRECT. THAT THAT CREATED WHETHER IT WAS APPROVED OR DENIED, REGARDLESS OF WHAT WAS DISCUSSED IN MEDIATION. CORRECT. YEAH. COUNCIL COULD HAVE SAID NO AFTER THE MEDIATION. IT WAS NOT BOUND BY THE MEDIATION AGREEMENT. BUT THE MEDIATION AGREEMENT DID WAS AGREED TO ALLOW, YOU KNOW, TO TELL THE THE DEVELOPER, HEY, WE'RE WE'RE WILLING, LIKE I THINK PARKING SPACES WAS ONE THAT WE WERE WILLING TO VARY IF NEEDED TO ACCOMMODATE SOME OF THE CHANGES THAT DIDN'T END UP NEEDING TO HAPPEN. BUT THE MEDIATION THAT PROPOSED OR THE MEDIATION AGREEMENT ALLOWED THE DEVELOPER SOME FLEXIBILITY IN CREATING A NEW PV THAT COUNCIL THEN CONSIDERED. BUT COUNCIL. BUT AT THE TIME OF MEDIATION AND AT THE TIME OF THE PROPOSED MEDIATION AGREEMENT, COUNCIL DID NOT HAVE THAT NEW PUD REVISED PD IN FRONT OF IT, AND COUNCIL WAS NOT DELIBERATING ON WHETHER THAT ONE. AT THE TIME THAT COUNCIL APPROVED THE MEDIATION AGREEMENT, THE REVISED PUD WAS NOT BEING CONSIDERED BY COUNCIL. THAT CAME LATER, BUT LET'S SAY ON JUNE 25TH, WHEN COUNCIL APPROVED THE REVISED PUD. AND IN THAT PUD, WE ALL AGREED THAT THEY WOULD PAINT EVERY PARKING SPACE PURPLE. WE COULD AT THE LATER DATE WHERE WE AFFIRMED WE COULD MAKE CHANGES TO THAT RIGHT AND SAY, NO, THE PARKING SPACES DON'T HAVE TO BE PURPLE ANYMORE. CORRECT. SO ULTIMATELY, THE MEDIATION AGAIN, IT'S PARTIES COMING TOGETHER, TRYING TO REPRESENT THEIR VIEWPOINTS. RIGHT. BUT ULTIMATELY, UNTIL COUNCIL APPROVES THE PUD, NOTHING'S FINALIZED ANYWAY. CORRECT. IT IT APPEARS TO ME THAT THE SMITHS AND THE NEIGHBORS WERE SUFFICIENTLY REPRESENTED. WE TOOK THEIR CONCERNS AND AND WE TOOK THEM TO THE MEDIATION FOR THEM. I MEAN, THEY WERE, IN MY OPINION, VERY WELL REPRESENTED AT THE MEDIATION. IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, WE WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION FROM COUNCIL. I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE THE MEDIATION REQUEST. NO. EXCUSE ME. I MOVE TO DENY THE MEDIATION REQUEST SUBMITTED BY MACK AND TERRY SMITH REGARDING WILLOWS PLACE TOWNHOMES PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. I'LL SECOND. I'M SORRY. I DID NOT MEAN TO CORRECT YOU. I JUST BASED ON YOUR PRIOR COMMENT, I WONDERED WHETHER THAT WAS. YOU'RE CORRECT. I WAS JUST SURE ABOUT THAT. OKAY. I HAD TWO CHOICES ON THE PAPER. OKAY. AND SO A SECOND FROM BUILDING IS BRADFORD. I. DINGMAN. YES. FREEMAN. YES. LARSON. YES.
MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. AND IS OUR OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS JOIN US. WE WILL HAVE DIRECTOR
[5.E.2) Quasi-Judicial Public Hearing - Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Reasoned Statement of Relevant Criteria and Standards, Elara Homes at Willow Creek Cove.]
CENTER COME BACK TO THE PODIUM. THIS IS A QUASI JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE ELARA HOMES AT WILLOW CREEK COVE. AND WE WOULD LET DIRECTOR SANTORE PRESENT IT, AND I WOULD DECLARE THE HEARING OPEN. AND ALL OF THE MATERIALS WILL BE PART OF THIS HEARING. WITH THAT. FOR CLICKING ON IT, PLEASE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MAYOR, FOR THE[01:05:11]
PD26-001 FOR A LOT OF HOMES AT WILLOW CREEK. I WONDERED IF USUALLY WE HAVE THE DEVELOPER SPEAK FIRST. WOULD YOU LIKE HIM TO SPEAK AS TO THIS DEVELOPMENT? AND THEN I CAN DO AN ANALYSIS AT THE END HOWEVER YOU WOULD LIKE TO, SINCE THIS IS. YES, WE CAN GO AHEAD AND THANK YOU.LET'S HAVE THE DEVELOPER PRESENT THEIR PROJECT, AND THEN WE WILL ASK THE STAFF FOR THEIR REPORT. AND THEN WE WILL OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. THANK YOU, DIRECTOR SANDERS. THANK YOU MAYOR. THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBERS, FOR HAVING US TODAY. I'M VERY EXCITED TO PRESENT WHAT WE HAVE TODAY. THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF THOUGHT THAT'S GONE INTO WHAT WE HAVE TO PRESENT TODAY. I THINK WE'LL GO AHEAD AND WE'LL GET STARTED. SO I'M CALLING READ. I'M THE LAURA HOLMES. THIS IS WILLOW CREEK COVE. WE'VE BEEN REALLY TAKING A LOOK AT HOW WE CAN PROVIDE A PROJECT THAT UNDER THE R-3, ZONING, PROVIDES SOME KIND OF DENSITY, BUT ALSO CAN PRESERVE, PRESERVE SOME KIND OF A SINGLE FAMILY LIFESTYLE AND REALLY BUILD A COMMUNITY. I THINK IT'S ONE THING TO COME INTO A CITY AND TO SEE WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE, AND TO HIT THE BARE MINIMUM. AND IT'S ANOTHER THING TO BUILD A REAL COMMUNITY. AND ONE OF THE BIG REASONS I'M EXCITED TO PRESENT WHAT I HAVE TODAY IS BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE WE'VE GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND, AND WE'VE KEPT SOME OF THAT DENSITY AND WE FIT WELL WITHIN. WHAT THE CITY HAD. WHAT I SAW IN THE CITY ECONOMIC PLAN TO GET US SITUATED A LITTLE BIT OUTLINED AS THE PROPERTY. SO WE'VE GOT. CLICKER WILL WORK. SO OVER HERE TO OUR SOUTHWEST, WE HAVE THE I'M L, WE HAVE FIFTH WEST, FIFTH WEST AND 33RD NORTH. AND I'LL CLICK A LITTLE BIT CLOSER AND WE'LL GET INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL OVER TO OUR WEST SIDE. THIS WAS A KIND OF A TWIN HOME DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS APPROVED AND LARGELY BUILT OUT, I THINK MOSTLY BUILT OUT AT THIS POINT. TO OUR NORTH, WE HAVE THE MARSHALLS. MR. MRS. MARSHALL H K CONTRACTORS OWNS THIS PROPERTY AND THIS PROPERTY.
IDAHO FALLS OWNS THIS PROPERTY RIGHT HERE. THE LDS CHURCH OWNS A PROPERTY RIGHT HERE. AND THERE'S A CHURCH WITH A PARK. YOU HAVE THE WHITES RIGHT HERE. AND THEN YOU HAVE LAVELLE THAT LIVES RIGHT THERE. SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE SITUATED. WE TOOK A LOOK AT WE'VE ACTUALLY HAD ONE OF OUR INTERNAL GUYS GO OUT AND TAKE A LOOK AT THE KIND OF CARS THAT ARE DRIVEN IN IDAHO FALLS, VERY SIMILAR TO WHERE I LIVE IN MAPLETON. PEOPLE LIKE THEIR TRUCKS, WHICH YOU'LL SEE A LITTLE BIT LATER ON. THAT'S THE REASON WHY INSTEAD OF A 20 FOOT OR A 22 FOOT GARAGE, YOU NEED A 24 FOOT GARAGE. YOU NEED AMPLE PARKING. AND WITH THIS KIND OF A DEVELOPMENT, THAT'S PRETTY CRITICAL, I THINK WE'VE WE'VE DONE A GOOD JOB ON THAT. WE'RE IN THE GENERAL URBAN ZONE DESIGNATION. SO SAME WITH PROPERTY TO OUR EAST, TO OUR WEST AND TO OUR SOUTH. JUST A QUICK OVERVIEW. WE TOOK A LOOK AT IT. GENERAL URBAN ALLOWS SMALL SINGLE UNITS, DUPLEXES, TRIPLEXES FOURPLEXES, COURTYARD APARTMENTS, BUNGALOW COURTS, TOWNHOMES, MULTIPLEXES AND LIVE WORK UNITS. LOT SIZES ARE SMALLER AND MORE COMPACT THAN SUBURBAN AREAS. I THINK WE'VE DONE A GOOD JOB AT PROVIDING SOMETHING THAT FITS WELL WITHIN THE GENERAL URBAN ZONE. WE ARE IN R-3 ZONING STANDARDS AND OR R3 ZONING DESIGNATION THAT ALLOWS 35 UNITS PER ACRE. THAT WOULD ALLOW POTENTIAL FOR 1252 UNITS TOTAL. THAT ALLOWS APARTMENTS, CONDOS, TOWNHOMES, SMALL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. AND IT IS CHARACTERIZED BY A RESIDENTIAL ZONE, WHICH IS CHARACTERIZED BY A VARIETY OF DWELLING TYPES WITH A DENSER RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT. KIND OF PICTURED HERE. THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT THE KIND OF DENSITY WOULD LOOK LIKE, AND THAT COMES STRAIGHT FROM THE CITY ECONOMIC PLAN. AND THEN THE SOUTHWEST IS THAT TYPE OF PRODUCT THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT. BUT I'D LIKE TO PRESENT WHAT WE HAVE TODAY. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS VIDEO WILL PLAY, BUT WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GIVE IT A SHOT. BUT THERE WE GO. SO WHAT YOU SEE HERE, WE'VE TAKEN OUT THE PLANTING STRIP SO YOU CAN SEE THE UNITS THEMSELVES. BUT IN THE ACTUAL PLAN WE DO HAVE A PLAN STRIP AND THERE ARE THERE'S A TREE LINED CORRIDOR,
[01:10:01]
BUT YOU CAN SEE THESE ARE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. AND WE HAVE DUPLEXES THAT ARE THAT REALLY LOOK LIKE A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. AND I'LL MAYBE GIVE YOU A VISUAL OF THAT HERE IN JUST A SECOND. WE HAVE CURRENTLY OVER 12 DIFFERENT ELEVATION TYPES WORKING ON POSSIBLY 15 THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. AND THE, THE WHAT WE'RE GOING FOR IS NO SINGLE FAMILY HOME THAT SITS NEXT TO ONE ANOTHER IS GOING TO LOOK EXACTLY THE SAME ON ITS EXTERIOR. I THINK THAT ADDS A LOT TO A DEVELOPMENT. AND BUT THEY'RE A LITTLE BIT MORE OPTIONS HERE. BUT BUT ABOUT 15. SO WE'RE GOING FORWARD. WE HAVE SINCE CREATING THIS VIDEO OUT OF THE CLUBHOUSE RIGHT THERE, WE STILL HAVE THE PICKLEBALL COURTS. WE HAVE THE PLAYGROUND AREA AND A LARGE OPEN SPACE HOA MAINTAINED AREA FOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THIS COMMUNITY. THESE HOMES ARE ACCESSED THROUGH PRIVATE STREETS, THROUGH THE BACK ALLEYWAYS. A LOT OF SIMILAR DEVELOPMENTS LIKE DAYBREAK WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE. THEY UTILIZE THIS AND IT'S.IT'S, IT'S REALLY NICE IF YOU'VE GONE AND TAKEN A LOOK AT A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS. IF YOU LOOK OVER TO THE BOTTOM RIGHT, THAT IS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT ONE OF THOSE DUPLEXES WOULD LOOK LIKE. IT'S A TOP DOWN UNIT AND YOU ACCESS IT FROM THE SIDE. SO YOU'VE GOT YOU'VE GOT A HOME ON THE BOTTOM AND YOU'VE GOT A HOME ON THE TOP. AND IT REALLY WILL LOOK VERY SIMILAR TO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. I THINK IT BRINGS THE COMMUNITY TOGETHER AND IT HITS A DIFFERENT MARKET THAN THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AS WELL. THERE'S THERE'S A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT PRICE POINTS THAT YOU CAN HIT WITH THIS WITH STARTER HOMES. AND IF I GO ON TO THE NEXT PLAN, THE LANDSCAPING PLAN, I COULD TALK A LOT ABOUT THIS, BUT I'LL BE QUICK. WE HAVE OVER 24 TREE TYPES, 27 SHRUB SPECIES. I MEAN, WE WE SUBMITTED A FULL PLANT, A FULL PLANT BOOK, AND A DESIGN STYLE BOOK THAT ALSO YOU WOULD SEE LIKE THE, THE TRASH RECEPTACLES RIGHT THERE, LITTLE DESIGN ELEMENTS THAT CAN BRING KIND OF UPGRADED DEVELOPMENT TO THE NEXT LEVEL. AND SO YOU CAN SEE THOSE DESIGN ELEMENTS IN THE DESIGN BOOK. BUT EVERY ONE OF THESE RESIDENTS HAS ADEQUATE ACCESS TO ONE OF THESE OPEN SPACES. THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. WE'VE GOT TREE LINED CORRIDORS, CORRIDORS THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT. THESE ARE OUR TWO.
THESE ARE OUR TWO PUBLIC STREETS RIGHT HERE. THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT, THERE ARE 70 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY STREETS, RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR ROADS, AND THEN WE REALLY FOCUSED ON KIND OF PLANNING WHERE GREEN SPACE IS THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. BUT I'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT HERE WITH THE COMMUNITY AMENITIES REQUIRED BY ORDINANCE IS. EIGHT WE HAVE PROVIDED. 17 THE MAIN CORRIDOR INCLUDES PICKLEBALL COURTS, CLUBHOUSE. THE CLUBHOUSE WILL HAVE A FITNESS CENTER, FAMILY GATHERING ROOM, OFFICE SPACE, CONFERENCE ROOM.
ALSO THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT, WE'VE ADDED COMMUNITY GARDEN BOXES THAT ARE HOH0A PROTECTED AND MAINTAINED AREAS. THERE ARE THREE OF THEM THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO OUR RESIDENTS TO GROW AND HARVEST LOCAL LOCAL PRODUCE IN THEIR COMMUNITY. WE ALSO HAVE WE HAVE SEVERAL OTHER COMMUNITY AMENITIES. WE HAVE APPROXIMATELY 5700FT OF TRAIL. SO THAT'S JUST OVER A MILE.
THREE OUTDOOR FITNESS AREAS BY THOSE TRAILS SO THAT WHEN YOU'RE WALKING AND YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING IN THE MORNING, LIKE, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE SEEN THEM, BUT THEY'RE A LITTLE LIKE ELLIPTICAL ITEMS OR, OR BODY WEIGHT MACHINES THAT YOU ARE ABLE TO, THAT WE PLAN TO PUT AROUND OUR DEVELOPMENT. WE HAVE A PROJECTOR WALL WITH POWER STATIONS, CROQUET SET UP AREA TO THE NORTH ON THE NORTHEAST SIDE OF THE PROJECT, WE HAVE TWO DOG PARKS SEPARATED TO THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH. WE HAVE. WILLOW CREEK WAS A VERY IMPORTANT PART OF THIS COMMUNITY. IF YOU'VE WALKED WILLOW CREEK, IT'S. IT'S PRETTY. AND SO WE HAVE. THAT'S AN AMENITY BY ITSELF. SO WE HAVE THE, THE WALKING, THE WALKING TRAILS GO RIGHT UP AGAINST THE,
[01:15:03]
THE TREE LINED CORRIDORS THERE. AND WE KEPT OUR DEVELOPMENT OUT OF THE CANOPIES. FOR THE MOST PART, WE WILL HAVE TO CLEAN UP SOME. IF YOU IF YOU GO OVER THERE, IT'S PRETTY HARD TO ACCESS INTO, YOU KNOW, INTO ITS BEAUTY BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF BRANCHES THAT DO OUTREACH.BUT I'LL SHOW YOU IN MORE DETAIL WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE. THAT'S AN IMPORTANT PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. WE'VE GOT TWO PLAYGROUNDS, ONE PICNIC COVERED AREA, ONE BENCH SWING AT THE ENTRANCE THAT WILL BE A WILLOW TREE AND WILLOW CREEK COVE. THE PROJECT CONSISTS OF JUST UNDER 36 ACRES. OF THAT, 185 ARE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, AND THERE ARE 88 DUPLEX STRUCTURES. SO THAT'S 176 DUPLEX UNITS, BUT 88 STRUCTURES. WE ARE REQUIRED 25% OPEN SPACE.
WE PROVIDE A 33%. AND THE BIG ONE I WANT TO TALK ABOUT IS PARKING. PARKING. WE ARE REQUIRED TO. WE HAVE PROVIDED TWO AND THEN AN ADDITIONAL 189 EXTRA PARKING STALLS THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE PUBLIC PARKING ON WHIPPLE WAY OR ON PINE VALLEY WAY. SO WE ARE AT 2.52 PARKING STALLS PER UNIT THROUGHOUT THIS ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT. PUBLIC COMMENT WE. SO THIS IS THE PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WE HAD FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING BEFORE GOING INTO PLANNING COMMISSION. SO THERE ARE SOME ADJUSTMENTS THAT I'LL MENTION THAT AREN'T ON THIS AS WELL. WE HAD SOME DESIGN AND SITE PLANNING QUESTIONS FOCUSED ON IS THERE A WAY TO BE ABLE TO OPEN THIS UP JUST A LITTLE, TO ZOOM IN ON THE. NEIGHBORHOOD? COMMENTS.
THANK YOU. AND SO WE ANSWERED THOSE QUESTIONS ABOUT ROADWAY BUTTS AND CONTRACTOR PARKING AND OPEN SPACE USAGE WITH, WELL, WHATEVER. THEY WERE 70 FOOT RIGHT OF WAYS AND THE PUBLIC ROADS. AND THEN HOA MAINTAINED SOUTH AREA WILL BE USED AS JUST AS THE OPEN SPACE AND IT WILL BE HOA MAINTAINED. WE HAVE WE DID MAKE THE MODIFICATION. WE ADDED ACCESS AN ACCESS ROAD FOR THE WHITES PROPERTY BASED ON A REQUEST THAT THEY HAD TO HAVE ACCESS TO BE ABLE TO DEVELOP IN THE FUTURE. WE ADDED A PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT AROUND THE DEVELOPMENT THAT DOES INCREASE THE OPEN SPACE. AND WE DID RELOCATE AND WE WE ADJUSTED THE PRODUCT MIX BECAUSE WHEN WE WHEN WE INCLUDED THAT 15 FOOT PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT, IT CAUSED UNITS TO MOVE AROUND QUITE A BIT. SO WE DID. FROM THE TIME THAT WE HAD PUBLIC COMMENT OR WE HAD. THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING, THAT WAS ONE OF THE ADJUSTMENTS THAT WE MADE. THERE WAS CONCERNS ABOUT IRRIGATION, ACCESS TO THE NORTH AND PIPING OF THE DITCHES. AND SO WE WE DID MAKE ADJUSTMENTS TO OUR PLAT. MR. AND MRS. MARTIN, WE WERE ABLE TO SIT DOWN WITH THEM AND WE WE ARE GIVING THEM ADEQUATE ACCESS. WE HAVE TWO WATER MAIN GATES ON THE PLANT THAT WE'VE SUBMITTED THAT GIVE THEM ACCESS TO TO IRRIGATE. HE HAS A FARM IN THE BACK, AND THEN HE HAS WATER USAGE IN THE FRONT AS WELL. AND SO WE'VE MET WITH HIM AND WE'VE, I FEEL LIKE WE'VE SATISFIED THAT THERE'S IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. I KNOW THAT'S WHERE THINGS START TO SPELL OUT WHEN THE THAT DITCH IS PIPED AND WHATNOT. SO, BUT WE, WE HAVE IDENTIFIED THAT AS A. AS AN ITEM. WE'RE SORRY, WE'VE MADE THE CHANGES TO WITH CONJUNCTION IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE, THE LANDOWNER, WITH OUR, WITH OUR NEIGHBOR. NEIGHBOR. TWO SO THIS WAS TO OUR SOUTHEAST IN PART ABOUT ELECTRIC FENCE RELOCATION AND THE COSTS, ALSO THE PRESERVATION OF THE EXISTING TREES. TO THE NORTH OF HIS HOUSE ARE THE WILLOW. THAT'S WILLOW CREEK AND THE SOUTH.
THERE ARE SOME PINE TREES THAT ARE ON OUR PROPERTY. HE. HE IS CURRENTLY HAVING HIS HORSES ON OUR PROPERTY AND HE HAS A. HE HAS AN ELECTRIC LINE FOR THOSE HORSES AND SO WE TOLD HIM WE
[01:20:03]
WILL PAY FOR THE RELOCATION OF OF HIS FENCE TO THE PROPERTY LINE. WHEN WE DEVELOP. THE PINE TREE. SO WILLOW TREES. WE AIM TO PRESERVE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. IT'S, IT'S REALLY PRETTY. AND YOU'LL SEE THAT IN THE. I COULD GO BACK, BUT WE DID KEEP THE THE UNITS OUT OF THE CANOPY TREE LINE OF THOSE TREES, THE PINE TREES. THE STATUS IS CURRENTLY UNDETERMINED. I KNOW WE HAVE A TIS STUDY THAT'S THAT'S TAKING PLACE. AND I KNOW THAT EXPANSION OF 33RD NORTH MAY TAKE THOSE PINE TREES, SO I KEEP THEM. BUT THAT'S. I THINK THAT'S OUT OF OUR CONTROL ON THAT ONE. AND THEN OTHER NEIGHBORS ACTUALLY NOTED POTENTIAL FIT FOR THEIR CHILDREN AND HOW THEIR KIDS WOULD LIKE TO MOVE INTO THIS DEVELOPMENT. IT'S ALL IT'S, IT'S FUN TO HAVE SOME POSITIVE COMMENT WHEN, WHEN YOU'RE IN ONE OF THOSE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS. AND SO THESE HOMES DO ALLOW US THE OPTION TO BE ABLE TO BUILD. FOR EXAMPLE, IF A LOT OF WOULD ALLOW FOR A HOME WITH 700FT■S, WITH A TWO CAR GARAGE, THAT SAME LOT WOULD DO VERY WELL WITH THE HOME. THAT'S 1270FT■!S. IF THE HOMEOWNER WOUD LIKE TO EVENTUALLY ADD A GARAGE, OR THAT OPENS UP THE EXTRA SPACE ABOVE THE GARAGE, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY COULD DO. A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I DID WANT TO BRING UP. WE HAVE A TIS STUDY GOING OUT RIGHT NOW, AND I THINK ONE OF THE REQUESTS THAT WE WOULD HAVE FROM CITY COUNCIL IS WE'RE PAYING APPROXIMATELY $1.3 MILLION, I BELIEVE, IN IMPACT FEES. OF THAT, 785 000 WOULD BE GOING TOWARDS THE TRANSPORTATION FUND, AND I WOULD ASK THAT ON FIFTH WEST AND 33RD NORTH, THE IMPACT FEES. WE'VE BEEN ASKED TO SHOW THOSE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE TO THE ART, THE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROAD AND THE MINOR ARTERIAL ARTERIAL ROAD ON FIFTH WEST AND 33RD NORTH. BUT THAT'S WHY WE'RE GETTING A TIS STUDY THAT HAS REQUESTED THAT OF US. SO WE HAVE THAT ONGOING RIGHT NOW.BUT WHEN WE PUT TOGETHER A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT I BELIEVE WE WE NEED TO SIGN AND WORK OUT WITH STAFF BEFORE COMING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL. I'D LIKE TO NOTE THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO COME BEFORE CITY COUNCIL. AND WITH THAT IN MIND, THAT I BELIEVE THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THOSE IMPACT FEES. AND I THINK IN PLANNING COMMISSION IT WAS COVERED VERY WELL BY BY KERRY.
THIS WAS BACK JUST NOT TOO LONG AGO WHEN WE WERE PLANNING COMMISSION. BUT HE SAID THIRD, THIRD, FOURTH AND FIFTH WEST ARE ARTERIAL ROADS. DEVELOPMENT WILL PAY IMPACT FEES INTO THAT TRANSPORTATION FUND. THAT TRANSPORTATION FUND THEN GOES TO FUND THE CONSTRUCTION OF THOSE ARTERIAL ROADS. AND THAT WAS ALSO BACKED UP BY GLEN OGDEN, MATTHEW AND FOREST. AND THEY ALL SAID THE SAME THING. AND THAT WAS OUR UNDERSTANDING AS WELL. AND SO WE'LL WE'LL SEE WHAT COMES BACK. AND I BELIEVE WE DO HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE HERE FOR THE, FOR FOR TRAFFIC, BUT WE WOULD ASK THAT YOU TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT'S IN THAT TRAFFIC TO THE TRAFFIC, THE T STUDY. BUT WE WOULD WE WOULD PREFER IF, IF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS WERE TO BE MADE, THAT THEY BE MADE WITH THE IMPACT FEES THAT WE PAY THROUGHOUT OUR DEVELOPMENT THAT WE'RE PAYING TOWARDS THE TRANSPORTATION FUND, WHICH FIFTH WEST END, 33RD NORTH ARE BOTH IDENTIFIED AS ROADWAYS TO USE IMPACT FEES IN THE NEAR FUTURE? THAT'S ALL THAT I HAVE.
SO THANK YOU SO MUCH. I REALLY APPRECIATE THIS OPPORTUNITY, AND I HOPE THIS IS A DEVELOPMENT THAT THE CITY COUNCIL IS HAPPY WITH. AND THANK YOU. REMIND ME YOUR NAME ONE MORE TIME. I'M COLIN. COLIN. THANK YOU. HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. WE'LL ASK HIM AFTER WE HAVE. IS THAT A GOOD WAY AND HAVE DIRECTOR CENTER COME AND. YES. THANK YOU MAYOR. I JUST THOUGHT IT WOULD BE BETTER TO HAVE THE DEVELOPER EXPLAIN IT FROM THE FRONT. SO THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, AS I WON'T GO THROUGH A EXTENSIVELY, I'LL GO THROUGH PRIMARILY WHY THIS PUD IS BEING REQUESTED. A COUPLE OTHER ELEMENTS I WANT TO POINT OUT TO. IF YOU'LL IF YOU NOTICE IN THE STAFF REPORT WE'VE REVISED IN CDS A LITTLE BIT OF OUR STAFF REPORT,
[01:25:02]
ESPECIALLY WITH PUDS. SO IF YOU LOOK, THERE'S THE STAFF REPORT AND THEN THEY GO THROUGH EACH SECTION OF PUD ORDINANCE AND STAFF ADDRESSES EACH ONE OF THOSE. SO WE'RE DOING THAT WITH A LITTLE BIT OF A SHIFT IN OUR DEPARTMENT JUST TO JUST TO GO THROUGH THAT CODE ANALYSIS. I WON'T GO THROUGH THAT EXTENSIVELY. I'M REALLY JUST GOING TO GO THROUGH THE TWO MAJOR ELEMENTS THAT ARE BEING REQUESTED AS PART OF THIS PUD. SO ANYWAYS, THE APPLICANT EXPLAINED REALLY THE CONCEPT OF WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT. WE'RE LOCATED AT FIFTH WEST AND 33RD NORTH. IT'S 35.92 ACRES. THIS IS THE PROPERTY WITH LITTLE CREEK COMING ALONG THE SOUTH PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. AS THE APPLICANT STATED, THIS IS ZONED R-3. IT IS IN THE GENERAL URBAN TRANSECT. THIS IS THE PROPOSED PUD. THE REQUEST IS FOR 359 UNITS ON 35.92 ACRES, WHICH EQUALS TO TEN UNITS PER ACRE FOR THE. PER THE PUD ORDINANCE, THE R-3 MAX DENSITY IS ALLOWED AT 35 UNITS PER ACRE, SO THERE ARE 25 UNITS PER ACRE LESS. THEY ARE LOOKING TO BUILD THIS PUD IN FIVE PHASES. AS THE APPLICANT STATED, THEY DO MEET THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENT.IT'S 25% AND THEY EXCEED IT TO 33%. SO WHY ARE THEY REQUESTING THE PUD? THERE'S REALLY TWO REASONS THAT THIS PUD IS BEING REQUESTED. THE FIRST IS IN REGARDS TO PRIVATE STREETS, WHICH I'VE PUT THE CODE SECTION UP THERE, THAT THEY ARE ALLOWED TO ASK FOR PRIVATE STREETS, THE ONLY PLACE IN OUR CODE THAT ALLOWS FOR PRIVATE STREETS. AND THE OTHER ELEMENT IS FOR THEIR SETBACK REQUEST, WHICH I JUST WILL POINT OUT THE BOTTOM SECTION THAT THE INTERNAL SETBACKS BETWEEN BUILDINGS AND LOT LINES MAY BE ESTABLISHED AS PART OF THE PUD PROCESS, SO THEY ARE ALLOWED TO ASK FOR A DIFFERENT SETBACK. YOU'LL SEE THAT THEY VARY A LITTLE BIT FROM THE R-3 STANDARD, BUT THEY ALSO MEET THAT STANDARD. IN SOME INSTANCES, THEIR PROPOSED BUILDING TYPE. I'LL WALK THROUGH THAT. IT'S I WILL ADMIT IT'S SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN WE'VE EVER HAD BEFORE. SO I DO WANT TO GO OVER THAT A LITTLE BIT IN DETAIL WITH THIS SETBACK.
THE FIRST IS OUR ACCESS AND CONNECTIVITY. SO THERE ARE PROPOSED THREE PUBLIC STREETS WHIP AWAY PINE VALLEY WAY AND WHITE LANE. ONE OF THEM IS JUST A LITTLE STUB TO THE WEST. SO WE'RE PRIMARILY LOOKING AT THIS RED. RIGHT HERE IS WHAT'S PROPOSED AS PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
THOSE ARE 70 FOOT PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. AND AS THE APPLICANT STATED, THEY DO ALLOW FOR ON STREET PARKING, WHICH IS NOT ACCOUNTED FOR IN THEIR CALCULATIONS FOR PARKING. SO JUST BE COGNIZANT OF THAT. THEY ARE PROPOSING 907 PARKING STALLS, WHICH WOULD EQUATE, IF I PUT THE CALCULATION AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT SLIDE WITH 100 PARKING STALLS, AND REALIZE THAT THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE ON STREET PARKING, THAT WOULD BE POTENTIALLY ON THOSE RIGHT OF WAYS, FURTHER ANTERIOR TO THE. THIS ONE'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT BECAUSE THERE ARE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAYS, BUT THIS YELLOW THAT I'VE HIGHLIGHTED HERE ARE ALL PRIVATE STREETS.
THOSE ARE 26 FOOT WIDE PRIVATE STREETS. A LOT OF THESE ARE REAR LOADED PRODUCTS. SO THE ENTRANCE OR THE PARKING IS COMING IN FROM BEHIND. AND YEAH, SO SO THAT'S THE AND OH, AND ALSO ASSOCIATED WITH THAT, THEY ARE PROPOSING A TRAIL SYSTEM AS PART OF THEIR CONNECTIVITY.
THAT'S THIS TAN LINE HERE. IT COMES UP THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND GOES ALONG THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT AS WELL. AND SOME HERE TO THE SOUTH. THE REST OF THESE, THEY ARE CONNECTING THROUGH THE HOUSE OVER TO THE FUTURE SIDEWALK NETWORK TO THE WEST. JUST SO YOU'RE AWARE. BUT THERE IS A TRAIL NETWORK THAT BASICALLY CIRCUMVENTS OR. YEAH, GOES AROUND THE PROPERTY AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. I WANT TO WALK THROUGH THIS SETBACK REQUEST HERE BECAUSE IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT. THE PRODUCT THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING IS A FLEXIBLE TYPE OF BUILD. AND I REALIZE I HAVE THIS ZOOMED IN. SO I WILL SHOW THESE A LITTLE BIT MORE IN DETAIL. BUT THERE'S BASICALLY FIVE HOUSING TYPES THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING. THEY HAVE THE I, I COULDN'T REALLY READ THE REQUESTED SETBACK WHEN I WAS DOING MY ANALYSIS ON THIS, SO I BLEW IT UP RIGHT HERE. SO THIS IS REALLY WHAT THE SETBACK REQUESTING FOR THE FLEX BASE AND FLEX FLAT. SO PRIMARILY THE FLEX BASE TYPE PRODUCT, THEY MEET THE R-3 STANDARD FOR THE FLEX FLAT. THEY ARE LOOKING FOR A LESS ON THE FRONT AND REAR
[01:30:05]
AND THEN ON THE FLEX PLUS THERE AND FLEX GARAGE AND FLEX PREMIUM THERE IS A REDUCTION.SO JUST BE COGNIZANT OF THAT. LET ME EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING. THAT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT FOR US. THE FIRST IS THE SIMPLE FLEX BASE, WHICH IS RIGHT HERE, THIS YELLOW PRODUCT. AND THEN THEY HAVE THE FLEX FLATS. THESE ARE PRETTY MUCH SINGLE UNIT OR THE DUPLEX THAT THE APPLICANT TALKED ABOUT AND WHICH THEY SHOW VARIOUS PROFILES HERE.
HOWEVER, ONE THAT'S A DIFFERENT. I'M GOING TO JUMP A LITTLE BIT. I TRIED TO GO THROUGH AND FIGURE OUT WHERE THESE WERE GOING TO BE LOCATED. SO WE HAVE THE FLEX BASE AND THE FLEX FLAT HERE. BUT IF YOU NOTICE, THEY HAVE THESE OTHER TYPES SPRINKLED THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. AND I THINK THOSE TYPE OF PRODUCTS. SO THE FLEX, IF I SAY THESE WRONG, PLEASE CORRECT ME. THE FLEX PLUS WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING IS THE ABILITY FOR FLEXIBILITY IN THEIR CONSTRUCTION. SO THE UNIT WOULD BE ADJACENT TO THE THE STREET OR TO THE PUBLIC SPACE THAT THE, THE, THE, THE UNIT WOULD FRONT ON. AND THEY'RE PROPOSING TO BUILD A CONCRETE SLAB WITH FOOTINGS IN THAT SLAB TO ALLOW FOR OFF STREET PARKING OFF OF THE PRIVATE ALLEYWAY.
THOSE VARY IN WIDTH AND LENGTHS. PRIMARILY, THEY'RE 24FT. BUT REALIZE WE'RE LOOKING AT THE.
IN RELATION TO THE LOT AND THE SETBACK. SO THE REAR SETBACK PROPOSED FOR THE FLEX PLUS IS WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING IS A THREE FOOT REAR SETBACK ON THAT. THE ECONOMIST SAID THAT THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE PARKING AREA OF 24FT. AND THEN THIS LITTLE MEASUREMENT RIGHT THERE IS THE THREE FEET. THEY ALSO WANT SOME FLEXIBILITY AND ABILITY TO CONSTRUCT FOR FUTURE HOMEOWNERS.
SO IF THE FUTURE HOMEOWNERS CHOSE TO CONSTRUCT, AND THAT'S WHAT I'M SHOWING ON PHASE TWO GARAGE, THEN THEY COULD POTENTIALLY DO THAT AND ENCLOSE THAT PARKING SPACE IN A GARAGE.
SO REALLY, IT WOULD WIND UP HAVING ONLY A THREE FOOT SETBACK TO THE GARAGE SPACE ON THE REAR. SO THAT'S WHERE IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT. AND THEY'RE PROPOSING THAT IN ALL THEIR DEVELOPMENT TYPES, THE MAIN ONE THAT'S VERY DIFFERENT IS THIS FLEX PREMIUM. AND WITH THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING THE CONCRETE SLAB, BUT THEY'RE ALSO PROPOSING AN ABILITY FOR THE INITIAL UNIT TO GROW AND ADD ADDITIONS TO IT OR NOT ADD ADDITIONS TO IT. SO FOR EXAMPLE, FOR THIS PHASE ONE, THEY HAVE A TWO STORY UNIT. AND THEN IN THAT CONCRETE SLAB THEY COULD BUILD A GARAGE OR THEY COULD BUILD AN ADDITION, OR THEY COULD LEAVE THE ADDITION IN THE MIDDLE PORTION. SO THIS IS WHY THEY'RE REQUESTING THE SETBACK WITH EACH OF THOSE DIFFERENT PHASES AND DIFFERENT PRODUCT TYPES. AND I'LL PULL BACK HERE JUST SO YOU CAN LOOK AT THOSE.
SO YOU HAVE SOME OF THESE SINGLE STORY, SINGLE STORY ALONG THE WEST. AND YOU'D HAVE THEM INTERMIXED HERE WITH THE DUPLEXES, DUPLEXES, DUPLEXES, AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE THOSE FLEXIBLE SPACES THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. SO JUST BE CONSCIOUS THAT THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE REQUESTING FOR THE SETBACK, ADJUSTMENT AND WAIVER ON THAT FROM THE THREE. I JUST POINT THIS OUT. I CALLED OUT SOME OF THE AMENITIES. THEY ALREADY HIT ON THIS, BUT I JUST WANTED TO CALL OUT. THEY ARE REQUIRED EIGHT AMENITIES. THEY ARE PROPOSING. 17 AND THEN THIS IS A AN AERIAL OF THE PROPERTY WITH THE CHURCH ON THE CORNER AND THEN THE WILLOW CREEK DOWN HERE ON THE SOUTH EAST. AND THEN THESE ARE JUST PICTURES I WANTED TO. THERE'S A COUPLE THINGS ON THE SUPPLEMENTAL. AND THEN I'LL GET INTO THE PUBLIC HEARING THE APPLICANT. SO I JUST BLEW THESE UP JUST TO MAKE THIS EASIER TO SEE IF WE WANTED TO GO OVER THEM IN DETAIL. I WANTED TO JUST BRIEFLY DISCUSS THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING, THE STREET NETWORK THAT WE USE THROUGHOUT THE CITY. WE DESIGNATED, ACCORDING TO THE ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN, WHICH IS SET BY THE BONNEVILLE METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION, MPO. MANY OF YOU HAVE SAID ON THAT BOARD, AND THAT DESIGNATES WHAT THE THE TYPE OF STREET PROFILE IN WHICH WE HAVE THROUGHOUT THE CITY. SO FIFTH WEST OR I BELIEVE SOME OF YOU LOCALS CALL IT EAST RIVER
[01:35:08]
ROAD. IT FITS WEST RUNS HERE AND THAT'S DESIGNATED AS A PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL. AND THEN 33RD NORTH IS REPRESENTED AS A MINOR ARTERIAL THIS GREEN. SO I JUST WANTED TO CALL THOSE OUT BECAUSE THERE ARE PROFILES FOR THOSE ROADS. EACH OF THOSE PROFILES FOR A PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL AND A MINOR ARTERIAL CALL OUT A CENTER TURNING LANE. THE DEVELOPMENT AS PART OF CONSTRUCTION AND PART OF DOING BUSINESS IS THAT THAT PROFILE WOULD BE BUILT BY THE DEVELOPMENT AS IT COMES IN FURTHER, AND THE ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN, IT DOES CALL A FUNCTIONAL AREA OF MAJOR INTERSECTIONS. AND THEY CALL OUT JUST ONE EXAMPLE IN THE ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN, BUT THEY DO CALL OUT RIGHT TURN LANES. THAT STREET IMPROVEMENT WOULD BE REQUIRED BY THE DEVELOPER AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION. FURTHER, HE BROUGHT UP IMPACT FEES. AND I'M JUST GOING TO BRIEFLY HIT ON THIS BECAUSE IMPACT FEE PROTESTS ACTUALLY COME LATER IN A DIFFERENT PUBLIC HEARING. THEY DON'T COME AS PART OF THIS.THIS IS SPECIFICALLY LOOKING AT THE PUD AND WHETHER IT MEETS THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS, HOW IMPACT FEES, AND THIS IS MAYBE FOR THE DEVELOPER AND ALSO FOR THE PUBLIC, JUST TO UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT OF PROCESS. IMPACT FEES ARE ASSESSED AT THE TIME OF THE BUILDING PERMIT, AND THAT'S WHEN THEY'RE PAID. THERE ARE EXEMPTIONS IN OUR CODE, WHICH I JUST CALL OUT HERE. IF YOU WANT THE REFERENCE 28-8, THIS PROJECT WOULD NOT BE PART OF THAT EXEMPTION. THIS WOULD BE SUBJECT TO IMPACT FEES, IMPACT FEES, HOW THEY WORK. IF SOMEBODY IF THEY WANT AN IMPACT FEE WAIVER OR THEY WANT SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE, THEN THEY PAY THE IMPACT FEE UNDER PROTEST AND THEN THROUGH THE MUNICIPAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
THAT'S PAM WAS JUST HERE PRESENTING THE BUDGET. THEN YOU WOULD PAY IT IN PROTEST, AND THEN YOU WOULD FILE AN APPEAL AT THAT TIME, AND SHE WOULD DO AN ANALYSIS. THAT IS ALL I WANTED TO HIT ON ON THOSE POINTS. THIS ITEM WENT TO PLANNING COMMISSION. I'LL JUST KEEP GOING BACK TO THE. THIS ITEM WENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON JUNE 2ND OF 2026.
THERE WAS SOME PUBLIC COMMENT AT THAT PUBLIC HEARING, AND I JUST WANTED TO HIT ON A COUPLE POINTS THAT WERE RAISED BY THE. AND I KNOW THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND SOME PUBLIC CAN COMMENT ON THIS. PRIMARILY, ISSUES WERE RAISED REGARDING. IT WAS REGARDING TRAFFIC, SPECIFICALLY ON FIFTH WEST AND 33RD NORTH, AND ALSO THE DENSITY AND THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT THIS WOULD FUNNEL TO THOSE RESPECTIVE ARTERIALS. THAT'S WHY STREET IMPROVEMENTS WOULD BE REQUIRED. AS PART OF THAT, HOW HOW STREETS GET WIDENED AS THEY GO DOWN, AS IT'S PIECEMEAL, AS DEVELOPMENT COMES INTO THE CITY, THOSE STREETS THEN GET WIDENED ACCORDING TO THAT ARTERIAL. SO THAT WAS BROUGHT UP. THERE WAS ALSO SOME QUESTION THAT WAS BROUGHT UP REGARDING WILLOW CREEK DOWN HERE. THE APPLICANT IS PRESERVING WILLOW CREEK.
THERE WAS SOME CONCERN THAT THERE WOULD NOT BE ANY PRESERVATION OF THAT FLOW THAT IS MANAGED BY THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. YOU CANNOT ADJUST THE FLOW OF THAT CREEK WITHOUT THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS INPUT. THE APPLICANT IS NOT PROPOSING THAT. SO THEY DID PRESERVE IT, AND THEY DID PUT A TRAIL SYSTEM ADJACENT TO IT. THEY ALSO THERE WAS THE ISSUE THAT THE APPLICANT BROUGHT UP AND WITH THE MARSHALL RESIDENCE TO THE NORTH. I'LL JUST EXPLAIN THAT BECAUSE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP AS PART OF THE PUBLIC HEARING. THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT THE THE ADJACENT PROPERTY TO THE NORTH. IF YOU NOTICE IN THE CONCEPT, I KNOW IT'S HARD TO SEE THERE WAS A DISCREPANCY FROM THE MARSHALL'S ABOUT WHAT THAT DITCH EASEMENT ACTUALLY WAS AND THE WIDTH OF THAT EASEMENT THAT IS SET BY THE CANAL COMPANY. THAT'S A THAT'S A DITCH. IT ACTUALLY IS A PRIVATE MATTER. AND SO WHAT WAS DISPUTED ON THE DITCH AND HOW BIG THAT EASEMENT IS, IS BETWEEN THE MARSHALLS, THE DEVELOPER, AND THE AND THE CANAL COMPANY. WE CAN'T CONDITION ANYTHING ON THAT BECAUSE IT'S A PRIVATE CIVIL MATTER. IF IT ESCALATES, THEN IT WOULD ACTUALLY BE DECIDED WITHIN CIVIL COURT. SO THE APPLICANT, WHAT THEY DID AFTER THAT, THEY DID SHIFT THE DEVELOPMENT TO THE SOUTH. SO THAT'S WHY THEY PUT THIS TRAIL SYSTEM. AND TO BE QUITE HONEST, I DON'T KNOW HOW WIDE THAT'S
[01:40:05]
GOING TO BE. I'M ASSUMING BETWEEN 5 AND 10FT. AND THEN USUALLY THE THE UTILITY OR THE DITCH IS USUALLY ABOUT A 20FT, 15, 20FT. SO THEY ACCOMMODATED FOR THAT COMMENT. I JUST SAY THAT BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME REQUEST IN THE PUBLIC HEARING THAT COULD BE A CONDITION ATTACHED TO THAT. AND WE CAN'T ATTACH A CONDITION BETWEEN PRIVATE ENTITIES. SO WE WOULD BE BINDING THE CANAL COMPANY TO SOME CONDITION, WHICH WE CAN'T WE CAN'T LEGALLY DO. AND I THINK COVERED ALL OF IT. YOU'LL NOTICE IN THE STAFF REPORT AND THE APPLICANT ADDRESSED IT, SOMETHING THAT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT IS WE DO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION FOR A CONDITION ON THIS ONE, AND I WILL READ IT VERBATIM. IT'S AT THE BOTTOM OF THE STAFF REPORT. IT'S IN REGARDS TO THE, THE, THE WIDENING OF 33RD AND FIFTH WEST. SO OUR LEGAL NEXUS IS THAT THE MPO ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN. AND AS PART OF THAT, WE STATE THAT THEY PROVIDE A CENTER LEFT HAND TURN LANE ON FIFTH WEST AND 33RD NORTH, OR PROVIDE A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY DEMONSTRATING THAT THE TRIP GENERATION FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL NOT CONSTITUTE THE NEED FOR A TURN LANE. SO WE'RE REQUESTING EITHER THE APPLICANT JUST DO THE TURN LANE AND CENTER LANE, OR DO A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY THAT WILL EITHER DETERMINE WHETHER THAT'S NEEDED OR NOT. I'M NOT AN EXPERT IN TRAFFIC ENGINEERING. BRIAN CUNNINGHAM. HE'S THE MAN WITH THE BRAINS BEHIND ME, AND HE CAN SPEAK TO THAT MUCH BETTER THAN I CAN. BUT THAT IS A CONDITION THAT WE HAVE REQUESTED AS PART OF THIS. WITH THAT, IT WENT TO PLANNING COMMISSION. PLANNING COMMISSION DID DELIBERATE ON THIS QUITE EXTENSIVELY, BUT IN THE END, THEY DID SEND A UNANIMOUS POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL. AND WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU AND I KNOW COUNCILOR FRANCIS ALSO HAS SOME QUESTIONS FOR THE DEVELOPER. SO, COUNCILOR LARSON, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING FOR. DIRECTOR CENTER? NO. GO AHEAD, DIRECTOR SANDERS, AND I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS YOUR PART OF THE WORLD. I'VE GOT SOME TIMING QUESTIONS. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT IMPACT FEE COLLECTION, THOSE HAPPEN WHEN THEY PULL BUILDING PERMITS. IS THAT CORRECT? SO HOW DOES THAT TIMING MATCH UP WITH THE NEEDED ROAD IMPROVEMENTS AND HOW THAT GETS FUNDED, GIVEN THAT THIS IS A PHASED PROJECT? I WILL TURN TO MR. CUNNINGHAM. SO AS FAR AS THE IMPACT FEES AND REIMBURSEMENT FOR ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS. YEAH. IF WHEN WE REQUIRE THE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS TO BE DONE ON THE ARTERIAL ROADWAYS, WE WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER AND THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND DEFINE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO REIMBURSE THEM FOR. AND SO TECHNICALLY, WE REIMBURSE THEM.IT'S KIND OF A COMPLICATED. THEY TYPICALLY WILL START BUILDING BUILDINGS BEFORE ALL THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE INTERNALLY IS BUILT. SO WE'RE COLLECTING IMPACT FEES AS THEY'RE BUILDING THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE ON THE ARTERIAL ROADWAYS. SO IT'S KIND OF A COMBINED THING. IT'S IN UNISON WITH EACH OTHER, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. SO TYPICALLY, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO PIN YOU DOWN TOO TIGHT, BUT THE DEVELOPER WOULD PAY THE THE BILL UP FRONT TO DEVELOP THE ROADWAY AS APPROPRIATE. AND THEN THEY WOULD BE REIMBURSED. AND THIS WOULD BE SPELLED OUT IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. CORRECT. WE'VE DONE THIS WITH SOME EXAMPLES OF ONES WE'VE DONE RECENTLY ARE MAVERICK ON 33RD NORTH JUST EAST OF HERE. YEAH. MOUNTAIN LAND SUPPLY RIGHT NEXT TO MAVERICK. WE'VE DONE THE SAME THING. WE REQUIRED THE 33RD NORTH TO BE INSTALLED. AND THEN WE'LL I MEAN, WE DEFINE HOW MANY LINEAL FEET OCCURRED ON THE OTHER SIDEWALK LANDSCAPING, HOW MUCH ASPHALT, AND IT'S DEFINED. BASICALLY, WE DEVELOP A BIG TAB IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE. OKAY. THANK YOU. I DO HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION. I THINK FOR CVS. THAT'S GREAT. AGAIN, IT'S IT'S KIND OF A TIMING ISSUE, BUT THIS HAS TO DO WITH AMENITIES. WILL THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SPELL OUT GIVEN THIS AGAIN THAT IT'S PHASED KIND OF WHEN THOSE AMENITIES COME IN COMPARED TO YOU KNOW WHAT THE PHASES COME IN. SO THERE'S KIND OF A MATCH. WE DON'T LEAVE AMENITIES UNTIL EVERYTHING'S DONE, THAT KIND OF THING. YEAH. GREAT QUESTION. SHORT ANSWER IS YES. THAT THAT IS WE MAKE SURE THAT THOSE MATCH AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT'S DRAFTED BY OUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. OKAY. AND I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE DEVELOPER, BUT I'LL MAKE SURE. GO AHEAD AND
[01:45:08]
THEN AND THEN JUST QUICKLY, IS THERE ANY ABILITY TO HAVE THIS CONNECTED TO THE CHURCH PROPERTY? I MEAN, IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT MANY PEOPLE THERE, I'M SURE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO WANT TO WALK INTO GO TO CHURCH ON SUNDAYS. OH, OVER HERE. YEAH. SO IS THERE A PLACE WHERE WE CAN HAVE THE CONNECTIVITY? WE WE CAN'T REQUIRE THAT BECAUSE THAT CONNECTION IS BETWEEN TWO PRIVATE LANDOWNERS. YEAH. SO THE, THE LATTER DAY SAINT CHURCH AND THE, THE DEVELOPER WOULD HAVE TO ENTER A PRIVATE AGREEMENT ON THAT, BUT WE COULD REQUIRE THEM TO HAVE THAT ACCESS POINT. RIGHT. WE WOULDN'T MANDATE THAT THEY MAKE IT, BUT THAT THEY HAVE SOME PLACE WHERE IT COULD BE OPEN. THIS IS AN ONGOING CONCERN. WE WANT WE DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO LIVE IN THESE KIND OF NEIGHBORHOODS AND THEN HAVE TO GET IN A CAR AND CONTRIBUTE TO OUR CAR TRIPS TO GO TO A TO A PUBLIC ENTITY LIKE A CHURCH OR EVEN THEIR NEIGHBOR KIDS OR WHATEVER. IS THIS BROWN TRAIL, THOUGH, AT THE BASE OF THAT PROPERTY TRAIL, IT'S A WALKING TRAIL. SO IT'S A WALKING TRAIL UP AGAINST THE, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. AND I WAS GOING TO SAY, I DON'T BELIEVE WE CAN REQUIRE THAT, BUT I WAS GOING TO MENTION THE TRAIL AS WELL AS REMEMBER, THERE'S GOING TO BE A FUTURE SIDEWALK NETWORK AS WELL.SO YEAH, THEY MAY HAVE TO GO OUT AND AROUND, BUT THERE STILL WOULD BE SOME PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY THERE JUST ON THE PERIPHERY OF THE TRAIL. I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
IT'S THE LITTLE BROWN LINE THAT IS AT THE BASE. CAN YOU CAN YOU BLOW THAT ONE UP FOR HIM? ARE WE TALKING ABOUT NO, UP AT THE UP RIGHT THERE. RIGHT. OH, YES. YES. THERE IS A BROWN LINE.
THAT IS A TRAIL THAT CONNECTS IN BETWEEN THOSE TWO PROPERTIES. THANK YOU. I SHOULD HAVE POINTED THAT OUT. SO I DO I DO HAVE A QUESTION THOUGH, AND IT'S UNUSUAL THAT I THINK THAT WE ALLOW ONE OR THE OTHER A TRAFFIC STUDY OR THE BUILD OUT OF THE ROAD, BECAUSE THIS IS GOING TO CREATE TRAFFIC. AND IT SEEMS LIKE UPON YOUR UPON THE FRONTAGE THAT WE WOULD REQUIRE THE 33RD AND FIFTH BE IMPROVED. AND, AND I DO UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, YOU WILL BE PAYING IMPACT FEES, BUT BECAUSE THERE ARE ARTERIALS, THEY WOULD BE REIMBURSED. SO I'M JUST NOT SURE WHY THAT WOULDN'T JUST BE PART OF IT. I MEAN, THIS MANY HOUSES ON THESE KIND OF FRONTAGE, IT JUST FEELS LIKE THAT IS WHAT IS TYPICAL, THAT WE WOULD JUST REQUIRE THE BUILD OUT OF THE ARTERIAL WITH A REIMBURSEMENT BECAUSE YOU'RE PAYING IMPACT FEES. SURE. OKAY.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THEY ARE PROPOSING A TIS TO BE DONE. THEY'VE THEY'VE SUBMITTED A SCOPE OF WORK FOR US, WHICH WE'VE REVIEWED AND GOT BACK WITH THEM. AND BUT THAT'S JUST GOING TO BE THEIR TRAFFIC STUDY. RIGHT. AND SO IF IT'S NOT I IT ISN'T A CRITICISM OF TRAFFIC STUDIES, BUT IT DOES FEEL LIKE WE COULD ALSO JUST REQUIRE THEM TO BUILD OUT. I MEAN, THEY ARE THE THEY ARE NOW THE NEW OWNERS AND THEY'RE TRYING TO DEVELOP ON ARTERIAL ROADS ON FIFTH WEST.
YES. I'VE GOT TO CONFIRM WITH DIRECTOR CANFIELD THAT WE'VE HAD DISCUSSION ON FIFTH WEST BECAUSE OF THE HIGHWAY 20 INTERCHANGE. MAKES SENSE TO BE REQUIRED TO BE BUILT THERE.
SHORT SHORT FRONTAGE ON 33RD NORTH IS. I CAN QUESTIONABLE. WE'RE STILL IN DISCUSSION ON THAT ONE BUT BUT FIFTH WEST WILL ABSOLUTELY BE BUILT OUT REGARDLESS OF ANY TRAFFIC STUDY THAT WE RECEIVE. IT WILL BE. IT IS A MAIN ROAD AND IT'S DOING A LOT OF THIS. SO WE'VE GOT TO GET THAT ROAD UNDER CONTROL. OKAY. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCIS, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS. YES. FOR THE DEVELOPER? YES, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND. SO THE TRAIL THAT GOES ALONG WILLOW CREEK, DOES IT GO ALL THE WAY TO THE NORTH EDGE OF YOUR PROPERTY OR DOES IT END? IT KIND OF LOOKS LIKE IT ENDS HALFWAY UP. YEAH. GOOD QUESTION. THERE'S TWO FORKS RIGHT HERE.
SO IT COMES UP THROUGH HERE AND YOU CAN SEE THERE'S ONE RIGHT THERE. AND THERE'S ANOTHER ONE THAT COMES UP THROUGH HERE. AND IT LOOPS THROUGH THE OPEN SPACE AREA RIGHT HERE. AND THEN SOME QUESTION. WELL YEAH, I MEAN, AND IT LEADS ME TO MY NEXT QUESTION IS WHY NOT RUN THAT TRAIL ALL THE WAY ALONG THE, THE SCENIC WILLOW CREEK? BECAUSE THAT'S HOW WE CONNECTED PARKING AND THE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT THAT WAS REQUIRED OF US 15 FOOT PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT. EVEN THOUGH I WOULD LOVE NOT TO HAVE THE 15 FOOT PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT,
[01:50:01]
BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE WHAT IT WOULD BE USED FOR IN THE FUTURE RIGHT THERE. BUT WE WERE REQUIRED TO PUT THAT. I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE AND THE DISCUSSIONS YOU'VE HAD WITH THAT PROPERTY OWNER, OR HE WOULD LIKE YOU TO PUT A FENCE UP AND NOT THE NORTH. SORRY, THE SOUTH EAST. OKAY. THE SOUTHEAST. HE HAS HORSES ON THE PROPERTY AND HE'S CONCERNED ABOUT. LET ME GO AHEAD AND SHOW YOU RIGHT HERE. THIS IS THE OWNER RIGHT HERE. OKAY? THIS IS THE NAME IS LA BELLE. AND HE HAS HORSES ON HIS PROPERTY.WE'VE GIVEN THE THUMBS UP TO HAVE THE HORSES ON THE PROPERTY UNTIL WE DEVELOP. AND ONCE WE START BUILDING, WE'VE AGREED TO MOVE THAT FENCE. THAT IS, IT'S ACTUALLY I KNOW IT SHOWS IT RIGHT HERE, BUT HE ALSO HAS IT ACTUALLY ON THE NORTH SIDE OF WILLOW CREEK AS WELL. WE NEED TO MOVE THE FENCE THERE AND BUT WE HAVE TOLD THEM THAT WE WOULD MOVE IT TO JUST THE BOUNDARY LINE, THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY LINE. YEAH. THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY LINE. AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY UNITS UP AGAINST THIS HOUSE EITHER. WE I THINK ONE OF THE ORIGINAL PLANS THAT WE DID, WE DID HAVE UNITS STUBBING INTO THAT SOUTH SOUTHEAST AREA, BUT. SO YEAH, SO CONTINUE MY QUESTION THEN, BECAUSE I CONSIDER WILLOW CREEK A COMMUNITY RESOURCE. YES. NOT A RESOURCE JUST FOR THESE RESIDENTS. SO HOW WOULD YOU MAKE THAT TRAIL OBVIOUSLY OPEN TO THE ENTIRE PUBLIC OF IDAHO FALLS? THAT'S A WONDERFUL QUESTION. THESE WILL BE. SO I BELIEVE THEY THEY ARE TEN FEET. AND THEY COULD WALK RIGHT IN AND AND GO ON THE TRAIL. I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY HOW TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, BUT COULD YOU SIGN IT? SO IT'S OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. YES, I'D BE OPEN TO THAT. I THINK THAT'S WHAT OUR MAIN PEOPLE WOULD LOVE PEOPLE TO UTILIZE IT. WE COULD REQUIRE A PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT, A PUBLIC SIDEWALK ACCESS OR A PATHWAY EASEMENT ACROSS IT IF YOU WANT. THAT'S HOW YOU WOULD RESOLVE IT FOR THEM. ALL THE PUBLIC TO USE IT IS A PUBLIC RIGHT, BECAUSE WILLOW CREEK IS KIND OF A RESOURCE FOR THE WHOLE COMMUNITY, AND I DON'T WANT TO BE BLOCKED OFF JUST AS AN AMENITY FOR THIS. OKAY. WITH THE CITY, BE WILLING TO MAINTAIN IT. IF WE DID OPEN IT UP TO THE CITY. I CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION. THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION, BECAUSE IF WE OPEN THESE UP TO THE TO THE REST OF THE CITY, THEN IT'S IT'S GOING TO BE USED A LOT MORE THAN JUST OUR RESIDENTS. WE WOULD. BUT.
RIGHT. BUT THAT'S WHAT THE PD IS ABOUT. THAT'S, THAT'S THE POINT. THE PED. THAT'S PART OF THE COMPROMISE, RIGHT, IS THAT YOU HAVE TO BUILD A PUBLIC AMENITY. SO THAT'S GOING TO BE ADDITIONAL COSTS AND MAINTENANCE. AND THAT'S THE CHOICE THAT YOU'RE MAKING WHEN YOU COME BEFORE US. YEAH. OF COURSE WE WOULD LOVE WE WOULD LOVE PEOPLE. WE WOULD LOVE ALL RESIDENTS OF IDAHO FALLS. AND THOSE AMENITIES, OF COURSE. I DON'T THINK IT'S UNTYPICAL FOR A DEVELOPMENT THAT HAD A POOL TO SHUT IT OFF TO. ONLY RESIDENTS ONLY. BUT I DON'T SEE THAT AS. PLEASE DON'T MISUNDERSTAND MY QUESTION. I'M NOT ASKING FOR THAT PICKLEBALL COURT TO BE OPEN TO EVERYBODY IN THE COMMUNITY. IT'S ONLY THE. THE ELEMENT OF WILLOW CREEK BELONGING TO. IT'S A RESOURCE FOR ALL OF THIS COMMUNITY. AND SO THE TRAIL ALONG IT SHOULD BE OPEN TO THE WHOLE COMMUNITY. OKAY. AND I REMEMBER FRANCIS, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE TRAIL THAT THE TRAIL BEHIND THE HOUSES. ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THAT RIGHT THERE WHERE THE LITTLE HAND IS GOES RIGHT ALONG THE RIGHT THERE? I MEAN, I AND NO, NO PROBLEM WITH WITH RESIDENTS OF IDAHO FALLS IS THAT I THINK I MEAN, OUR AMENITY COUNT IS SIGNIFICANTLY ABOVE THE TYPICAL. AND THAT'S BECAUSE WE WANT OUR RESIDENTS TO LOVE WHERE THEY LIVE. AND SO.
YEAH, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE. SAY THERE, BUT I THINK IF CITY COUNCIL HAS A RECOMMENDATION AND. IF WE'D LOVE TO OPEN IT UP, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. YEAH. I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT OPENING ALL YOUR AMENITIES TO THE PUBLIC. THAT'S NOT THE QUESTION. TO OPEN UP THE TRAIL SYSTEM ON THE ON THE PART THAT GOES ALONG WITH IT. YEAH. YES. OKAY. MR. REED, CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION ABOUT THE THREE FOOT SETBACKS? YES. AND I'M JUST CURIOUS IF YOU CAN POINT OUT TO ME WHERE THOSE WOULD BE THE THREE FOOT SETBACKS. SO WE'VE GOT THE I DO WANT TO NOTE THAT IN SEVERAL OF THE OTHER ZONINGS. PLEASE DO CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY IN THERE AS A THREE FOOT SETBACK AND FIVE FOOT SETBACKS. AND THERE ARE DIFFERENT. BUT WE'RE IN THE R-3
[01:55:02]
ZONING. SO IF WE ARE UNDER THE T ZONING, I ACTUALLY BELIEVE THAT NO, IT'S A. I BELIEVE THAT ANYWAYS, THREE FOOT SETBACKS. I BELIEVE THEY'RE ON THE BACK OF THESE UNITS RIGHT HERE. SO FOR EXAMPLE, ON THIS UNIT RIGHT HERE AND WAIT, PLEASE STOP ME IF I'M SAYING IT INCORRECTLY.BUT WE WORKED THROUGH IT ALL THE STAFF. BUT IT'S FOR A DRIVER THAT'S COMING IN. THEY DRIVE RIGHT INTO THEIR GARAGE. AND WE PROVIDED THAT TO BE A 24 FOOT GARAGE WITH. YOU WERE CORRECT IN THE ZONE. IF YOU ACCESS FROM THE REAR FROM AN ALLEYWAY, YOU CAN HAVE A THREE FOOT SETBACK, BUT ONLY IN THE T ZONE. OKAY, SO AND I KNOW THE PROPERTY ACROSS THE STREET IS IS ANYWAYS, BUT IT SEEMED LIKE A GREAT FIT FOR THE COMMUNITY AND FOR THE DEVELOPMENT TO HAVE THAT VARIANCE. SO, SO I'M IN A MYSTERY. I'M GOING TO TAKE YOU THROUGH JUST A QUESTION IN HERE.
IF I'M COMING IN, WHIP AWAY. AND THEN I TURN ON TO WALTER DRIVE. YEAH. SO I'M TAKING A LEFT ONTO WALTER DRIVE, AND I AM GOING INTO ONE OF THOSE HOUSES THAT IS KIND OF A BLUE AND A PINK. BLUE AND A PINK. YEP. YOU'RE RIGHT ON RIGHT THERE. THE PINK PART OF THAT HOUSE IS JUST A SLAB. NO, THAT'S A GARAGE. IT IS A IT'S A FULL GARAGE, IF I MAY. SO YES, HOW WOULD I GET INTO MY HOUSE WITH A THREE FOOT SETBACK? IT LOOKS LIKE I HAVE TO DO A THREE POINT TURN. YEAH. SO LET'S SAY I'M DRIVING IN. WE AS THE BUILDER, WE WERE ASKING FOR THE ABILITY TO BUILD EITHER A SLAB IN THAT KIND OF THAT AREA RIGHT THERE. SO IN THAT CASE, IT WOULD TECHNICALLY BE A 27 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE UNIT. I MEAN, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. BUT IF THE GARAGE IS BUILT, WHICH WE DO PLAN TO BUILD MANY OF THESE UNITS WITH THE GARAGES. THAT WOULD BE THE THREE FOOT SETBACK. SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, IF YOU WERE DRIVING HERE, YOU WOULD EITHER DRIVE INTO YOUR GARAGE OR YOU WOULD DRIVE ONTO THE CONCRETE PATH, BUT THAT WILL BE A GARAGE. THAT'S NOT A THAT'S THAT'S NOT ADDITIONAL LIVING. LIKE THE LIVING SPACE WOULD BE ABOVE THE GARAGE. BUT YEAH, SO YOU DO HAVE, I DO WANT TO POINT THIS OUT. YOU HAVE THREE ON LOCKED PARKING STALLS ON THESE BLUE UNITS. YOU'VE GOT TWO IN THE GARAGE OR ON THE SLAB, AND THEN THERE'S ONE RIGHT NEXT TO IT. SO WE INCREASE THE SETBACKS BETWEEN THE HOMES TO BE TEN FEET ALTERNATING BETWEEN FIVE FEET. SO ON THE TEN FOOT SIDE YOU CAN HAVE AN ADDITIONAL PARKING. SO THERE'S THREE RIGHT THERE. AND THEN ON TOP OF THAT YOU'VE GOT WHIPPLE WAY AND YOU HAVE THE 180. SO THAT'S THE THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING AT BETWEEN THOSE GREEN AND PINK. THOSE TWO LITTLE DASHES ARE EXTRA PARKING STALLS. AND THEN AND THEN YOU HAVE THEY COME CLOSER TOGETHER AND THEN FURTHER APART AND CLOSER TOGETHER AS YOU HAVE PROVIDED EXTRA PARKING THERE. YES. AND THEN THESE THESE PARKING STALLS RIGHT HERE WOULD SERVE SERVE THESE UNITS RIGHT HERE, BUT YOU'VE GOT ONE, TWO, THREE. AND THEN THESE WOULD BE CONSIDERED SOME ADDITIONAL. AND THESE ARE REAR ENTRANCE, REAR ENTRANCE. YES. FROM WINTER STREET. YES. AND YOU COULD TURN ON A 26 FOOT RADIUS TO GET INTO YOUR DRIVEWAY. OKAY. WE DID, WE EXTENSIVELY WENT THROUGH WITH FIRE TO MAKE SURE THEIR FIRE TRUCKS COULD GET THROUGH THE WHOLE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT. WE MET WITH THE THAT WAS ONE OF THE ITEMS WE ACTUALLY TOOK OUT THE. WE HAD SOME COVERED PARKING. WE WANTED MORE COVERED PARKING. BUT THAT IS ONE THING THAT WAS. THE CITY STAFF RECOMMENDED REMOVAL SO THAT THERE WAS ADEQUATE ACCESS TO EACH OF THE UNITS FOR FIRE. I HAVE A QUESTION. GOING BACK TO COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCIS'S QUESTION ON THE TRAIL. I GUESS I'M NOT CLEAR WHY IT STOPPED. YOU INDICATED SOME SORT OF A PEW THAT WAS PROHIBITING YOUR ABILITY TO CONTINUE THE TRAIL AS YOU HEAD NORTH THROUGH, INSTEAD OF HAVING IT JUST ABRUPTLY END THERE. YEAH, I THINK THE IDEA IS TO HAVE IT RIGHT INTO HERE INSTEAD OF ABRUPTLY ENDING, BUT WE DID ORIGINALLY HAVE IT UP THROUGH THE UP THROUGH THIS SIDE. BUT WE NEEDED THAT SPACE FOR PARKING. AND WITH THE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT THAT THIS IS A 15 FOOT PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT, I COULD BE WRONG, BUT I DON'T
[02:00:05]
THINK WE'RE ALLOWED TO PUT. WE CAN PAVE ON IT, JUST NOT STRUCTURES. CORRECT. BUT YOU COULD CONTINUE A TRAIL LIKE WHERE YOU HAVE THAT GRASS THAT I'M SEEING. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE WIDTH IS THERE, BUT IT LOOKS COMPARABLE TO YOUR TRAIL WIDTH, MAYBE A LITTLE WIDER, I.SEE. YEAH, IT JUST LOOKED LIKE IT. I WAS JUST CURIOUS ON THE PEW BECAUSE THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT YOU COULD CONTINUE A TRAIL. IS THAT CORRECT? DIRECTOR CENTER BUT DOES THAT DOES THE WILLOW CREEK EVEN GO UP THERE? IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S NOT EVEN THAT'S AN IRRIGATION DITCH. THAT'S. YEAH, THAT'S THE DITCH UP WILLOW CREEK, THEN BENDS TO THE. ALSO, THERE'S A LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS TO JUST TO MAINTAIN FOR THE GREEN SPACE ON THAT EAST SIDE. AND WHAT A, WHAT A TRAIL. NOT IT WOULDN'T COUNT IN THIS CASE, NOT IF IT'S PAVED, I SEE. OKAY. YES. SO THIS HAS COME UP AT OTHER TIMES. BUT WHEN WE HAVE THESE THAT HAVE THE PUBLIC STREETS THAT ALLOW PARKING ON BOTH SIDES, AND THEN PRIVATE STREETS WHERE IT'S HARD FOR PEOPLE TO FIGURE OUT WHICH IS WHICH BECAUSE SO WHAT I'M WONDERING IS, ARE YOU CAN YOU COMMIT TO DOING MORE THAN JUST A SIGN ON THE PRIVATE STREETS, LIKE PAINT THE CURBS SO IT'S REALLY CLEAR NO PARKING ON THAT STREET, THE PRIVATE STREETS, BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE RUN INTO THE PROBLEMS WITH THE FIRE TRUCKS CAN GET THROUGH ON THE PUD DRAWING, BUT THEY CAN'T GET THROUGH BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE PARKED THERE. YES. COME ON, CURB. CURB PAINT IS WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR. RED CURB. YEAH. RED CURBING PAINT. IS THERE CURBING ON THIS? I MEAN, IS IT EVEN A PROJECTION? I'M COLLINS DAD. OKAY. THIS IS HIS FIRST PRESENTATION TO CITY COUNCIL, SO THANK YOU. HE'S BEEN DOING A GREAT JOB. YEAH. PART OF THE REASON WHY WE AREN'T PUTTING THE TRAIL UP ALONG THAT THAT DITCH IT IS THAT IS THE DITCH AND NOT THE THE CREEK. IS THAT A LANDFILL? AND WE DON'T WANT I MEAN, THERE'S SOME SAFETY ISSUES AND OTHER THINGS ALONG THAT LANDFILL. WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE PEOPLE WALKING ALONG THAT AND KIDS JUMPING AND GOING OVER TO WHERE THEY SHOULD GO. BUT WE DO WANT TO HAVE FULL ACCESS TO TREAT FOR SURE. YEAH. AS FAR AS THE THE PARKING, WE'RE GOING TO BE INVOLVED WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT FOR THE LONG TERM.
SOME OF THESE WILL BE RENTAL UNITS. SO WE WILL BE CLOSELY MONITORING PARKING FROM A HIGH PERSPECTIVE. AND WE'LL PUT THAT IN THE HOA AGREEMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE PROPERLY ENFORCING THAT THAT RESTRICTION, THAT COVENANT. AND WE'VE WE'VE OVER PARKED THIS ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT. SO, YOU KNOW, JUST THE BACKGROUND, WE'VE BEEN WORKING AT THIS FOR 11 MONTHS WITH YOUR STAFF. WE'VE GONE THROUGH SIX DIFFERENT CONCEPT PLANS AND JUST, JUST FOR SOME BACKGROUND, AND WE'VE PROBABLY PAID MORE IN ENGINEERING FEES TO GET TO THIS POINT THAN WE HAVE ANY OTHER PROJECT WE'VE WE'VE EVER DONE. AND THAT'S BEEN OKAY BECAUSE WE WANT A REALLY GOOD, REALLY GOOD DEVELOPMENT. BUT I JUST GAVE YOU THAT AS BACKGROUND THAT WE REALLY WORKED HARD WITH STAFF ON FIRE ISSUES, ON MAKING SURE THAT OUR CORNERS, ALL OF OUR CORNERS, YOU'LL SEE ARE CURVED. THOSE WERE SUGGESTIONS OF OUR OF THE FIRE MARSHAL THAT WE INCORPORATED. AND WE LOST A LOT OF UNITS BY DOING THAT, BUT WE WILLINGLY DID IT TO MAKE SURE WE WERE COMPLIANT WITH THE FIRE MARSHAL'S REQUEST. YEAH. AND MY QUESTION ISN'T THERE. MY QUESTION IS TAKING THE EXTRA STEP TO TRY TO ENSURE THAT PEOPLE WHO DON'T KNOW, WHEN THEY COME IN THERE, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PRIVATE AND A PUBLIC STREET, THEY'LL KNOW WHEN THE PLOWING COMES, BUT THE REST OF THE YEAR IT'S GOING TO BE HELPFUL IF YOU TAKE AN EXTRA STEP TO MAKE IT CLEAR ON THE CURB. I ABSOLUTELY AGREE. IF THAT SIGNAGE WE'RE HAPPY TO DO SIGNAGE, YOU KIND OF HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WITH SIGNAGE A LITTLE BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE TOO MUCH, PEOPLE START IGNORING IT. AND SO WE WANT TO HAVE THE APPROPRIATE BALANCE, BUT IT WILL BE MONITORED CLOSELY BY THE HOA THERE AND ON. THERE WILL BE AN ON SITE PERSON ALWAYS AT THE CLUBHOUSE. I HAVE ONE MORE. YES, I'LL OPEN IT UP TO PUBLIC COMMENT. THERE WILL BE A CHANCE TO TO, TO BRING THE DEVELOPER BACK AFTER WE HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC AS WELL, BECAUSE I DO HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT THE ONE SECTION THAT SHOWS PARKING ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET. YOU KNOW, THE DRIVE IN STRAIGHT IN PARKING. I CALL THEM DRIVE AISLES, BUT ON WALTER DRIVE. YEAH, YEAH. AND NOT IT'S NOT THAT ONE. I THINK IT'S THIS ONE RIGHT HERE TOO, RIGHT? YEAH. WALTER. DRIVE, POPLAR. OKAY. YEAH. NOW, WALTER, DOWN AT THE BOTTOM TOWARDS THE
[02:05:04]
SOUTHERN PROPERTY, GO TO YOUR LEFT. RIGHT HERE. YES, YES. OKAY. AND THE REASON I ASKED ABOUT THAT IS. IT SEEMS LIKE. CITY CODE, THE PURPOSE OF PD REGULATIONS TO PROVIDE ATTRACTIVE STREETSCAPES THAT ARE NOT DOMINATED BY PARKING VEHICLES OR GARAGE ENTRANCES, THAT'S DOMINATED BY PARKING. DO YOU? I DON'T KNOW, IT SEEMS LIKE YOU HAVE MORE PARKING THAN YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TO HAVE. DOES IT HAVE TO LOOK LIKE THAT? I IF YOU'D LIKE TO DIRECT US TO HAVE LESS, WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO ACCOMMODATE THAT TO AN EXTENT. BUT WE HAVE BEEN DOING THESE PROJECTS FOR A WHILE. AND WHAT WE FOUND IS A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE USE THEIR GARAGE FOR, FOR STORAGE. AND SO WE'RE VERY CAREFUL IN, IN SMALL SINGLE FAMILIES LIKE THIS AND IN TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENTS, MOST OF THE TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENTS WE'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH, PEOPLE JUST PACK THEIR PACK THEIR GARAGE WITH STUFF, AND THEN THEY'LL PARK ON THE STREET. AND WE DIDN'T WANT THAT TO HAPPEN. WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S A SIDE PARKING AND THEN AMPLE PARKING ELSEWHERE FOR GUESTS AND POTENTIALLY EVEN RESIDENTS TO, TO UTILIZE. BUT WE WALKED THROUGH A COUPLE OF OTHER DEVELOPMENTS. AND WHEN YOU HAVE WHEN YOU HAVE CARS PARKED ON THE STREETS, IT JUST BRINGS A DIFFERENT FEEL TO THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT. AND SO TWO AND A HALF, I DON'T THINK IS TOTALLY OVERKILLING IT. WE'RE ABOUT HALF ON AVERAGE PER UNIT.THAT'S IN MOST OF THE DEVELOPMENTS WE DO. THAT'S WHAT WE TRY TO GET. IT SEEMS TO WORK THE BEST BECAUSE THAT'S THAT KEEPS THE CARS OFF THE STREET AND IT MAKES FOR A GOOD FLOW AND A GOOD LOOK FOR THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT. SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO. THE TOWNHOME PROBLEM THAT I WAS MENTIONING, WE ALSO DID HAVE TREES AND KIND OF LIKE A PLANTING STRIP THROUGHOUT THE PARKING STALLS THROUGHOUT. YEAH, LIKE EVERY, EVERY 6 OR 7 YEARS, WE WERE REQUESTED TO TAKE THOSE OUT. SO WE TOOK THOSE OUT FOR FIRE ACCESS. SO BUT WE DID HAVE THOSE IN ORIGINALLY. WE ALSO HAVE COVERED STALLS. WE ALSO HAD A COUPLE OTHER GARAGE LOCATIONS EXTERNALLY, BUT WE HAVE WE HAVE WORKED WITH STAFF EXTENSIVELY TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT FIT WITHIN THE CODE AND SOMETHING TO PRESENT TO YOU GUYS TODAY. AND WE, I, WE, WE HAD TO MAKE THOSE ADJUSTMENTS, I BELIEVE, TO GET IN FRONT OF CITY COUNCIL AS WELL. MAYBE, MAYBE 1.2 IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE, WE'VE MOVED FROM WE'RE NOT DOING APARTMENT COMPLEXES, WHICH IS WHAT WE WOULD GO TO IF WE COULD GET SOMETHING LIKE THIS APPROVED. WE LIKE THE SINGLE FAMILY LOOK, AND WE REALLY WANT TO DO A PROJECT THAT HAS SMALL SINGLE FAMILIES, WHICH WE FEEL IS A NICHE THAT IS REALLY NEEDED IN, IN THE ENTIRE NATION, FRANKLY, THERE JUST AREN'T AFFORDABLE HOUSES. I HAVE I HAVE TWO BOYS IN THIS ROOM THAT I STARTED THINKING ABOUT A FEW YEARS AGO. THEY STARTED LOOKING TO GET A HOUSE AND THEY COULDN'T AFFORD IT THERE.
THERE'S TOO BIG AND THEY THEY COULD MAYBE GET INTO A TOWNHOME IF THEY WERE LUCKY, BUT THERE'S JUST SOMETHING TO HAVING A SINGLE FAMILY HOME THAT DOESN'T SHARE WALLS. SO WE TRIED TO COME UP WITH A PRODUCT THAT DOES THAT. AND WE THINK THAT WE'RE THERE ON THIS, THIS PRODUCT. WE'VE, WE'VE WORKED EXTENSIVELY WITH ARCHITECTS, WITH OUR ENGINEERS, AND WE THINK THE PRODUCT IS, IS REALLY SOLID. I'M HAPPY TO TALK THROUGH OR SHOW ANY DETAILS OF THE INTERIOR AND GO INTO WORK SESSION AND DO THAT. BUT IT'S WE, WE REALLY ARE PROUD OF THE PRODUCT THAT WE PUT PUT ON THIS COMPARED TO WHAT WHAT COULD BE. WE'RE NOT SEEKING THE HIGHEST DENSITY THAT WE COULD SEEK ON THIS, ON THIS PROJECT. AND THAT'S REALLY BECAUSE WE HAVE A PASSION FOR, FOR HAVING A PROJECT THAT REALLY FITS WHAT WE THINK IS A NEED OUT THERE.
DON'T GET ME WRONG, MY CONCERNS ARE DETAILS, NOT THE CONCEPT. WELL, AND WE'RE HAPPY TO TALK ABOUT DETAILS. SURE. I JUST WANT TO SHARE RED CURVES. WE HAVE A DEEP PASSION FOR THIS AND WHAT WE'RE WHAT WE'RE DOING. WE REALLY LOVE THE IDEA OF, OF FILLING THIS NICHE BECAUSE WE FEEL IT'S REALLY NEEDED. WE'RE LOOKING AT DOING A NUMBER OF THESE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENTS ELSEWHERE. AND SO FAR AS WE'VE TALKED TO CITIES, WE'VE BEEN REALLY QUITE EXCITED ABOUT TAKING A, A, A MULTI-FAMILY DESIGNATED AREA AND MOVING IT TO SINGLE FAMILY AS OPPOSED TO HAVING THESE LARGE, YOU KNOW, 3 TO 4 STORY BUILDINGS. AND THEN IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT PARKING IN THOSE THAT THAT LOOKS TOTALLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT, WHAT THEY WOULD LOOK LIKE HERE. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. I HAD ONE OTHER QUESTION AND THEN WE WILL OPEN IT TO PUBLIC COMMENT. YES, JUST JUST A SILLY QUESTION. SO DUPLEXES RATHER SNAP. SO WERE YOU SPEAKING TO YOUR MIC COUNSELOR. SORRY. TWO DIFFERENT PEOPLE COULDN'T OWN THOSE TWO. AND THE WHOLE BUILDING WOULD HAVE TO BE OWNED BY ONE PERSON. IS THAT CORRECT? NO. SO IT'S ACTUALLY CONDOMINIUMS. SO THE STATE LAW IT'S CONDOMINIUMS. SO SOMEBODY COULD GET INTO A HOME THAT,
[02:10:06]
THAT THAT THAT'S OUR KIND OF LOWEST PRICE POINT WHERE AN INDIVIDUAL. AND THAT'S WHERE THE PARKING DID COME IN THAT EVEN IF THEY LIVED IN ONE OF THOSE SMALLER HOMES, THEY COULD STILL PARK TWO PEOPLE. OKAY. PER UNIT. GREAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. I'M SURE WE HAVE A LOT OF PUBLIC COMMENT TONIGHT, SO WE WILL OPEN IT UP NOW TO PUBLIC COMMENT. TRY AND KEEP YOUR COMMENTS TO THREE MINUTES. AND WELCOME TO THE WELCOME TO THE PODIUM. AND WE WILL BEGIN THE PUBLIC COMMENT OF OUR PORTION OF THIS MEETING. ALRIGHTY. GOOD EVENING AGAIN.MY NAME IS COLBY HATTON. I AM A RESIDENT OF IDAHO FALLS, AND I AM ONCE AGAIN HERE REPRESENTING STRONGER IDAHO FALLS. WE HERE AT STRONGER IDAHO FALLS RECOGNIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF DENSE HOUSING AS AS IT IS MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE AT LONG TERM FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY AND AFFORDABILITY. SINCE EACH HOUSING UNIT HAS MUCH LESS INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTAIN PER CAPITA. LONG TERM MAINTENANCE IS SELF-FUNDED AS OPPOSED TO LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY SUBURBIA, WHICH MUST BE SUBSIDIZED BY DENSER PARTS OF THE CITY, SUCH AS DOWNTOWN AND THE LETTER AND NUMBER STREETS. WHILE WE FUNDAMENTALLY BELIEVE THAT INFILL DEVELOPMENT IS BETTER FOR THE CITY THAN GREENFIELD, THIS DEVELOPMENT STILL FOLLOWS SEVERAL PRINCIPLES OF RESPONSIBLE URBANISM, THOUGH WE WOULD HOPE TO SEE THE CITY IMPROVE ON NON DRIVING TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS FOR THIS, ESPECIALLY GETTING INTO DOWNTOWN AND CITY PROPERTY.
AND OUR GENERAL COMMENT. AT THE BEGINNING OF LAST CITY COUNCIL, I DISCUSSED THE IMPORTANCE OF SMALL SCALE LOCAL BUSINESSES SUCH AS BAKERIES, BARBERSHOPS AND CORNER STORES. THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE PERFECT OR IT WOULD BE A PERFECT CANDIDATE FOR SUCH BUSINESSES, PROVIDING USEFUL SERVICES WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE FOR RESIDENTS AND AND REDUCING TRAFFIC BY REDUCING THE NEED FOR, SAY, A LAST MINUTE GROCERY RUN. THIS WOULD HAPPEN BY HAVING MORE CONVENIENT OPTIONS WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IN MY OWN PERSONAL OPINION ON THIS, I BELIEVE THAT ANY BUSINESS WITH FEWER THAN FIVE PARKING SPOTS SHOULD BE ALLOWED BY RIGHT ANYWHERE IN THE CITY. DUE TO THE DENSE NATURE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT AND OUR NEED TO ADDRESS THE HOUSING CRISIS IN OUR CITY, STATE AND COUNTRY, WE HERE AT IDAHO FALLS GIVE OUR APPROVAL OF THIS PROJECT, AND WE HOPE TO SEE CHANGES TO CITY ZONING CODE THAT MAKES DENSER HOUSING, WITH SMALL BUSINESSES INCLUDED EASIER TO BUILD IN MORE PARTS OF THE CITY. THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT TONIGHT ON THIS? OKAY, THEN WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT AND ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE DEVELOPER OR THE STAFF BEFORE WE BEGIN DELIBERATION.
YES, YES, WE WILL TAKE A WELL, IT IS STILL WE ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE HEARING. IF WE CAN JUST FINISH OUT THE HEARING, THAT WOULD BE OKAY. DO ANY OF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT WE DID NOT ADDRESS WITH THE DEVELOPER? IS ANYONE READY TO MAKE A MOTION? I'D LIKE TO COMMENT. OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS DIRECTION IS LIKE THE REQUIREMENT THAT THAT TRAIL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. WE WOULD HAVE TO WRITE THAT INTO THE REASON STATEMENT. IF THERE'S SUPPORT FOR THAT, WE THE LAST TIME WE LOOKED AT ONE THAT HAD THE MIX OF PRIVATE STREET AND PUBLIC STREET, WE DID REQUIRE THE RED CURVE. DO WE WRITE THAT IN? IT DEPENDS ON WHAT OTHER PEOPLE THINK. I'VE EXPRESSED MY OPINION ON THOSE. I'D SAY TWO THINGS ON BOTH ON THOSE AND WEIGH IN ON THIS. I'M NOT AS CONCERNED WITH THE RED BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF PARKING AND THE OTHER BEAUTY. YES, IN THE OTHER PUD, I WAS MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT BECAUSE I DIDN'T FEEL LIKE THERE WERE THERE WAS NOT ADEQUATE PARKING THAT OTHER ONE IN. SO IT WAS IT FELT LIKE THAT WAS FOR SURE. WHERE THEY WERE GOING TO GO WAS ON TO THE PRIVATE STREET, BUT I WONDERED, I'M OPEN IF THEY IF THE DEVELOPER WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT, MOVE THEIR TRAIL LIKE HOWEVER THEY WANT TO FIT THAT. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THIS EXACT TRAIL THAT THEY OPEN IF THEY WANT TO SOMEHOW MOVE THE TRAIL TO THE SOUTH TO MAKE THAT OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AND THEN CONNECT THEIR RESIDENCES HOWEVER THEY WANT. I THINK THAT THE WAY THAT IT'S DRAWN HERE IS BECAUSE THEY'RE CONNECTING THEIR HOUSES, RESIDENTIALLY LIKE IT'S A SIDEWALK, AND TO HAVE IT WITH A THREE FOOT SETBACK OR A FIVE FOOT SETBACK, WHATEVER THAT TURNS OUT TO BE.
[02:15:01]
I MEAN, IT WOULD BE MUCH LIKE SNAKE RIVER LANDING, WHICH I THINK IS A PERFECTLY BEAUTIFUL LOCATION, BUT IF WE WANTED IT, IF MY POINT IS, IF THEY WANT TO MOVE THIS TRAIL TO ANYWHERE SOUTH AND MAKE IT PUBLIC, I'M OKAY WITH THAT. IF THEY NEED TO CHANGE THIS ONE ELEMENT OF THEIR PLAN TO MAKE IT OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. IT'S JUST THE ACCESS TO THE WILLOW CREEK CORRIDOR, SO TO SPEAK, AND THAT SEEMS TO ME, BELONGS TO ALL OF US IN THE COMMUNITY. BUT HOW THEY DO IT MOVE THE TRAIL. THE KEY IS IT IS ACCESSIBLE BY OTHERS THAT LIVING THOSE LIVING IN THE COMMUNITY. WELL, AND IT DOES SAY THAT AS PART OF THE REQUIREMENTS THAT PUBLIC ACCESS TO OR ADDITIONS TO THE GREENBELT IS JUST SOME OF THE OPTIONS. AND SO YEAH. I THINK WITHIN CODE IT IS ALLOWABLE. IT IS ALLOWABLE TO REQUIRE THAT BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. IT SAYS PUD SHALL PROVIDE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING OR PROPOSED SCHOOLS, PARKS, PUBLIC LANDS OR PATHWAYS ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES. AND CAN I KNOW YOU CLOSE THE PUBLIC THING, BUT COULD I MAKE A COMMENT? NOW I HAVE TO, I'LL REOPEN IT. IS IT? YEP. OKAY. YES. BUT WE WOULD ALSO ALLOW THE DEVELOPER JUST TO HAVE A CHANCE AS WELL. SO WELCOME TO THE WE'RE NOT SO BIG THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE REALLY HAPPY. WE'RE STILL IDAHO FALLS. MY QUESTION ON THE THE PATHWAY, JUST FOR THE RECORD, COULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME? YEAH. MY NAME IS JANINE WHITE AND I LIVE AT 392 WEST 33RD NORTH. MY QUESTION IS ABOUT THE PATHWAY AND IT BEING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC ALONG WILLOW CREEK, WHICH I THINK IS BEAUTIFUL AND LOVELY IDEA. AND THEN IT ALSO GOES INTO THE WHOLE IDEA THAT THERE IS NOT WILLOW CREEK UP WHERE THERE IS NO PATH. AND SO THAT SEEMS MOOT. AND I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE ISSUE IS, BECAUSE FOR ONE THING, HOW DO YOU KEEP PEOPLE FROM GOING ON IN AND THEN HAVING FULL ACCESS TO PEOPLE'S BACKYARDS OR NEIGHBORHOODS OR WHATEVER, AND BECAUSE THOSE LITTLE GREEN SPACES AND OPEN SPACES AREN'T PUBLIC AREAS, THEREFORE THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IS THAT CORRECT? I DON'T KNOW, I'M ASKING. SO I'M WONDERING IF IT'S SUCH A BIG PROBLEM OR AN ISSUE TO HAVE THAT PATH END AT THE UTILITIES DEVELOPMENT THING THERE, RATHER THAN CONTINUE ALONG THE CANAL THAT'S THERE, THAT'S ADJACENT TO A RUNS ALONG INSIDE THE DUMP ON THE SOUTH WEST SIDE OF THAT PORTION OF THE DUMP. AND THEN IT CURVES ON AROUND AND FOLLOWS THE CANAL UP THAT WAY, BUT ON THE NORTH SIDE. BUT IN THE MEANTIME, ON THE NORTH TO SOUTH PART OF THAT, WHERE IT'S NOT ACTUALLY ON WILLOW CREEK, I'M WONDERING IF THAT'S AN ISSUE, BECAUSE IT'S NOT WILLOW CREEK, IT'S A CANAL. AND THANK YOU.THANK YOU. I CAN RESPOND TO THAT. WE CAN WE CAN LET THE DEVELOPER RESPOND. NOW WE'LL GIVE THE DEVELOPERS RESPONSES. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS BACK OPEN. SO YES, YOU CAN RESPOND TO THAT.
OKAY. YEAH. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY. SO THIS PORTION RIGHT HERE, I KNOW THAT WAS TALKED ABOUT, IT'S BY THE DUMP. IT WAS, I THINK IT WAS A STATEMENT OF SHE FELT IT WAS OKAY THAT IT KIND OF ENDED THIS WAY. THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING AS WELL IS THAT SHE WAS OKAY WITH THE WAY IT WAS PRESENTED. THE SOUTH SIDE HERE, THIS PORTION THAT KIND OF COMES OVER HERE. THE OTHER PORTION WAS, COULD IT FOLLOW THIS OR WAS IT SORRY, YOU'RE ARE YOU ASKING ME? OKAY, I THINK SO. ARE YOU ASKING IF THE TRAIL SHOULD GO THIS WAY OR THIS WAY OR THAT? YOU'RE OKAY? HOW IT LIES? NO, I THINK IT'S FINE. I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN WITH HAVING IT GO UP THROUGH THAT UTILITIES AREA WHERE. OH, YES, WE YES, WE HAD ADDRESSED THAT AND ABANDONED THAT IDEA. YEAH, YEAH I APOLOGIZE. YES. OKAY. I APOLOGIZE, I UNDERSTAND THAT I THINK WE YEAH, WE DID. SO THANK YOU. I'M GLAD TO HAVE THAT CLARITY. YEAH. I THINK THAT WAS THE POINT THAT WHEN WE FOUND OUT WHY IT DIDN'T GO ON UP THERE, THEN WE'RE GOOD. WE'RE GOOD. CREEK MEANS SOMETHING TO ME. WE DO NEED TO CLOSE THE
[02:20:01]
PUBLIC HEARING AGAIN. OKAY. COUNCIL. I'LL MAKE A MOTION. OKAY. WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS. I MOVE COUNCIL APPROVE THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE ALURA HOMES AT WILLOW CREEK COVE, AS AMENDED, TO INCLUDE PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE TRAIL ALONG WILLOW CREEK. AND I WILL SAY THAT CAN BE DONE IN CONJUNCTION WITH PUBLIC WORKS, OR THE EXACT LOCATION CAN BE WORKED OUT IN A SITE PLAN. AND SO AS PRESENTED, WELL, NOT AS PRESENTED, AS AMENDED. SECOND.DID YOU HAVE NOT ADDRESSED THE CONDITION THAT WAS PROPOSED AS WELL? OH, I THOUGHT THAT WAS ALREADY PART OF THE REASON STATEMENT. YOU CAN EITHER UPHOLD THE CONDITION OR YOU CAN JUST NOT EVEN ENTERTAIN THE CONDITION WITH THE TRAFFIC. YES. TRAFFIC THAT WAS PROPOSED IN THE STAFF REPORT. WELL, THERE I HAVE A QUESTION. I THINK IT'S A LEGAL QUESTION. CAN WE JUST SAY THE INTERSECTIONS HAVE TO BE IMPROVED, OR ARE WE NOT ALLOWED TO SAY THAT IN THIS MOTION? WHAT? SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS TYPICALLY, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THIS IS UNIQUE TO US.
WE HAVE NOT HAD A CONDITION LIKE THIS PLACED AGAIN. SO IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND COMING TO READDRESS THIS CONDITION BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT ADDRESSED. AND THAT'S THE COUNCIL PURVIEW.
SO YOU CAN REQUIRE THE IMPROVEMENTS AND JUST MAKE IT A MOOT POINT. HOW WE HOW WE STATED IT IS WE JUST WANTED TO GIVE NOT THAT WE GIVE FLEXIBILITY, BUT JUST THAT THE APPLICANT COULD COME FORWARD WITH A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. SO FOR 33RD. TURN LANE, WE IT CALLS OUT FIFTH LESSON 33RD AND FOURTH OR PROVIDE A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY DEMONSTRATING THE TRIP GENERATION FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT. SO WE CALL OUT THE VOTE. BUT THAT IS YOUR PURVIEW AS PART OF THE LAND USE AUTHORITY. YOU COULD SAY IT'S JUST FOR 33RD, JUST FOR FIFTH OR YOUR TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. BASICALLY, IT JUST HAS TO BE APPROVED. SO THAT'S, THAT'S YOUR PREROGATIVE. OKAY. WELL, MY THOUGHT IS IT MAKES ABSOLUTE SENSE THAT THE INTERSECTION SHOULD BE BUILT OUT PROPERLY. NOW, WHEN THEY DO THIS, AND THE WAY IT WORKS OUT IS HOW IT WORKS WITH THE IMPACT FEES IS ANOTHER ISSUE. THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE IN FRONT OF US. THE FACT IS THAT INTERSECTION ON BOTH OF THOSE ARTERIALS SHOULD BE IN PLACE. YEAH, I DON'T THINK IT'S THE INTERSECTION. I THINK IT'S A TURN LANE ON THE ROAD. IS THAT WELL, SO WHAT THE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY IS GOING TO DICTATE WHETHER THEY HAVE TO PUT TURN LANES IN, REGARDLESS OF OUR PUBLIC CROSS SECTION IMPROVEMENTS THAT SO REGARDLESS OR INCLUDING INCLUDING, I GUESS I SHOULD SAY, OKAY, SO THIRD TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY SHOULD COULD SAY THEY HAVE TO PUT A RIGHT TURN LANE INTO EACH BOTH 33RD AND FIFTH WEST. NOW, I'M NOT TRYING TO COMPLICATE IT, BUT IF WE SAID WE'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE YOU BUILD THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, CURB, GUTTER, SIDEWALK AND THEIR TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY SAID THEY HAD TO HAVE CENTER TURN LANE AND RIGHT TURN LANE. THEY'RE REQUIRED TO PUT THAT IN WITHOUT THE CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK. SO I DON'T KNOW. I CAN'T MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, BUT THE TIS IS CRITICAL FOR BOTH INTERSECTIONS.
AND THEY'VE THEY'VE OFFERED TO DO IT. THE RECOMMENDATION IS THE TIS FROM STAFF. YES. WELL, I THINK MY MISUNDERSTANDING WAS IT'S MORE THAN JUST A STUDY IT. WHAT IT ENDS UP SAYING IS THIS YOU HAVE TO DO BASED ON THE STUDY. SO IT ALSO IS A LEADS TO A REQUIREMENT. THAT'S WHAT I IT'S MORE THAN A STUDY. AND YOU GET. AND AND WHEN THE STUDY COMES BACK, YOU WILL BE ABLE TO VERIFY THAT STUDY. THAT IS ALWAYS. MY CONCERN IS THAT THE STUDY WOULD NOT WILL REVIEW THE STUDY. AND IF WE'LL MAKE COMMENTS, IF WE DON'T AGREE WITH THE ASSUMPTIONS THEY'VE MADE, AND WE'LL SAY, HEY, WE FEEL YOU NEED TO ADDRESS THIS. THOSE ARE ALWAYS. MY CONCERN IS THAT THE THE TRAFFIC STUDY DOES NOT END UP REPRESENTING THE COMMUNITY, BUT RATHER THE DEVELOPER WILL REVIEW IT. JUST LIKE WE REVIEW THE IMPROVEMENT DRAWINGS OR A SITE PLAN. OKAY.
THEY COME INTO COURT. ARE WE IN A COMMENT PERIOD? WE ARE SORT OF DOUBLE. WE HAVE A MOTION SOMETHING, SOMETHING THAT WAS KIND OF NAGGING AT ME RIGHT THERE. THERE WERE COMMENTS MADE ABOUT ABOUT THE IMPACT STUDY. AND I KNOW THAT OR THE IMPACT FEES. AND I KNOW THAT WE'RE NOT
[02:25:02]
ADDRESSING THAT TONIGHT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THE POINT THAT THE IMPACTS THAT YOU'RE PAYING FOR AREN'T JUST IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE YOU'RE BUILDING THE DEVELOPMENT, RIGHT? IT'S ON THE WHOLE CITY, IT'S HOLISTIC. IT'S, YOU KNOW, THE MONEY THAT YOU PUT INTO IMPACT FEES FOR DEVELOPMENT ISN'T JUST TO IMPROVE THE AREA IN FRONT OF YOUR DEVELOPMENT, IT'S TO IMPROVE THE WHOLE CITY BECAUSE OF THE PEOPLE THAT YOU'RE BRINGING THAT ARE GOING TO MOVE AROUND THE CITY AND, AND REQUIRE SERVICES. SO. SO DO YOU HAVE A NEW MOTION YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE, COUNCILMEMBER? I'M NOT QUITE SURE HOW TO WORD THE SECOND PART, BUT DO YOU HAVE ONE IS YOU CAN MAKE IT. PROBABLY. NO, I'M JUST READING THE SECOND YEAR. ALL RIGHT.I'LL TRY AGAIN. I MOVE. COUNCIL APPROVED THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE ALERA HOMES AT WILLOW CREEK COVE, AS AMENDED, TO INCLUDE PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE WILLOW CREEK SECTION AND THE. I FORGET EXACTLY WHAT THEY CALL IT. THE TRAFFIC STUDY OPTION. THERE'S A.
YOU HAD, YOU COULD SAY JUST THE CONDITION IN THE PROPOSAL. WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE CONDITION.
IN THE PROPOSED STATEMENT. OKAY, EXACTLY WHAT YOU SAID. SECOND. LEE. YES, YES, YES. FRANCIS I.
LARSON. YES. RADFORD. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. AND I MOVE. WE'RE READY FOR THE SECOND ONE. RIGHT. AND I MOVE. COUNCIL APPROVED THE RECENT STATEMENT OF RELEVANT CRITERIA AND STANDARDS, AS AMENDED, TO REFLECT THE MOTION FOR THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AT ALERA HOMES AT WILLOW CREEK COVE AND GIVE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS. COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRANCIS, I CAN'T SAY IT THAT WAY. NO, NO, NO IT'S FINE. WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO DRAFT ONE? THAT WAY YOU CAN SEE THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU'D BE APPROVING BEFORE WE CAN TAKE A SHORT RECESS. I'VE GOT I'VE BEEN DRAFTING. IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA. JUST THAT WAY. COUNCIL IS APPROVING. YOU KNOW, THEY'RE ABLE TO REVIEW BEFORE THEY APPROVE THE LANGUAGE. OKAY. OKAY. SO WE WILL TAKE A WE HAVE OUR FIRST MOTION THAT HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED AND VOTED UPON. AND WE WILL TAKE A FIVE MINUTE RECESS TO COME BACK AND THEN DO THE APPROVED WE'RE GOING TO WE ARE BACK IN SESSION, AND WE THANK THE ATTORNEY FOR CREATING THE REINSTATEMENT OF RELEVANT CRITERIA. AND WE ARE READY, COUNSELOR FRANCIS, FOR YOU TO. CAN WE GO BACK TO THE REGION? YES. WE'LL GO BACK TO THE SECOND ACTION ITEM. AS LONG AS. MR. JONES, WILL YOU TAKE US THROUGH THE CHANGE? YES. SO YOU'LL LOOK ON THE LAST PAGE AT THE VERY TOP, THERE'S GOING TO BE ANOTHER BULLET POINT FOR UNDER THE CONDITIONS. AND IT SAYS, MAKE THE PORTION OF THE TRAIL ALONG WILLOW CREEK OPEN TO THE PUBLIC WITH THE EXACT LOCATION SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE IDAHO FALLS PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. OKAY. I THINK OKAY, SO I'M MAKING THAT MOTION, MOTION NUMBER TWO. NO, NO, THAT WAS IN THAT. THAT'S ALREADY IN.
OKAY, SO COUNCIL APPROVED THE RECENT STATEMENT OF RELEVANT CRITERIA AND STANDARDS, AS AMENDED, TO REFLECT THE PORTION ALONG THE THE PORTION OF THE TRAIL ALONG WILLOW CREEK IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC WITH THE EXACT LOCATION SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE IDAHO FALLS PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, AND GIVE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS. SECOND. DINGMAN. YES. LARSON. YES. FRANCIS I. FREEMAN. YES. LEE. YES. RADFORD. AYE.
MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. WE NOW HAVE AN AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE TITLE SEVEN TO ADD THE NEW
[5.E.3) Amendment to City Code Title 7 to add a new Chapter 13 regarding Certificate of Occupancy Requirements and Construction without a Required Permit.]
CHAPTER 13 REGARDING CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY COMING TO US FROM CBS AS WELL. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. OH THANK YOU. I'LL JUST JUMP IN. I'LL BE VERY BRIEF ON THIS ONE.THIS ITEM CAME TO THE CITY COUNCIL IN A WORK SESSION ON JULY 27TH. WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED IS AN AMENDMENT TO TITLE SEVEN OF THE CITY CODE TO ADD A CHAPTER, CHAPTER 13. AND THAT'S REGARDING BUILDING CODE ENFORCEMENT AND PRIMARILY WHAT THAT SECTION AND THE LANGUAGE OF THAT ORDINANCE IS IN YOUR PACKET. I ALSO HAVE OUR CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL HERE WITH US
[02:30:06]
AS WELL, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THE BUILDING SIDE. BUT REALLY, WHAT WHAT THE CODE THAT WE'RE REQUESTING IS TO ADDRESS PENALTIES, VIOLATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES DEALING WITH OCCUPANCY OF BUILDINGS WITHOUT A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AND CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT A PERMIT. AND THE THE ORDINANCE THAT'S PROPOSED BEFORE YOU LAYS OUT PATHWAYS SO THAT IT'S A SOFT APPROACH IS WHAT I CALL IT TO IT CURRENTLY, STATE STATUTE. IF SOMEBODY BUILDS WITHOUT A PERMIT, WE IMMEDIATELY HIT THEM WITH A MISDEMEANOR. AND WE WANTED A PROCESS THAT WE HAD INTERNALLY TO WORK TO GUIDE PEOPLE THROUGH TO GET THEM INTO COMPLIANCE.BUT WE REALIZE THAT THAT REALLY NEEDED TO BE CODIFIED IN ORDINANCE. AND SO THAT'S WHY IT'S BEFORE YOU. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, MYSELF OR THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL, HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE. WE CAN HAVE A COUNSELOR FROM CVS. OKAY, I THINK I'VE GOT IT. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE TITLE SEVEN TO ADD A CHAPTER 13 REGARDING BUILDING CODE ENFORCEMENT UNDER A SUSPENSION OF THE RULES REQUIRING THREE COMPLETE SEPARATE READINGS AND REQUESTS THAT IT BE READ BY TITLE.
SECOND. LEE. YES. DINGMAN. YES. FRANCIS I. RADFORD. I. LAWSON. YES. FREEMAN. YES. MOTION CARRIES. AND I'LL READ THAT IN. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF IDAHO FALLS, IDAHO, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF IDAHO, AMENDING TITLE SEVEN TO ADD A. CHAPTER 13 TO REQUIRE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY BEFORE A STRUCTURE IS OCCUPIED, PROHIBIT VIOLATING VARIOUS BUILDING CODES AND CONSTRUCTING OR ALTERING STRUCTURES WITHOUT A REQUIRED PERMIT. PROVIDE AUTHORITY FOR THE BUILDING OFFICIAL TO ISSUE STOP WORK NOTICES AND DO NOT OCCUPY ORDERS. PROVIDE AUTHORITY TO SEEK INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND PROVIDE PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS. CODIFICATION PUBLICATION BY SUMMARY AND ESTABLISHING EFFECTIVE DATE.
[5.E.4) Provide staff direction regarding whether the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning designation and associated provisions should be rescinded from the Comprehensive Zoning Code.]
OKAY DIRECTOR CENTER FOR THE NEXT ITEM TO PROVIDE DIRECTION REGARDING WHETHER THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING DESIGNATION ASSOCIATED PROVISIONS SHOULD BE RESCINDED FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING CODE. WHAT WE WOULD BE DOING HERE, COUNCIL IS JUST GIVING DIRECTION TO STAFF TO BEGIN THAT PROCESS, TO RESCIND THAT. IT WOULD. IT WOULD. AND DIRECTOR CENTER IS HERE TO TAKE US THROUGH WHAT THAT PROCESS WOULD LOOK LIKE. YEAH. THANK YOU. MAYOR. SO THIS CAME OUT OF THE MOST RECENT WORK SESSION. SORRY, I DON'T HAVE THAT DATE.IT WAS JUST FROM MONDAY. THERE WAS A DISCUSSION FROM CITY COUNCIL ABOUT THIS ITEM TO RESCIND THE PUD ORDINANCE IN OUR ZONING CODE PER TITLE 67, CHAPTER 65 OF THE LOOFAH. IT DOES GIVE THE OPTION OF EACH CITY TO HAVE A PUD ORDINANCE. THE KEY LANGUAGE THERE IS MAIN, AND SO WE DO NOT HAVE TO HAVE A PUD ORDINANCE. WE ALSO COULD REVISE OUR PUD ORDINANCE. SO LOOKING FORWARD, DEPENDING ON WHAT DIRECTION YOU GIVE TO TO ME, THEN I WOULD DIRECT MY STAFF TO DRAFT LANGUAGE OR RESCIND LANGUAGE FOR THE PUD. I SAT DOWN WITH THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR AND JUST LOOKED AT NOTICE REQUIREMENTS PER LUBA. SO I JUST WANTED TO GET THESE DATES IN FRONT OF YOU. THE EARLIEST WE COULD GET IT TO PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD BE THE 6TH OF OCTOBER. AND THEN IF YOU WANT TO, IF YOU WANTED US TO RESEND IT, THEN THAT CODE CHANGE WOULD COME TO CITY COUNCIL ON THE 12TH OF NOVEMBER. THE REASON JUST WE DIDN'T WANT TO DOUBLE NOTICE THAT IF THAT'S THE DIRECTION IN WHICH YOU GIVE. BECAUSE THERE COULD BE POTENTIAL FOR PLANNING COMMISSION TO TABLE THAT ITEM. ALSO, PLANNING COMMISSION COULD MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS, AND WE WANTED TO GIVE THEM THE ABILITY TO FUNCTION IN THEIR CAPACITY AND LET THAT PROCESS MOVE FORWARD. SO JUST TO LET YOU KNOW THAT THAT'S WE'RE JUST LOOKING FOR DIRECTION FROM CITY COUNCIL. AND I KNOW YOU HAVEN'T ASKED THIS QUESTION, BUT I KNOW COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCIS AND MY LIAISON MEETING ASKED ME THIS. IF IF WE WERE TO RESCIND THE ORDINANCE, WE CURRENTLY HAVE TWO PUDS THAT HAVE APPLIED FOR PERMITS. SO THOSE WOULD STILL BE COMING BEFORE YOU. AND WE'VE HAD TWO THAT HAVE COME TO PREDEVELOPMENT MEETING. THEY HAVE NOT FILED AN APPLICATION, BUT THEY HAVE MET WITH US IN PRE-DEVELOPMENT MEETING, DIVESTITURE. WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT VESTITURE OF RIGHTS COMES AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION. SO WE STILL WOULD HAVE TWO COMING NO MATTER WHAT YOU DIRECTED US IN. SO JUST WANT TO PRESENT
[02:35:03]
THAT AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER. I TRIED TO PROVIDE JUST JUST BEING VALUE NEUTRAL. I WASN'T TRYING TO SAY ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. I, I PROVIDED A PARAGRAPH IN THE AGENDA THAT WAS PUBLISHED WITH OUR MEMO, JUST TO GO THROUGH THE PROS AND CONS OF, OF AN ACTION. BUT IN THE END, YOU'RE THE LAND USE AUTHORITY. AND I FRANKLY DO WHAT YOU ASK IN THAT REGARD.AND MY STAFF. SO I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY A POINT WITH YOU. WHEN YOU GIVE US THESE DATES, THOSE ARE THE DATES TO GET A RESIDENT TO GET A. IT'S NOTHING TO DO WITH WRITING REFORM AT THAT POINT. THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S CORRECT. BY OCTOBER, WE'LL HAVE A REFORM IN FRONT OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING. YES. WE WOULD JUST HAVE THE PROPOSAL TO RESCIND. YEAH. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARITY. THAT'S CORRECT. THAT WAS THE THAT WHEN WE LOOKED AT NOT THE FASTEST BUT THE MOST DIRECT PATH, THOSE WOULD BE THE DATES THAT WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT. YEAH.
COUNCIL. I'M NOT INTERESTED IN DOING ANYTHING EXCEPT FOR RESCINDING AT THIS TIME. I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, OVER OVER THE YEARS SINCE WE APPROVED THE PUD ZONING DESIGNATION, WE'VE HAD DIFFERENT DIRECTORS, WE'VE HAD DIFFERENT LEGAL COUNSEL, WE'VE HAD DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES. AND I AND I DON'T THINK THAT WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW IS, IS WORKING TO GET I MEAN, WE'VE HAD NOW NUMEROUS VOTES WHERE COUNCIL FEELS AS THOUGH THEY DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO PROVIDE A CERTAIN DIRECTION. AND WE'RE WE'RE NOT IN THE CONFINES OF THIS BODY SOMEHOW ABLE TO DO THAT. SO AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, I'M ONLY INTERESTED IN A RETENTION. IF THE DIRECTOR WANTS TO COME FORWARD AT A LATER DATE WITH A REVISION WHERE COUNCIL AND LEGAL AND THE DIRECTOR ALL GET ON THE EXACT SAME PAGE OF WHAT CAN AND CAN'T BE DONE. I WOULD CERTAINLY ENTERTAIN A CONVERSATION IN A WORK SESSION, BUT I DO RECOGNIZE THAT THIS MIGHT MAKE AND WILL MAKE SOME PROPERTY BE, YOU KNOW, LESS ABLE TO BE DEVELOPED. AND THAT JUST IS WHAT IT IS. ALL RIGHT. I AGREE WITH MICHELLE. I IT'S NO SECRET HOW I FELT ABOUT PUDS FOR A DECADE. AND I JUST, IT JUST DRIVES ME CRAZY TO FORM MANY CITIES WITHIN OUR CITY.
AND BUT I DO THINK THAT WE DO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DEVELOP ODD SHAPED PROPERTIES. IF WE DO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS AND WE CAN WE CAN WORK THROUGH THAT. OTHER CITIES DO DO THAT. I ALSO LIKE TO. THE LAST YEAR OF PUDS HAS JUST BEEN RELENTLESS PROCESS RIGHT HERE, SITTING HERE HAVING US WORK AS DEVELOPERS ALMOST. AND IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM PRODUCTIVE, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE HAVE WE PAY HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR PROFESSIONALS TO MAKE THESE CHOICES. AND SO AND THEN TO BE HONEST, WE'RE NOT IN A SPACE RIGHT NOW WHERE WE'RE HAVING A LACK OF DEVELOPMENT, RIGHT? LIKE THERE'S ENOUGH DEVELOPMENT HAPPENING. SO IF IT SLOWS A BIT, I DON'T THINK THAT'S A REAL NEGATIVE FOR OUR COMMUNITY. AND THEN THE OTHER PIECE OF THIS IS AT WHAT POINT ARE THE STATE LAWS GOING TO MAKE IT? SO THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE AS MANY PUDS EITHER. THAT SEEMS REAL. AND THESE THESE NEW ORDINANCES OR THE NEW LAWS THAT CAME ABOUT. SO, I MEAN, I THINK TWO OF US ARE IN AGREEMENT THERE, AND I'D BE INTERESTED TO HEAR WHAT OTHERS HAVE TO SAY. IF I COULD MAKE A COMMENT. I AGREE WITH THE DECISION AT THIS STAGE TO RESCIND. I PERSONALLY LOVE PUDS. I'VE SEEN THEM USED VERY EFFECTIVELY IN MANY MUNICIPALITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY. HOWEVER, I AGREE, I DON'T FEEL THAT THE WAY OURS IS CURRENTLY CONSTITUTED ALLOWS US TO UTILIZE THEM IN A WAY THAT IS EFFECTIVE AS THEY COULD BE.
SO I THINK RECENSION IS APPROPRIATE AT THIS TIME TO ALLOW, AS MICHELLE STATED, THAT IF WE CAN GET ON THE SAME PAGE, THAT WE COULD COME BACK AND LOOK AT THAT AND. BUT UNTIL WE DO THAT, I BELIEVE IT'S APPROPRIATE. AND I'LL JUST ADD TO THAT, BRIAN, AND I APPRECIATE THAT. AND I THINK THE SAME PAGE MEANS THAT ROADS WILL BE MEETING OUR STANDARDS.
WE WOULDN'T HAVE THESE PRIVATE ROADS THAT CAUSE PROBLEMS FOR FIRE ENGINES AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS. AND THAT WHEN PUDS DO COME BACK INTO THE CITY, THEY WOULD LOOK LIKE OUR CITY NEIGHBORHOODS MORE. I THINK WE'VE LEARNED A LOT. WE CAN TAKE WHAT WE'VE LEARNED. YEAH, YEAH. I MEAN, I, I'M GOING TO ADD THAT THE, THE ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUSNESS THAT FOR ME, IT'S LIKE IF WE'VE ALLOWED IT IN ONE PLACE BECAUSE IT MADE SENSE IN ONE PLACE, BUT THEN WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO CHANGE OUR, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE, WELL, IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE ON THIS 100 ACRE PARCEL. IT MADE SENSE ON THE TWO ACRE PARCEL. THEN TO THAT'S THE PART I AM ALSO, THOUGH, AS WE. AND I KNOW THAT STAFF IS WORKING ON THIS, I'M INCREDIBLY CONCERNED ABOUT THIS
[02:40:04]
STATE LAW THAT ALLOWS THE DENSITY. I THINK THAT THAT IS THE BIGGEST ISSUE WITH PUDS IS THAT THE IDEA THAT THEY ARE THAT WE ARE HORSE TRADING AND WE ARE BECAUSE WE'RE HORSE TRADING FOR GREEN SPACE AND FOR AMENITIES. AND WHAT THE STATE LAW HAS IS PROVIDING IS JUST DENSITY. WE DON'T GET A CHANCE TO SAY HERE'S, YOU KNOW, IN RESPONSE TO THAT, WE GET AMENITIES OR TRAILS OR ANYTHING. SO AS PART OF THAT, IT'S LIKE, I DON'T WANT TO, I DON'T WANT TO END UP NOT BEING ABLE TO USE A PUD FOR A FOUR ACRES OR I CONCUR WITH THAT BASED ON WHAT YOU JUST SAID, RIGHT? THE PUD THAT WAS APPROVED THIS EVENING, THEY'RE NOW THEY'RE LOCKED IN WITH WHAT THEY'RE DOING. IF WE APPROVE SOMETHING SIMPLY BY RIGHT, ONCE THIS NEW LEGISLATION TAKES PLACE. YEP. ANYTHING CAN COME BACK TO RESIDENTIAL ZONE IS THEY CAN COME IN AS OUR ONE ANYTHING AND PUT IN, YOU KNOW, WAS IT 45 OR 145 HOUSES IN ACRE? IT WAS RIDICULOUS. I MEAN, I CAN'T REMEMBER DIRECTOR CENTER, BUT IT WAS A LOT OF THIS STARTER HOME, YOU KNOW, WHICH I, I LIKE WHAT THE PRODUCT WAS OFFERED HERE TODAY BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE THAT IS THE KIND OF HOUSING IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WITH AMENITIES, WITH TRAIL, WITH GREEN SPACE THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE AS OPPOSED TO WHAT THE STATE IS BRINGING UP FOR US NEXT. SO, SO I DO FEEL THAT THERE IS A PLACE FOR PUDS AND NOT COMPLETELY, BUT WE DO HAVE TO GET ON THE SAME PAGE OF WHAT IT MEANS WHEN SOMEONE BRINGS A PAD FORWARD AND WHAT CAN BE EXPECTED OF THEM. I, WHEN I FIRST GOT ON COUNCIL, I WAS IN MY OWN MIND. I SAID, LIKE SOMEBODY TO TRY TO CONVINCE ME WHY I SHOULD LIKE PUDS. BUT TONIGHT TO WHAT YOU SAID, MAYOR, YOU KNOW, THE THING WE HEARD OVER AND OVER IN THE LAST ELECTION CYCLE WAS AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND CITIES DON'T HAVE VERY MANY LEVERS TO PULL FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. BUT WHAT WE SAW TONIGHT, AND AGAIN, TO YOUR POINT ABOUT GREEN SPACE AND THAT WE CAN BUILD A NEIGHBORHOOD, SEE A NEIGHBORHOOD BUILT THAT WILL BE HOMES THAT ARE MUCH MORE AFFORDABLE, BUT STILL A VERY LIVABLE SPACE. THAT'S, TO ME, THE BIGGEST MOTIVATION I HAVE FOR TRYING TO PUT A PG ORDINANCE TOGETHER THAT WILL WORK. AND I DON'T KNOW HOW WE DEAL WITH THE STATE, I CAN'T, I, I HAVE SOME THOUGHTS ON THIS. I WAS IN THE MEETING TODAY, THE INITIAL MEETING OF THE STARTER HOME COMMITTEE THAT WE RECOMMENDED ON THE 24TH AND LEARNED A LOT FROM DEVELOPERS AND BUILDERS. THEY ARE, AS A GROUP, RELATIVELY OPPOSED TO RESCINDING THE PUD ORDINANCE, ALL OF THEM IN THE ROOM. THE ONE POSITIVE THAT CAME OUT OF IT WAS IF WE COULD GET THIS DONE BY THE NEXT BUILDING SEASON, SO BY MARCH OR SO. BUT YOU DON'T KNOW IF EVEN IF WE EVEN HAVE FOUR COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO WANT. I KNOW THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO FIND OUT, IF WE CAN, WHAT EVERYONE'S GOAL IS WITH THE RESCINDING. I MEAN, FOR MYSELF, I CAN I CAN SAY I WANT TO RESCIND IT BECAUSE I DON'T SEE THERE'S ANY OTHER WAY THAT WE CAN COMMUNICATE THAT WE ARE DISSATISFIED WITH WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH PUD PROCESS. AND OBVIOUSLY, OUR VIEWS ARE NOT FILTERING DOWN THROUGH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, BECAUSE OFTENTIMES WE REJECT THINGS THAT ARE PASSED THERE, AND IT'S NOT FILTERING DOWN TO STAFF WELL ENOUGH. WE'RE NOT ALL ON THE SAME PAGE. SO BUT I'M WILLING TO TRY TO COME BACK TO YOU AT SOME POINT BY REWRITING IT, REWRITING IT. SO IS THAT WHERE PEOPLE WANT TO GO OR DO WE JUST WANT TO GO? RIGHT NOW IT'S OUT AS OF THE EARLIEST WE CAN DO. IT IS THE 12TH OF OF NOVEMBER AND IT'S JUST OUT AND WE'LL WORK IT FROM THERE. OR DO WE START WORKING IT NOW? IT'S I DON'T KNOW, WE CAN'T DO BOTH.CAN WE RESCIND WITH A DATE CERTAIN ON WHICH WE'LL HAVE SOMETHING ELSE TO CONTEMPLATE? I MEAN, COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRANCIS, YOU KNOW THAT WE'RE ALREADY WORKING ON OTHER THINGS, RIGHT? AND SO TO PUT A DATE CERTAIN TO SOMETHING RIGHT NOW, I THINK IS REALLY UNREASONABLE BECAUSE WHAT KEEPS HAPPENING, AND THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED, IS THAT WE WERE WORKING ON SOMETHING ELSE. THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN ALCOHOL BECAME THE PRIORITY. SO WE PUSHED EVERYTHING ASIDE. THEN WE HAD TO DO ALCOHOL COUNCIL. FRANCIS AND I REWROTE THE LICENSING STRUCTURE. HOW MANY YEARS AGO FOR BUSINESS LICENSES? THAT'S CHAPTER FOUR. HOW MANY YEARS DID WE WORK ON CHAPTER FOUR? AND WHAT KEEPS HAPPENING IS THAT THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING KEEPS GETTING PUSHED ASIDE FOR THINGS BECAUSE OF THINGS LIKE COUNCIL AS A BODY, NOT
[02:45:04]
UNDERSTANDING THE WORK THAT'S ALREADY IN PROCESS. SO I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH A DATE CERTAIN, AND I'M NOT SURE YOU EVEN HAVE FOUR COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO THINK THAT IT'S WORTH THE TIME TO GO TRY TO REVISE THIS. SO THAT'S THE QUESTION. SO I THINK THAT OF ANYONE HERE, WELL, JUST GET RID OF UTI. WE'RE DONE. I, I SHARE THAT GOAL WITH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS IN PLACE OF PUDS. SO YOU JUST THAT'S WHAT MOST THAT'S WHAT A LOT OF CITIES ARE. I MET WITH ONE OF OUR FORMER CITY PLANNERS. I MET WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY, FORMER CITY ATTORNEYS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT THIS. THERE ARE WAYS TO GET THIS, THIS KIND OF THING DONE THROUGH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS OR EACH ONE'S CUSTOM, BASICALLY. YES. AND WE'RE NOT JUST LOOKING AT A LAW AND. YEAH.AND LEGAL IS AGREEING OR NOT AGREEING WHETHER WE'RE INTERPRETING IT. AND THEN IT COMES TO US VERY DEVELOPED AND VERY MUCH POLISHED. AND OUR PROFESSIONALS ARE DOING THE WORK OF PROFESSIONALS. AND IT'S NOT US AS CITY COUNCILORS BUILDING FROM THE PULPIT. AND WE CAN TRY THAT FOR SIX MONTHS OR A YEAR AND SEE WHERE THAT GOES, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT OUR PLANNERS ARE GOOD AT. I THINK THE INTENT WAS GOOD ORIGINALLY, RIGHT, OF THAT PUD ORDINANCE. I MEAN, WE AND I, THERE ARE PROPERTIES OUT THERE THAT THAT NEED HELP GETTING OVER THE FINISH LINE. THEY NEED CONSIDERATION FOR FOR ODD SHAPES AND FOR DIFFERENT DENSITIES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. YOU KNOW, THERE IS THERE, THERE'S A USEFUL PIECE OF THIS, BUT THAT'S NOT BUT, BUT OURS DIDN'T TURN OUT THAT WAY. AND IT STARTED BEING TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF. AND THEREFORE I'M, I'D BE SUPPORTIVE OF AMENDING AND, AND REWORKING IT. AND I THINK THE OTHER PIECE OF THIS IS THE PUBLIC. I MEAN, WHAT WE EXPERIENCED WITH WILLOW PLACE AND OTHER PLACES IS THEY COME EXPECTING US TO HAVE SOME ROLE THAT WE COULD FIX. AND THAT'S NOT HOW THE ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN. RIGHT. IF THEY IF THE DEVELOPERS FOLLOW THE RULES, THEN WE WERE IN A TOUGH SPOT. WHEREAS WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THEN MAYBE WE COULD HAVE MORE INFLUENCE. WELL, I THINK THAT'S WHERE THAT'S IN ESSENCE, THAT'S THIS THIS CHALLENGE OF THE SITUATION, RIGHT. THERE'S A DIFFERENT INTERPRETATION OF WHAT THE DISCRETION IS OF COUNCIL. AND THAT'S WHERE WE NEED TO GET ON THE SAME PAGE AND WHAT THAT MEANS AND HOW OUR ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN. I THINK THAT'S WHAT I'M THINKING IS, ARE WE I MEAN, COUNCILOR BRADFORD, ARE YOU THINKING THAT A DEVELOPER WOULD COME FORWARD, LET'S SAY, IN AN R THREE ZONE AND LET'S SAY AN R-1 ZONE AND HAVE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BEFORE US? AND WE WOULD CHANGE THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ON THE FLY? I DON'T I'M NOT SPEAKING TO THAT AT ALL.
I'M SAYING YOU CAN DO WHAT WE DO WITH PUDS THROUGH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. AND IT WOULD COME TO US AND WE COULD SAY, NO, GO BACK AND TRY AGAIN, OR YOU COULD DO SOME OF THAT.
AND THAT'S HOW MANY COMMUNITIES WORK PUD THESE PROPERTIES. AND THEN THE OTHER THING IS WE GET IDAHO FALLS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MORE INVOLVED SO THAT IF THERE ARE REAL COMPLEXITIES THAT CAUSE THE PROBLEM, SO THAT THIS IS INFILL, THAT'S NOT HAPPENING. THAT'S THEIR ROLE ANYWAY, RIGHT? IS TO TRY TO HELP WITH THE INFRASTRUCTURE. AND SO I THINK THERE'S LOTS OF ANSWERS. BUT RIGHT NOW, THE COUNCIL'S BEEN PLACED IN A POSITION WHERE WE CAN'T WIN.
AND I DON'T LIKE THAT POSITION BECAUSE WE'RE BEING TOLD IT'S ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS, AND IT YOU'RE ALREADY AT A DISADVANTAGE WITH THE CITIZENS IN THE ROOM, RIGHT? BECAUSE THE DEVELOPERS HAVE A SET OF RULES THEY TRIED TO FOLLOW, AND IT WAS A LOT OF MONEY AND A LOT OF ENGINEERING AND A LOT OF THINGS THAT THEY DID THAT WE NEED TO HONOR THAT, RIGHT? BUT WE ALSO DON'T GET MUCH OF A CHANCE TO LISTEN TO THE CITIZENS, TO TRY TO PUT THEIR, THEIR PERSPECTIVE AT PLAY. SO THAT GETS FRUSTRATING TO EVERYONE IN THE ROOM. RIGHT? SO SO I'M GOING TO ASK THEN ONE MORE QUESTION. I MEAN, I, I MEAN, BECAUSE I ACTUALLY AM IN FAVOR OF RESCINDING FOR A PERIOD OF TIME, BUT NOT INDEFINITELY BECAUSE THE PUD THAT CAME BEFORE US TODAY, IT WOULD BE OUR THREE. I THINK YOU'RE NOT MAYBE WRONG, BUT IT ALSO MIGHT BE IF THEY IF THAT DEVELOPER WAS AS COMMITTED AS THEY SAID TO THIS TYPE OF HOUSING, THEN MAYBE THEY WOULD HAVE FOUND A WAY IN A, IN A, IN AN AGREEMENT, A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO DO EXACTLY WHAT THEY DID. THERE'S NOTHING THAT SAYS THEY CAN'T DO WHAT THEY JUST DID. THE FACT THAT WE'RE JUST TRADING PUBLIC. YEAH, BUT THE PRIVATE ROAD CHANGED PRIVATE ROADS AND YOU GET AMENITIES. I MEAN, THAT WOULD BE THE. THE ALTERNATIVE IS THAT YOU GET. AND I'M NOT SURE THAT THOSE AMENITIES ARE GIVING THE COMMUNITY ENOUGH BENEFIT. THEY'RE GIVING THAT NEIGHBORHOOD A BENEFIT. OKAY. BUT I SHOULD ALSO SAY I'M NOT OPPOSED TO A ORDINANCE IN THE FUTURE IF WE CAN GET IT RIGHT. BUT LET'S TRY MAYBE ONE WITHOUT DOING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
SO I THINK BASED ON MY CONVERSATION WITH STAFF TODAY, THAT IT WOULD BE A YEAR. IN DETROIT BECAUSE AND PARTICULARLY THE WAY YOU'RE TALKING NOW, IT WOULD BE A YEAR BECAUSE WE'D BE SORT OF LOOKING AT, ARE WE GOING TO MODIFY THE PUD THING, OR ARE WE GOING TO MODIFY OUR ONE ZONING? ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CAME OUT TODAY IN THE MEETING WAS WE CAN GET
[02:50:05]
MORE DENSITY. IF WE DIDN'T HAVE AS MUCH, WE HAD LESS. WE COULD COVER MORE LOT. I DON'T KNOW HOW TO PUT IT. LESS LANDSCAPING ON LOTS. IN OTHER WORDS, INSTEAD OF 5000FT■S LESS. THERE WAS A LOT OF TALK ABOUT THE WAY WE CONSTRUCT DRIVEWAYS AND GARAGES AND CREATIVE WAYS.WE'RE DEALING WITH THE STARTER HOME OPTION. BUT IT REALLY CAME DOWN TO AND THERE WERE PEOPLE IN ROOMS SAID, IF YOU GET RID OF PUDS, YOU'RE GOING TO KILL DEVELOPMENT IN IDAHO FALLS, QUOTE UNQUOTE. AND I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH THAT, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT THE DEVELOPERS ARE SAYING IN RESPONSE TO THIS DECISION. SO THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING, IS OUR GOAL TO COMPLETELY GET RID OF PUDS, OR IS OUR GOAL TO SAY WE NEED A THOROUGH REFORM OF THE WAY THIS OPERATES? WHAT WAS YOUR SENSE OF THEM SAYING THAT IT WOULD IT WOULD RUIN DEVELOPMENT? WAS YOUR SENSE THAT THEY JUST WOULDN'T HAVE PREDICTABILITY? I MEAN, WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DEVELOP A LOT OF PARCELS, MEANING THEY CAN'T MAKE ENOUGH MONEY AND THEY CAN'T GET ENOUGH DENSITY. THAT'S I DIDN'T ASK THAT BECAUSE THAT'S BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE ALL HERE EXACTLY WHAT IT IS. THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. IF THEY DON'T PENCIL, NOBODY'S DEVELOPING JUST FOR FUN. YEAH. SO THAT'S WHY I'M JUST SAYING IT'S IMPORTANT THAT I ALSO THOUGHT OF AS I WAS THINKING THIS THROUGH THIS AFTERNOON, THAT THIS IS KIND OF A UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS PUT US IN LIMBO. WHO KNOWS WHERE THIS IS GOING? I'VE ALREADY HEARD FROM SOME LEGISLATORS THAT WHAT THEY DID, THEY KNOW THEY MESSED UP. SO THEY MODIFY THAT. THAT'S GOING TO CHANGE THINGS. THEY DON'T MODIFY IT. THEY KEEP ADDING TO THIS IDEA. YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE STARTER HOMES SOME OTHER WAY. WHO KNOWS WHERE THAT'S ALL GOING. SO THIS IS A PERFECT TIME TO MAKE THIS REFORM BECAUSE IT MAY HAVE TO MESH WITH SOME NEW STATE STATUTE. THAT'S MY. SO MAYBE HAVING A GOAL OF SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2027 DOES MAKE A LOT OF SENSE. IS THAT IT AGAIN, IT HAVING A GOAL OF HAVING THIS READY BY SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2027 DOES MAKE SENSE. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? I THINK SO, BECAUSE IF WE IF WE DON'T, I AGREE, I THINK AND IF NOTHING CHANGES AT THE STATE LEGISLATURE, WE COULD HAVE EVERY RESIDENTIAL ANNEXATION THAT COMES IN, DO EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE AND DO A STARTER HOME SUBDIVISION, WHICH IS WHAT WE SAW IN SANTA FROM SAN ANTONIO. YEAH. NOW THAT TIMING I COULD GET BEHIND BECAUSE IT GIVES LEGAL AND THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS TIME. BUT WHAT I WAS WHAT I WASN'T EXCITED ABOUT WAS SOMEBODY SAYING BY NOVEMBER 1ST OR BY DECEMBER 1ST, THAT'S NOT GOING TO WORK IN MY OPINION. YOU'RE WILLING TO PUT THE DATE CERTAIN OF SEPTEMBER 1ST. THAT'S FINE WITH ME. IS THAT GOING TO FLY? IT'S ANOTHER CONSTRUCTION SYSTEM, SO IT WORKS AGAIN, IT WILL BE A CONSTRUCTION SEASON LOST, BUT WE DON'T HAVE. BUT WE NEED TIME TO WORK ON IT. AND THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING IS IT DOESN'T WE WEREN'T GOING TO GET IT DONE FOR THE NEXT SUMMER ANYWAY, SO WE MIGHT AS WELL DO IT. I THINK THAT'S WHAT I HEARD FROM STAFF TODAY TOO. BUT WE DID IT WITH THE AIRPORT THING. REMEMBER THE AIRPORT MORATORIUMS? WE'VE DONE THIS. IT'S NOT NEW. THE DATE CERTAIN IS SEPTEMBER 1ST. SO THAT THERE IS VISIBILITY THAT IT THAT THERE IS SOMETHING COMING BACK. IF IT COMES BACK SOONER, IF IF WE SKIP THE PRESSURE FROM THE DEVELOPERS WHO SAY, NO, LET'S COME TO THE TABLE AND AND LET'S COME UP WITH THESE AGREEMENTS TOGETHER. AND IT COULD IT COULD HAPPEN. BUT TO COUNCIL, IT'S NOT COMING IN NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER. I MEAN, IT WOULD BE A. YEAH. CAN I MAKE A MOTION SOMEWHERE ALONG THE LINE THEY WANT TO BE THEY WANT SOME ASSURANCE TO. YES. SO I'M GOING TO MOVE TO RESCIND THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE 11-2-6W FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING CODE AND DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE REPLACEMENT OF ORDINANCE SECTION TO THE IDAHO FALLS CITY COUNCIL AND PRESENTATION BY SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2027. SECOND. SECOND. WE CAN'T BECAUSE WE. THIS IS A LAND USE DECISION. WE CAN'T LEGALLY RESCIND THE ORDINANCE TONIGHT.
CORRECT. YOU CAN DIRECT STAFF TO START THE PROCESS. ALL RIGHT, I WILL I WILL MOVE TO DIRECT STAFF TO START THE PROCESS OF RESCINDING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE 11-2-6W FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING CODE. SECOND. SO I JUST HAVE A QUESTION THEN. I KNOW SHE JUST STATED TO GIVE THAT DIRECTION. DOES THAT DIRECTION ALSO NEED TO HAVE PREPARATION FOR TO COME BACK IN A YEAR? OR IS THAT'LL HAPPEN? THAT'LL HAPPEN AFTER WE RESCIND IT? LIKE IF IT GOES TO P AND Z, RIGHT, THEN IT WOULD COME BACK TO US. THEN I COULD GIVE, THEN THE MOTION WOULD, THEN WE'D HAVE THE TIME. OKAY, SORRY. CERTAINLY SO. BUT IN TERMS OF PROCESS, YOU'RE CORRECT. PLANNING COMMISSION REMEMBER IN TERMS OF PROCESS WILL GIVE WILL GIVE RECOMMENDATIONS AS WELL. AND THEN THIS WILL GET BACK TO YOU AS THE FULL ORDINANCE. AND THAT ORDINANCE WILL SHOW RECEPTION AT THAT TIME. AND THEN AT THAT TIME, YOU CAN PUT WHATEVER
[02:55:02]
CONDITIONS YOU WOULD WANT, AND PLANNING AND ZONING WILL HAVE A HEARING. AND ALL OF THESE ARE PUBLIC HEARINGS. SO WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AND FORGIVE ME FOR INSERTING. KNOW WHAT WE'RE.BUT FOR PLANNING COMMISSION, AT THAT POINT, THERE WOULD BE A PUBLIC HEARING. AND SO THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY COULD SPEAK THERE AS WELL AS IN IN THE CITY COUNCIL. OKAY. SO THE RECOMMENDATION GOING TO PLANNING AND ZONING FROM THIS BODY IS TO RESCIND THAT. OUR RECOMMENDATION IS THAT IT GOES THROUGH PLANNING AND ZONING TO RESCIND WITH A DATE OF SEPTEMBER 1ST TO BRING SOMETHING BACK. SO THAT WOULD COME AT THE TIME OF ORDINANCE.
YES. YEAH. THAT'S WHY THERE'S ON A DATE. YES. OKAY. SO RIGHT NOW. AND SO YOU WOULD BE, YOU WOULD BE DIRECTING STAFF TO DRAFT LANGUAGE TO TAKE IT THROUGH THAT PROCESS. BUT I THINK, I THINK WHEN IT COMES TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING, WE SHOULD BE SAYING SOME KIND OF DIRECTION. WE'RE WE'RE ASKING YOU TO RESCIND IT ON THE BASIS OF WE WANT TO REFORM IT OR REPLACE IT. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MAKES SENSE, BUT IN OTHER WORDS. BUT IT IS JUST ANOTHER STEP IN THE PROCESS THOUGH. LIKE THEY'RE ALL THEY'RE GONNA VOTE IS A RECOMMENDATION WHETHER TO RESCIND OR NOT RESCIND. AND YOU WANT PLANNING COMMISSION TO FUNCTION IN ITS CAPACITY. REMEMBER, THEY'RE RECOMMENDING BODIES. SO THEY MAY SAY SOMETHING COMING BACK THAT YOU HAVEN'T EVEN THOUGHT OF, BUT JUST PROPOSING THAT. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S RIGHT. SO YOU WOULD WANT THEM TO BE ABLE TO FUNCTION AND THINK THROUGH IT ON THEIR TERMS AS WELL. OKAY, OKAY. IS THAT MOTION CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU, CITY CLERK MOTION. AND DID WE HAVE A SECOND ON THAT? I THINK SHE DID. AND WE GOT THE SECOND. YES. OKAY. LARSON. YES. RADFORD I.
LEE. YES. DINGMAN. YES. FREEMAN. YES. FRANCIS. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT. OUR FINAL
[5.E.5) Final Plat and Reasoned Statement of Relevant Criteria and Standards, Rose Nielson Addition Division No. 101, Sixth Amended.]
ITEM TONIGHT ARE FINAL PLAT UNLESS THERE ARE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. I THINK WE ARE READY TO MOVE THROUGH OUR FINAL PLAT OF WITHDRAWAL. OKAY, BRENNAN, WE'RE READY TO. COUNCIL MEMBER LEE, WE ARE READY TO BEGIN OUR FINAL PLAT MOTION. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE FINAL PLAT FOR ROSE NIELSEN. ADDITION DIVISION NUMBER 1016, AMENDED AND GIVE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR, CITY ENGINEER AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN SAID FINAL PLAT. SECOND. THE. YES. DINGMAN. YES. FRANCIS.I. FREEMAN. YES. LARSON. YES. RADFORD. MOTION CARRIES. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE REASON STATEMENT OF RELEVANT CRITERIA AND STANDARDS FOR THE FINAL PLAT FOR ROSE NIELSEN, ADDITION DIVISION NUMBER 101, SIXTH AMENDED, AND GIVE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS. SECOND, RADFORD. LARSON. YES. FREEMAN. YES. FRANCIS. I. DINGMAN. YES.
LEE. YES. MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ONE. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE FINAL PLAT FOR STINGER FARMS
[5.E.6) Final Plat and Reasoned Statement of Relevant Criteria and Standards, Stanger Farms Commercial Addition, Second Amended.]
COMMERCIAL EDITION. SECOND AMENDED AND GIVE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR, CITY ENGINEER AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN SAID FINAL PLAT SECOND. LEE. YES. DINGMAN. YES. RADFORD. I.FREEMAN. YES. LARSON. YES. FRANCIS. I MOTION CARRIES. AND I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE RECENT STATEMENT OF RELEVANT CRITERIA AND STANDARDS FOR THE FINAL PLAT FOR STINGER FARMS COMMERCIAL ADDITION SECOND AMENDED AND GIVE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS. SECOND. LEE. YES. DINGMAN. YES. FRANCIS I. FREEMAN. YES. LARSON. YES.
RADFORD. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. COUNCIL. ANY ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS COMING FROM. YES.
[6. Announcements]
COUNCILOR. FRANCIS I HAVE ONE ON SEPTEMBER 17TH AT THE WAR MEMORIAL ON THE GREENBELT. OKAY.IS THAT DO I HAVE A RIGHT. 1818 OKAY. AT 515 THERE'S A REMEMBRANCE OF. MIA'S AND PRISONERS OF WAR. THERE'S STILL UNACCOUNTED FOR. SO PUT ON BY A VETERANS GROUP. SEPTEMBER 18TH.
WHAT TIME? 515. 515. MAYOR, I HAVE A QUESTION. YES, THAT IS THE WILL PLACE NOW, SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DISCUSS WITH THE PUBLIC. ARE WE STILL IN A QUASI JUDICIAL SITUATION? WE'RE STILL WITHIN THE 28 DAYS FOR PETITION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW. SO IT'S STILL A QUASI JUDICIAL MATTER.
THAT'S PART THE EX PARTE RULES STILL APPLY BECAUSE WE'RE STILL WITHIN THE WINDOW OF 28 DAYS FOR THE PETITION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? I GOT ONE FOR YOU. THAT IDA, THE
[03:00:05]
AIRPORT IS HAVING THEIR TENANTS AND FAMILIES BARBECUE TOMORROW AT 11 A.M. ON BORAH AVENUE. AT THE MAINTENANCE SHOP. MAINTENANCE SHOP. OKAY. ONE THING THAT I DON'T KNOW WHETHER COUNCIL APPRECIATES IT, BUT EVERY WEEK THE DIRECTORS ARE SENDING US THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING IN THEIR DEPARTMENTS. AND I'M LEARNING A LOT, AND I MEET WITH THEM ABOUT EVERY OTHER WEEK, SO I. THERE IS A LOT THAT HAPPENS IN THE CITY AND I'VE BEEN REALLY GLAD TO SEE. EVERY WEEK THEY'VE BEEN IN ALL OF THEIR WORK. AND I WANT TO THANK THE DIRECTORS FOR ALL OF THEIR HARD WORK AND WE ARE ADJOURNED. OH, OH, WE ARE STILL OPEN. CAN YOU KEEP SENDING US? WE WILL KEEP SENDING IT OUT THIS TIM* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.