[1. Call To Order]
[00:00:02]
I, UH, I READ SIX 30 ON THE CLOCK, SO WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED AND, UH, CALL THIS A PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING FOR SEPTEMBER 1ST FROM 26TH TO QUARTER.
[Minutes: August 4, 2026]
OF BUSINESS IS THE, UH, MINUTES FOR AUGUST 4TH.HAS EVERYONE HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THOSE? LOOK GOOD THERE.
UM, IF WE WOULD LIKE TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THOSE MINUTES, UHLIN COMMENT.
UH, I WASN'T AT THE MEETING, BUT ON PAGE FOUR, UH, COMMISSIONER WAS LISTED A SECOND MOTION AND I BELIEVE HE ACCUSED.
SO I'LL REREAD THROUGH THAT AND SEE WHERE WE'RE AT.
SO DO WE NEED TO HAVE A MOTION THEN WITH THOSE CHANGES, JUST MENTIONING THOSE CHANGES OR YOU, YOU CAN DO A SIMPLE MOTION AS CORRECTED.
AND THAT, WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO ENTERTAIN THAT MOTION? I MOVE THAT THE COMMISSION APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM OUR AUGUST FOUR MEETING AS CORRECTED.
UM, AND I'LL JUST DO A VOICE VOTE, SO GIMME NEED A SECOND.
OH, DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SORRY, SECOND.
SO, UH, LET'S, UH, YEAH, I'LL JUST DO A VOICE VOTE ALL, UM, IN FAVOR OF THE MINUTES, SAY AYE.
[3.I. ANX26-007 Annexation and Initial Zoning of HC, Highway Commercial for approximately 2.23 acres in Lots 2 and 3 Carlyle-Erma Subdivision Division No. 1. Located north of Bentley Way, east of N Woodruff Avenue, south of Lincoln Road, and west of Quail Drive.]
ONTO THE SECOND ITEM OF OUR, UM, IT'S OUR FIRST PUBLIC HEARING OF THE NIGHT.IT IS THE ANNEXATION AND INITIAL ZONING FOR HC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL FOR APPROXIMATELY 2.2 ACRES THERE ON WOODRUFF NEAR LINCOLN.
UH, DO WE HAVE AN APPLICANT? NOPE.
OKAY, THEN WE WILL HEAR FROM CITY STAFF.
UH, TODAY WE ARE THESE FIRST ITEM WE'RE TALKING ABOUT INITIAL ZONING OR ANNEXATION, INITIAL ZONING OF HC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL.
UM, THE REQUESTED ACTION IS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FOR ANNEXATION INITIAL ZONING OF HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL.
SO IT'S, UM, SURROUNDED BY HC AND SIMILAR USES TO THE PROPERTY, AS WELL AS SOME VACANT LAND TO THE SOUTH AND THE EAST.
UM, AS WE MOVE FORWARD, IT'S PART OF OUR MIXED USE SCENARIO AND CORRIDORS ARE, UH, PUSHED ON THE COMP PLAN.
UM, AND THIS USE AND ZONING IS, UH, IT FITS RIGHT INTO THAT
UM, AND THEN STEP RECOMMENDATION, REC RECOMMENDATION, SORRY, IS, UH, THAT WE HAVE REVIEWED IT AND THE ANNEXATION AND INITIAL ZONING IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE AREA, THE COMP PLAN AND THE COMP, UM, COMPREHENSIVE ZONING CODE.
UH, ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR, UH, CITY STAFF? NO.
UM, SO NOW IT IS TIME TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ANNEXATION.
UM, SO, AND THESE WILL BE THE SAME RULES FOR ALL THE OTHER PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR THE OTHER, UH, ITEMS TONIGHT.
UM, BUT PRETTY MUCH JUST, UH, YOU KNOW, KEEP YOUR COMMENTS SOMEWHAT TO FIVE, 10 MINUTES.
AND, UM, IF SOMEONE GOES AHEAD OF YOU AND SAYS PRETTY MUCH THE SAME THING, UM, WE DON'T NEED TO HEAR THE SAME THING TWICE.
YOU CAN COME UP AND SAY, DITTO IS THAT GUY.
UM, WE'RE JUST REALLY LOOKING FOR COMMENT ON AND DIFFERENT CONCERNS FOR DIFFERENT THINGS.
IF, UH, YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, UNFORTUNATELY WE CAN'T HAVE A, IT'S NOT REALLY A Q AND A, BUT WE WILL DO OUR BEST TO ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS, UM, AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION WITHIN THIS MEETING.
IF YOU'RE STILL NOT UNDERSTANDING OR NEED MORE CLARIFICATION CITY STAFF, UH, LATER, UM, THE NEXT DAY OR THE APPLICANT, I'M SURE WE'D BE HAPPY TO HELP ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS.
[00:05:01]
UM, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OPEN.I FIGURE YOU'RE ALL HERE FOR SOMETHING ELSE.
SO, UM, WITH THAT BEING SAID, WE WILL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, DISCUSSION AMONGST THE COMMISSION? NO, PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
I MEAN, THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE'D EXPECTED YOU RIGHT ALONG HERE.
DO WE HAVE, UH, WHO WOULD LIKE TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION? I MOVE ALSO, SCOTT COMMISSIONER SCOTT.
UH, I MOVE THAT WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, THE ANNEXATION AND INITIAL ZONING OF HC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL FOR LOT TWO AND THREE OF THE CARLISLE BURMA SUBDIVISION DIVISION NUMBER ONE.
WE'LL DO A ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE.
[3.II. ΑΝX26-008 Annexation and Initial Zoning of R2, Mixed Residential for approximately 24.83 acres in the SE ½ of Section 23, Township 2 North, Range 37 East. Located north of W 17th South, east of Blue Ridge Drive, south of Rendezvous Road, and west of Grizzly Avenue.]
WE WILL GET ONTO THE NEXT ITEM OF THE AGENDA, WHICH IS THE ANNEXATION AND INITIAL ZONING OF R TWO TO, UM, JUST, I GUESS THEY'RE ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE SKYLINE AND OR GRIZZLY AND 17TH SOUTH.OH, AND I APOLOGIZE SINCE WE DIDN'T HAVE AN APPLICANT LAST TIME.
UH, JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS AND FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SAME WITH EVERYONE ELSE, SO THANK YOU.
MY NAME IS RYAN SINGLETON FROM MOUNTAIN WEST ENGINEERING AT ONE 12 WEST MAINE, UNIT 2 0 2 RIGBY, IDAHO.
UM, AND TONIGHT WE'RE HERE TO LOOK AT A, A REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION WITH AN INITIAL R TWO ZONING.
UM, IF I COULD, UM, JUST SHOW YOU REALLY QUICKLY, I PUT TOGETHER KIND OF AN EXHIBIT TO SHOW YOU KIND OF WHERE THIS IS LOCATED AND, AND WHAT IS IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF THIS.
UM, SO HERE IS, SO HERE IS THE IN QUESTION.
AND DIRECTLY WITHIN A QUARTER MILE.
SO WE HAVE, UM, A CITY BIKING PATH HERE IN RED THAT IS TEMPORARILY OR CURRENTLY A SHARED LANE BIKING PATH.
AND WE ALSO HAVE A STRIPED BIKING PATH UP TOWARDS THE UPPER END, UM, OF GRIZZLY.
UM, SO I WANTED TO EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT ABOUT US AS A COMPANY AND WHAT REALLY DRIVES OUR DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS.
WE ARE A RELATIVELY LOCAL ENGINEERING FIRM THAT PRIDES OURSELVES OKAY.
IN INVESTING IN THIS AREA AND BRINGING QUALITY PRODUCTS AND HOPEFULLY FILLING A NEED THAT WE'RE SEEING THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
UH, AND THE SAME CAN BE SAID ABOUT OUR DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS.
OUR DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS, THIS ONE IN SPECIFICALLY IS VERY COMMITTED TO THIS AREA.
THEY'RE COMMITTED TO THE IDLE FALLS AREA AND THEY REALLY WANT TO HELP BUILD OKAY.
AND GROW THIS GREAT COMMUNITY.
WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE, IT'S A GREAT PLACE TO WORK AND TO RECREATE, YOU KNOW, AND WE AS ENGINEERS AND OUR CLIENTELE, UM, AS DEVELOPERS ARE REALLY COMMITTED TO THAT VISION AND ARE COMMITTED TO, TO HELPING GROW THAT, YOU KNOW, PROVIDE QUALITY PRODUCTS WITH QUALITY AMENITIES.
SO I REALLY WANTED TO TAKE AN OPPORTUNITY TO JUST INTRODUCE THIS PROJECT, UM, AND, AND PREFACE WHAT'S PROBABLY GONNA BE A REALLY GOOD THOROUGH STAFF REPORT.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, AS SEEN IMMEDIATELY WITHIN THIS QUARTER MILE VICINITY, WE HAVE IMMEDIATE ACCESS TO, TO CURRENT BIKING PATHS.
THEN IF WE WERE TO STEP OUT INTO OUR QUARTER FROM OUR QUARTER INTO, UM, OUR HALF MILE RADIUS, SO WITHIN A HALF MILE WE HAVE SKYLINE HIGH SCHOOL.
WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, UP TO THE NORTH WE HAVE EAGLE ROCK MIDDLE SCHOOL.
AND TO THE WEST WE HAVE WEST SIDE ELEMENTARY.
AND THEN MOVING OUT TO THE LARGER PROXIMITY AREA OF ONE MILE.
WE ARE APPROXIMATELY ONE MILE FROM THE WESTFIELD COMMERCIAL PLAZA.
[00:10:02]
THIS AREA IS, IT'S, IT'S WELL SITUATED WITHIN PROXIMITY OF SCHOOLS, WALKING PATHS, COMMERCIAL AREAS ALSO.IT IS, IT IS CURRENTLY BORDERED BY, UM, IT'S ALREADY BORDERED BY A MAJOR COLLECTOR TO THE EAST IN GRIZZLY AVENUE, AND IT'S BORDERED TO A, UM, A, A MINOR ARTERIAL IN 17TH SOUTH.
IT IS, IT'S 24 ACRES THAT IS CURRENTLY BEING FARMED.
UM, IT HAS, IT, IT'S A RELATIVELY FLAT PARCEL.
UH, IT HAS AMAZING PROXIMITY TO SOME OF THE SURROUNDING OFFERINGS.
UH, IT HAS CURRENT CITY ACCESS TO BOTH A COLLECTOR AND A MINOR ARTERIAL.
AND I REALLY WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE TWO MAJOR QUESTIONS THAT ARE POSED TONIGHT IS, IS WHY ANNEXATION AND WHY R TWO? YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I WANTED TO START THE PRESENTATION OFF AND SHOWING THE PROJECT IS TO KIND OF PUT IN PERSPECTIVE HOW MUCH SENSE ANNEXATION MAKES.
RIGHT NOW WE ARE WITHIN A PROXIMITY TO CURRENT SERVICES.
IN FACT, WE ARE ACTUALLY, WE'RE BORDERING, WE'RE BORDERING R ONE TO THE NORTH AND R ONE TO THE SOUTH.
AND WE'RE, WE ARE IN PROXIMITY OF R THREE A TO THE EAST AND MORE R ONE TO THE WEST.
AND WHEN I INITIALLY LOOKED AT THIS PROJECT, THE FIRST THOUGHT THAT CAME TO MY MIND IS, IS WHY HASN'T IT ALREADY BEEN ANNEXED? OKAY.
IT'S A, A REALLY GOOD CANDIDATE AND IT MAKES SENSE TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION AS FAR AS UTILITIES ARE CONCERNED.
WE TALKED ABOUT, UM, THE, THE ACCESS WITH THE CITY ROADS, BUT ALSO I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT IN, IN GRIZZLY WE HAVE AN EXISTING EIGHT INCH SEWER AND WATER ALREADY INSTALLED.
AND DOWN IN 17TH WE HAVE A 21 INCH SEWER AND A 12 INCH WATER.
WHY ANNEXATION? YOU KNOW, OUR PRIMARY QUESTION IS WHY ANNEX THIS? AND ULTIMATELY IT'S TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF, OF THE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE IF WE WANT TO PRIORITIZE INFILL RATHER THAN SPRAWL AND TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S ALREADY IN PLACE.
IT IS ALSO WORTH NOTING THAT, THAT THE CITY HAS EXPRESSED INTEREST IN TRYING TO PARTNER WITH ANY POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR THIS AREA.
IN CLEANING UP AND REALIGNING THE INTERSECTIONS OF GRIZZLY AND 17TH SOUTH.
AND IN DOING SO, FINISHING WHAT STARTED TO BE A FULL PROFILE DOWN TO THE INTERSECTION.
SO I THINK THIS WOULD BE A, A KEY OPPORTUNITY FOR THE CITY TO NOT ONLY TO ACCOMPLISH THEIR INFILL GOAL, BUT ALSO TO FACILITATE WHAT HAS BEEN EXPRESSED TO US AS THE CITY'S DESIRE TO CLEAN UP THAT INTERSECTION AND ALSO EXPAND THAT RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH TO A FULL PROFILE THAT HAS YET TO BE COMPLETED BECAUSE THE PARCEL HAS YET TO BE ANNEXED.
UM, I WANTED TO TOUCH JUST QUICKLY ON YR TWO, YOU KNOW, SO, YOU KNOW, OUR INITIAL APPROACH IN R TWO IS IT GIVES US THE VARIETY OF HOUSING.
THAT WOULD FIT NICELY IN THIS AREA.
CURRENTLY WE ARE SEEING R ONE IN THIS AREA.
WE'RE ALREADY SEEING R THREE A IN THIS AREA.
WE THOUGHT A GREAT FIT OR A GREAT ADDITION TO THIS AREA WOULD BE R TWO.
WE ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT THE R TWO POTENTIAL HOUSING TYPES IS A, A, A VARYING, UH, A VARYING LEVELS OUTSIDE OF R ONE THAT GIVES US THE FLEXIBILITY AND THE POTENTIAL TO PROVIDE, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF VARYING HOUSING.
YOU KNOW, AND I JUST WANT TO CLOSE BY SAYING WHAT A, A GREAT PROJECT THIS WOULD BE AND YOU KNOW HOW ANNEXATION MAKES SENSE.
YOU KNOW HOW IT'S, IT'S REALLY KIND OF AN ISLAND THAT'S ALREADY SURROUNDED ON MULTIPLE SIDES
[00:15:01]
BY CURRENT CITY BOUNDARIES AND BY GRANTING THIS ANNEXATION, OKAY, IT WILL HELP MOVE THROUGH AND ACCOMPLISH THE COMP PLAN.AND THEN ALSO IT WOULD HELP FACILITATE ANY DESIRE THAT THE CITY HAS TO WORK ON THAT INTERSECTION AND WIDEN THOSE ROADS.
AND WITH THAT, I'D JUST LIKE TO CLOSE AND OPEN MYSELF UP FOR QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY.
UH, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT SO FAR? NO.
I, UH, GARY CAROL, UH, NOW WE WILL HEAR FROM CITY STAFF.
SO TONIGHT THE REQUESTED ACTION IS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ANNEXATION, INITIAL ZONING OF R TWO MIXED RESIDENTIAL, UH, WITH THE CONTROLLED DEVELOPMENT AIRPORT OVERLAY ZONE TO THE MARON CITY COUNCIL.
SO THIS ANNEXATION WAS REQUESTED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER.
THE PROPERTY IS IN THE AREA OF IMPACT.
UM, IT IS CONTIGUOUS ALONG, UH, CITY PROPERTY, UH, 17TH AND GRIZZLEY HAS ALREADY BEEN ANNEXED INTO THE CITY, SO THEY ARE ALREADY CITY STREETS AS WELL.
THE PROPOSED ZONING IS, UH, OUR TWO MAKES RESIDENTIAL.
SO THE R TWO ZONE IS LIKE RESIDENTIAL ZONE CHARACTERIZED BY SMALLER LOTS, UH, MORE COMPACT DEVELOPMENTS.
AND THEN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LIST AS A SUBURBAN TRACT.
AND IN THE, UH, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE SUBURBAN TRACT IS VARIOUS HOUSING TYPES.
SO GENERALLY INCLUDING DETACHED AND, AND ATTACHED SINGLE UNIT DWELLINGS, DUPLEXES, TRIPLEXES, FOURPLEXES, AND UNITS AT A HOUSE.
SCALE DEVELOPMENT SHOULD INCLUDE A MIXTURE OF HOUSING TYPES, PRICE POINTS AND SIZES.
UM, THE CONTROLLED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE WOULD APPLY HERE, BUT ALL UNDERLYING USES ARE PERMITTED.
SO THERE'S NOT A CONFLICT FOR THERE.
AND AGAIN, GRIZZLY AND 17TH HAVE BOTH ALREADY BEEN ANNEXED INTO THE CITY.
AS A REMINDER, UH, THE COLLECTOR WOULD BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DEVELOPER TO, UH, IMPROVE WHEN DEVELOPMENT HAPPENS AND ARTERIAL WITH IMPACT FEES WOULD BE THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY.
UM, SO STAFF HAS REVIEWED, AND AGAIN, THE ZONING AROUND IT, WHILE THERE IS PRIMARILY R ONE, YOU DO HAVE AREAS OF R THREE, R THREE A IN R TWO IN OTHER AREAS.
UM, SO STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ANNEXATION.
IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE COMP PLAN AND THE ZONING ORDINANCE, AND IT DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF R TWO OF CONTROL DEVELOPMENT AIRPORT.
OVERLAND, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NOT YET.
UM, WHEN, UH, THE APPLICANT SAID THAT, UH, THE CITY HAS A DESIRE TO REWORK THAT INTERSECTION, I'M ASSUMING THAT'S JUST GETTING RID OF THE SOMEWHAT DANGEROUS CURVE THERE, MAYBE REALIGNING SOME STUFF? UH, YES, THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AS WELL.
I, I DON'T THINK THEY HAVE NEED TO PLAN SURE.
THOSE CONVERSATIONS THAT WOULD HAPPEN YET.
DO WE KNOW WHO OWNS THE PART AT THE BOTTOM QUARTER WHERE STRUCTURED THAT INTERSECTION AND
THAT GUY THAT, IS THAT ALREADY CITY OR YES, IT IS CITY.
AND IT'S CITY AND IT'S RIGHT AWAY ALREADY.
SO IN THE CASE THAT THIS INTERSECTION WAS REALIGNED, I, I KNOW WE GOT SOME PUBLIC COMMENT ON THAT THAT WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE MEETING.
UM, ASSUMING IT GOES INTO AN INTERSECTION LIKE THAT AT HOW DOES THAT AFFECT NORMAL, UM, RESPONSIBILITIES FOR ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS? WHERE YOU SAID SOME OF IT'S ON THE DEVELOPER ON THE SMALLER ROADS, SOME OF IT'S ON THE CITY, ON THE LARGER ROADS.
CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT? IF, IF IT WAS COMPLETELY REALIGNED, SO AS THIS PROPERTY DEVELOPS AND IT, AND PRELIMINARY PLA AND FLAT IT OUT, THOSE DESIGNS WOULD COME UP AT THAT TIME.
UM, AND I'M SURE AS THEY, WITH THE COLLECTOR MATERIAL, THE CITY WOULD WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER AT THAT TIME AND PUT THAT IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, WHAT THAT, THOSE RESPONSIBILITIES WOULD LOOK LIKE.
UM, OKAY, I THINK THAT'S THAT FOR NOW.
SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND OPEN UP THE PUBLIC COMMENT AND, UH, YEAH.
AND, UH, WHAT WAS GONNA SAY? OH, YEAH.
[00:20:01]
IS DON DAHL.I LIVE AT 1 5 2 5 BLUE RIDGE CIRCLE ADJACENT TO THE PARTIAL IN QUESTION.
AND I'D FIRST LIKE TO THANK MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO, TO, UM, TO GIVE OPINION HERE THIS EVENING AND, UH, WORK THAT YOU DO HERE FOR OUR CITY.
LAST WEEK I PROVIDED WRITTEN COMMENTS AND I HOPE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THOSE, BUT TONIGHT I QUICKLY WOULD LIKE TO REVIEW JUST A FEW OF THOSE POINTS, BUT ALSO PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL COMMENT CONCERNING THE REQUESTED ZONING.
FIRST INCONSISTENT INFORMATION'S BEEN PROVIDED TO THE PUBLIC CONCERNING WHO'S MAKING THIS APPLICATION HERE TONIGHT.
WE HEARD REPRESENTATIVE FROM MOUNTAIN WEST ENGINEERING ON THE, UM, NOTICE OF NOTIFICATION LETTER THAT WE'VE GOT.
IT SAYS THAT IT IS MOUNTAIN WEST ENGINEERING MAKING THE APPLICATION, BUT YET ON THE STAFF REPORT IT SAYS THAT IT IS THE PROPERTY OWNER AND BOTH THE, UM, COUNTY LAND RECORDS AND THE NOTIFICATION THAT WE EXCUSE AND THE NOTIFICATION STATE THAT IT'S A DIFFERENT LANDOWNER THAN MARTIN MOUNTAIN WEST ENGINEERING.
SO THERE'S BEEN A LITTLE BIT OF CONFUSING INFORMATION AS FAR AS ACTUALLY WHO THE APPLICANT IS.
WHY THAT MATTERS IS BECAUSE IS IT A PERSON THAT HAS, UM, INTEREST OR HAS STANDING HERE IN THE CITY OR COUNTY TO MAKE THAT APPLICATION? OR IS IT A, EVEN THOUGH RIGBYS CLOSE AND WE'VE HEARD A, YOU KNOW, A GOOD PERSON, YOU KNOW, TALK ABOUT THEIR COMPANY, YOU KNOW, IT'S AN OUTSIDE ENTITY, AN OUTSIDE DEVELOPMENT FIRM THAT'S MAKING THIS APPLICATION.
AND THAT'LL BECOME A LITTLE BIT MORE EVIDENT OF WHY THAT MATTERS HERE IN A MINUTE.
AS I MOVE ALONG, AS I STATED IN MY WRITTEN COMMENTS, ANNEXATION OF THIS PROPERTY SEEMS TO ME TO LINE UP WITH WHAT THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SAYS.
AND SO AS FAR AS ANNEXATION, I REALLY DON'T HAVE ANY BASIS TOO MUCH TO BE CONCERNED WITH THIS.
I PERSONALLY FEEL THIS OBSESSION SHOULD HAVE OCCURRED YEARS AGO.
HOWEVER, I FEEL THAT THE ZONING OF R TWO IS PREMATURE, PREMATURE IN THAT THIS PROPERTY HAS NEVER BEEN IN THE CITY.
AND THEN TO ZONE IT IN SOMETHING THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN THE EXISTING AGRICULTURE, REALLY RECOGNIZING THAT, YOU KNOW, THE AGRICULTURE'S ON THE WAY OUT, BUT DIFFERENT THAN THE PREPONDERANCE OF THE ZONING GROUND THERE, THAT'S R ONE DOES NOT SEEM IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO TAKE SMALL INCREMENTAL STEPS IN MOVING SOME OF THE DECISIONS.
UM, FOR A NEW COUNTY PROPERTY TO BE IMMEDIATELY BE ZONED DIFFERENT THAN THE CURRENT EXISTING ZONING REQUIRES MORE TIME, IN MY OPINION.
IN MY WRITTEN COMMENTS, I OUTLINED SEVERAL SECTIONS OF COMPARABLE PLAN, WHICH INDICATE INCREMENTAL CHANGES, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT BEST PRACTICES AND THE COMMUNITY VOICE.
ONLY TWO WEEKS TO CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL.
I HAVE MY NOTIFICATION UP HERE AND MY PROPERTY IS JUST VERY ADJACENT.
THERE'S THE IRRIGATION DISTRICT IN BETWEEN ME AND MY PROPERTY.
SO I AM, I HAVE AN INTEREST IN THAT WE RECEIVED TWO WEEKS, PROBABLY A LITTLE BIT LESS BY THE TIME IT GOT DELIVERED POSTMARKED ON AUGUST 15TH TO COME HERE TO US.
AND SO TO CONSIDER THIS AND TO CONSIDER SUCH A CHANGE AT THIS TIME, AGAIN, ANNEXATION MAY BE APPROPRIATE, THAT ZONING NEEDS A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION AND MORE CONSIDERATION.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S SUFFICIENT TIME FOR THE COMMISSION NOR FOR THE RESIDENTS AND THE PUBLIC TO HAVE ADEQUATE EXPRESS THEIR VOICE TO PRIMARY CONCERNS THAT I HAVE WITH ZONING.
IT HAS TO DO WITH TRAFFIC ON A DANGEROUS CURVE, WHICH BEEN, WHICH HAS BEEN NOTED AND, AND, UM, AND DISCUSSED A LITTLE BIT HERE.
AND ALSO THE LACK OF ADEQUATE STAFF WORK FOR THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER THIS APPLICATION.
FIRST OFF, THE ACCESS TO ALL THIS PROPERTY IS, HAS BEEN DISCUSSED IS ON GRIZZLY OR, UM, OR, UM, 17TH, SOUTH WEST, 17TH SOUTH.
AND THIS HAS BEEN DISCUSSED, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY VIEWED THIS AS FAVORABLE.
BUT, AND JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, I'VE LIVED IN THE IRONWOOD SUBDIVISION FROM 1993 UNTIL ABOUT SEVEN AND A HALF YEARS AGO.
AND THEN FOR THE LAST SEVEN AND A HALF, ALMOST EIGHT YEARS NOW, I'VE LIVED VERY APPROXIMATE.
BUT THE IRONWOOD SUBDIVISION IS THE PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH OF THIS IN QUESTION.
SO FOR MORE THAN 33 YEARS, I'VE DRIVEN EVERY DAY ON THIS CURVE.
AND I'VE SEEN SCHOOL KIDS, ELEMENTARY KIDS, UM, AND JUNIOR HIGH KIDS AND HIGH SCHOOL KIDS TRAVELING ON THAT ROAD.
I'VE SEEN TWO OR THREE TIMES CARS GO OFF THE CURVE DOWN INTO THE DEEP BORROW PIT, WHICH WAS, UM, YOU KNOW, UP TO THE, IMMEDIATELY TO THE EAST AND HAS HAD TO HAVE AN EMERGENCY RESPONSE THERE.
SO, AND IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT WAS PROVIDED IN ADVANCE, THERE WAS NO DISCUSSION OF TRAFFIC LOADS.
THIS, THEY DISCUSSED ABOUT POSSIBLY REFINING THE CURB AND MAKING A NEW INTERSECTION IS NEW HERE TONIGHT.
I DON'T BELIEVE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC HAVE HAD ENOUGH TIME, NOR HAS THE COMMISSION TO VIEW THIS IN ITS ENTIRETY BECAUSE WE'VE HEARD THIS POTENTIAL ROAD CHANGES OR WHATEVER TO MAKE IT SAFER.
THAT'S BEEN TALKED ABOUT, BUT THERE'S NO FIRM PLANS.
SO I THINK, AGAIN, THE, THE ZONING OF R TWO IS PREMATURE.
[00:25:01]
ALSO, LET'S SEE.I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT, UM, ATTACHED MY WRITTEN COMMENTS WERE PHOTOS THAT I TOOK OF SEVEN.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WERE ABLE TO SEE THE PHOTOS OR NOT.
I STRUGGLING A LITTLE BIT WITH SOME OF THE LARGE, I JUST WENT OUT THIS PAST FRIDAY MORNING BETWEEN SEVEN AND EIGHT IN THE MORNING AND TOOK PICTURES OF CARS, VEHICLES, TRAILERS, MOBILE HOMES, RVS ON CITY STREETS.
SURROUNDING PROPERTY HAS BEEN ZONED AS R TWO AND R THREE.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S BEEN ENOUGH TIME CONSIDERATION GIVEN ON THAT CURVE.
YOU CANNOT HAVE CARS PARKED ON THAT CURB AND STILL MAINTAIN SAFE SAFETY.
THERE'S NO OTHER OPTIONAL OFF STREET PARKING THAN ON THE CURB BECAUSE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT PROPERTY IS SHOWN AS THE CANAL, THERE'S NOT GONNA BE ANY ROAD THAT CROSSES THAT CANAL.
AND SO I THINK THAT, UM, AGAIN, PREMATURE, MAYBE EVENTUALLY WE GET THERE, BUT FOR RIGHT NOW, I DON'T THINK ADEQUATE STAFF WORK AND TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND SAFETY ANALYSIS HAVE BEEN DONE TO SUPPORT THAT RATING OF R TWO CURRENTLY.
THE STAFF REPORT WAS ALSO DELINQUENT, OR I GUESS DEFICIENT NOT, BUT EXCUSE ME, DEFICIENT.
AND THAT IT DID NOT ADDRESS THE ABILITY OF CITY WATER, CITY ELECTRICITY, AND CITY SEWER TO HANDLE THE INCREASED LOAD ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROPERTY.
AND ESPECIALLY, UM, GIVEN THAT IN THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS, ANOTHER NEW DEVELOPMENT ON THE CORNER ON THE, LET'S SEE, SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PAN C AND SKYLINE RIGHT THERE ADJACENT TO CAMPING WORLD.
THEY'VE BROKEN GROUND FOR LARGE, UH, DEVELOPMENT THERE, WHICH WILL I'M SURE HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE CITY'S ABILITY TO PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES.
UP UNTIL THE, JUST A COUPLE, UM, YOU KNOW, STATEMENTS THAT WERE MADE VERBALLY HERE TONIGHT, THERE WAS NO INFORMATION PROVIDED, NO ANALYSIS OF ANY OF THE CITY SERVICES AS ADEQUACY TO, TO, TO INCREASE THE LOAD IN THAT AREA.
AND I, AND I HEARD PIPE SIZE GIVEN I HEARD NOTHING ABOUT CAPACITY AND THE CURRENT USE.
I KNOW THAT OCCASIONALLY MY WATER PRESSURE GOES DOWN, WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT WE LIVE WITH THAT CITY DOES A GREAT JOB WITH THAT.
BUT THERE ARE CONCERNS WITH THAT.
UM, I'LL TELL YOU, UM, OUR FOREFATHERS OF THIS COUNTRY IS, UM, WE TALKED ABOUT TAXATION WITH THAT REPRESENTATION.
THEY EVEN HAD A BOSTON TEA PARTY ABOUT THAT.
BUT IN THIS MATTER, IF WE HAVE THE INVERSE, WE HAVE OUTSIDERS OUTSIDE THE CITY OR PROPERTY, I SHOULD SAY, PROPERTY THAT'S NOT BEEN PART OF THE CITY, IS ALL OF A SUDDEN AFTER YEARS OF AVOIDING BEING INTO THE CITY AND AFTER YEARS OF NOT PURSUING ANNEXATION WHEN ALL THE SURROUNDING PROP PROPERTY DID, THEN WHEN IT GETS TIME FOR DEVELOPMENT, THEY SAY, OH, LET'S TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE CITY'S UTILITIES.
I REVIEWED THE BONNEVILLE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN THE BONNEVILLE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
IT HAS A PARAGRAPH IN THERE THAT IT SAYS THAT WHEN YOU DO SUCH DEVELOPING IN THE COUNTY, THE DEVELOPER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COST OF WATER, SEWER, OTHER UTILITIES, OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE, OTHER SERVICES THAT ARE NEEDED TO SUPPORT THAT, UM, DEVELOPMENT.
HERE WE'VE GOT LANDOWNERS THAT CHOSE NOT TO BE PART OF THE CITY.
AND NOW WHEN IT'S CONVENIENT FOR DEVELOPMENT, THEY SAY, LET'S HAVE THE CITY FUND OUR DEVELOPMENT.
I AS A TAXPAYER FOR OVER 33 YEARS.
AND I HOPE PAUL'S DON'T APPRECIATE THAT.
I'VE BEEN, I'VE MANY, MANY TIMES I'VE TALKED TO COWORKERS, FRIENDS AND FAMILY WHO ARE COUNTY RESIDENTS, GREAT PEOPLE, AND THEY'VE TOLD ME, OH GEE, YOUR CITY TAXES ARE MORE THAN DOUBLE OURS FOR PROPERTY OF SAME VALUE OR EVEN MORE VALUE.
AND, AND THAT'S BECAUSE WE PAY FOR THESE SERVICES.
PEOPLE IN THE COUNTY USE OUR SERVICES, THEY USE THE LIBRARIES, THEY USE THE SOCCER FIELDS.
I'VE LITERALLY TALKED TO PEOPLE IN, IN MASS FROM THE COUNTY SITTING ON THE SIDE OF THE CITY, SOCCER FIELDS.
I'VE SAID, DOES IT EVER MAKE YOU GUYS FEEL GUILTY THAT YOU'RE HERE USING CITY SOCCER FIELDS TO WATCH THE PREPONDERANCE OF KIDS PLAY THAT ARE FROM THE COUNTY? THEY SAID, OH NO, IT DOESN'T BOTHER US AT ALL.
SO THAT'S MY CONCERN, AND AGAIN, GOES BACK TO WHY I FEEL IT MIGHT BE PREMATURE FOR THE ZONING.
LET'S BRING THAT PROPERTY INTO THE CITY THAT'S APPROPRIATE ANNEXATION, BUT THEN LET'S GIVE US TIME TO THINK, LET'S LET'S GIVE TIME FOR THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO DEVELOP STANDING TO MAKE AN APPLICATION TO THE CITY TO USE CITY RESOURCES THAT THEY DID NOT FUND FOR THEIR DEVELOPMENT.
AND WHICH AGAIN, WHICH IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE BONNEVILLE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
UM, I WOULD JUST, UM, LET'S SEE.
I WOULD JUST MENTION MY PERSPECTIVE, AND I DON'T KNOW EVERYTHING IN THE CITY OBVIOUSLY, BUT MY DRIVE AROUND RIGHT NOW, THERE ARE PLENTY OF OUR TWO MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCES BEING BUILT AND BEING ESTABLISHED HERE.
MY, MY SON JUST RECENTLY, YOU KNOW, WAS CAME OUTTA MEDICAL RESIDENCY LOOKING FOR A PLACE TO LIVE IN HERE.
AND I COULDN'T TELL HIM, WELL,
[00:30:01]
YOU KNOW, HERE IN IDAHO, IDAHO FALLS CITY, HERE'S A NICE R ONE DEVELOPMENT.THERE, THERE PROBABLY ARE SINGLE RESIDENT DEVELOPMENT SOMEPLACE IN THE CITY.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY'RE AT.
AND IF, AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT COMMUNITY VOICE, IT DOESN'T TAKE MUCH EFFORT TO REALLY COMMUNITY VOICE.
AND THEY SAY, OH, ANOTHER APARTMENT.
OH, ANOTHER APARTMENT, OH, ANOTHER APARTMENT, OH, ANOTHER DUPLEX, ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, FOUR, IT, THAT'S ALL THAT'S BEING BUILT IN, IN MY LIMITED OPINION.
I COULD BE WRONG ON THAT, BUT I DON'T.
SO WHEN WE SAY, WHY NOT BRING IN THIS PROPERTY? AGRICULTURE ISN'T FEASIBLE.
SIGN UP R ONE FOR SOME AMOUNT OF TIME, SOME NUMBER OF YEARS.
MAYBE A WONDERFUL DEVELOPER COMES IN, BUILDS A NICE R ONE THE SAME AS THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY.
IF THAT ISN'T FEASIBLE, THEN YEAH, MAYBE CONSIDER ONCE THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS STANDING WITH THE CITY TO SAY, YEAH, LET'S, LET'S REZONE IT.
POSSIBLY LET'S SOME OF THE CERTAIN THINGS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT.
AND OH, THERE WAS A COMMENT MADE ABOUT THE BIKING PATHS HERE.
I'M A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED WHEN HE SAYS BIKING.
'CAUSE MY WIFE AND I, WE BIKE AND WE AVOID THAT CURVE BECAUSE THERE YOU HAVE WHAT HE SAID.
WE MAKE A POINT NOT TRY OUR BIKES ON THAT CURVE.
WE GO THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOODS.
WE EITHER GO THROUGH THE IRONWOOD SUBDIVISION BACK DOWN AROUND ON THE BACKSIDE OF, UM, CAMPING WORLD, OR WE GO THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND YES, THERE IS A BIKE PATH THAT DEAD ENDS THERE.
BUT RIGHT NOW THAT THAT PATH, THAT CURVE ISN'T, IT'S TOO DANGEROUS FOR US TO BIKE ON.
SO I DON'T THINK THAT'S RIGHT NOW A BENEFIT.
UM, OH, I HEARD SEVERAL TIMES THE, THE APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE OF MOUNTAIN WEST ENGINEERING MENTION THAT LET'S TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE CITY UTILITIES.
YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE INTERESTING WORDS.
'CAUSE I AS A TAXPAYER FEEL THAT A PROPERTY OWNER WHO'S AVOIDED BEING IN THE CITY FOR YEARS NOW, ALL OF A SUDDEN IS TAKING ADVANTAGE OF CITY SERVICES THAT WE TAXPAYERS HAVE PAID FOR.
AND I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE, THAT'S ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS TOO, WHY THIS REQUEST FOR OUR TWO ZONING IS PREMATURE.
AGAIN, MAYBE EVENTUALLY IT'S THE RIGHT THING, BUT NOT IMMEDIATELY AT THIS POINT.
'CAUSE OF THE, WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED ENOUGH INFORMATION.
THE PROPERTY HAS AN OWNER HASN'T HAD THE STANDING.
LET'S ZONE IT FOR R ONE FOR A WHILE.
SO IT HAPPENS MAYBE AFTER A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME.
IN MY WRITTEN REPORTS, I SHOW IN THE STATE'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOW THEY TALKED ABOUT A, A THREE YEAR TIME PERIOD FOR FIRST MOVEMENT, THEN OTHER TIME PERIODS.
LET'S DO THE PHASED APPROACH THAT'S TALKED ABOUT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND NOT JUST A ALL AT ONCE, OH, SOMEBODY WANTS TO GET ANNEXED.
LET'S, LET'S, LET'S HAVE THE CITY FUND THE DEVELOPMENT.
I DON'T THINK WHEN YOU HEAR, WHEN YOU LISTEN TO THE VOICE OF THE COMMUNITY, I DON'T THINK THAT IS THE VOICE OF THE COMMUNITY.
I REALLY DO APPRECIATE YOU WHO SERVE ON THIS PLANNING COMMISSION.
AND, UM, I WOULD JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I LEARNED SOMETHING IS I LOOKED AT SOME OF THE CITY, UM, POLICIES FOR THIS PLANNING COMMISSION AND I'VE, AND I'VE TALKED DOWN A LITTLE BIT TO COUNTY RESIDENTS OR PEOPLE THAT AREN'T CITY TAXPAYERS.
I SEE THAT THE, THAT THE COMMISSION CAN BE MADE UP OF UP TO THREE NON-CITY RESIDENTS.
AND OF COURSE IT'S INAPPROPRIATE FOR ME TO POLL HOW MANY OF YOU ARE HERE, BUT I'M A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED WHEN NON-CITY, NON-CITY TAXPAYER RESIDENTS ARE HAVING A SIGNIFICANT SAY IN WHAT HAPPENS WITHIN THE CITY.
SO I WOULD JUST ASK THE CHAIR TO MAKE SURE THAT ANY DECISION OR ANY RECOMMENDATION THAT IS MADE TO THE COUNCIL IS MADE WITH THE QUORUM IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE, UM, CITY'S POLICY ON HAVING NO MORE THAN THREE COUNTY PARTICIPANTS ON THE COMMISSION.
AND I AGAIN, APPRECIATE YOU FOR THIS TIME AND THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS.
UH, WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO GO? MY NAME IS JOANNE ENS, 2146 RENDEZVOUS ROAD.
AND I THINK, UH, NORTH OF THAT PROPERTY IS ALL, ALL R ONE.
I THINK R TWO IS INAPPROPRIATE FOR THE ENTIRE AREA, MAYBE SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE, BUT I THINK, UH, THE PLANNING OF THAT AREA IS SHORTSIGHTED.
I'M NOT OPPOSED TO ANNEXATION.
I'M SURPRISED IT WASN'T ANNEXED BEFORE.
UH, YOU'LL NOTE ON THE NORTH, THOSE R ONE PROPERTIES HAVE ACCESS IN INGRESS AND EGRESS ONLY THROUGH GRIZZLY.
AND WE HAVE, WE'RE GRATEFUL FOR THE HIGH SCHOOL, BUT IT CREATES
[00:35:01]
A LOT OF ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC AND I THINK, UM, WE'LL HAVE TO TALK TO THE ROADS DEPARTMENT ABOUT THAT, THAT I THINK IT'S, IT'S TOO PRELIMINARY FOR US THAT HAVE THE R ONE PROPERTIES AND WHY ARE TWO IN AN AREA WHERE IT'S KIND OF LOCKED IN.THERE'S DEVELOPMENT ALL ALONG PAN CHERRY, UH, THAT IS OUR TRUE, UM, THE BUILDING IS JUST OVERWHELMING, BUT IN OUR LITTLE POCKET OF THE WORLD, WE KIND OF ARE HIDDEN IN AN R ONE DISTRICT.
I THANK YOU FOR PAYING ATTENTION AND THEN INVITING US TO MAKE COMMENT.
I'M SURE WE'LL HEAR A LOT MORE ON THIS ONE.
I LIVE AT 1485 BLUE RIDGE CIRCLE FOR THE PAST 23 YEARS, WE ARE DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY THAT'S PROPOSED FOR ANNEXATION AND THE R TWO, UH, RESIDENTIAL ZONING.
WELL, I UNDERSTAND THAT IDAHO FALLS IS GROWING AND WE MIGHT NEED ADDITIONAL HOUSING, BUT I RESPECTFULLY ASK THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER IF THIS IS THE RIGHT LOCATION.
UH, MY FAMILY CHOSE TO LIVE HERE BECAUSE OF THE QUIET SINGLE FAMILY CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE OPEN FIELD HAS LONG SERVED AS A BUFFER AND REZONING IT TO R TWO WOULD CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF WHERE WE LIVE.
I WORRY ABOUT THE INCREASED TRAFFIC.
MR. DAHL REALLY COVERED A LOT OF THESE ISSUES VERY WELL.
THE SAFETY OF CHILDREN, PEDESTRIANS, CYCLISTS, AND WHETHER OUR ROADS AND DRAINAGE SYSTEMS CAN HANDLE MORE DEVELOPMENT IS, IT'S JUST, IT'S BEEN A FIELD WHERE, AND THE OTHER THING THAT A LOT OF MIGRATING BIRDS COME TO THIS PARTICULAR FIELD AND, UH, BUT THEY WOULD LOSE THAT, THAT I HAVE PICTURES OF HUNDREDS OF THEM.
UM, I WOULD LIKE YOU TO CONSIDER WHETHER THIS REZONING ALIGNS WITH THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
IF THIS PROPERTY IS ANNEXED, A LOWER DENSITY ZONING DESIGNATION WOULD BE MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THE HOMES THAT ARE SURROUNDING IT, LIKE OURS.
I RESPECTFULLY ASKED YOU TO DENY THIS REZONING REQUEST OR POSTPONE THE DECISION UNTIL THESE CONCERNS HAVE BEEN THOROUGHLY ADDRESSED ADDRESS.
AND I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND LISTENING TO MY COMMENTS.
ANY OTHER ACRES? IS IT APPROPRIATE TO TAKE 20 SECONDS MORE? ABSOLUTELY.
SINCE WE HAVEN'T BEEN TOO LONG.
I, I FEEL LIKE THAT'S 20 SECONDS AND I HAVE IT ON MY NOTES, BUT MS. VANSICKLE MENTIONED, OH, I'M SORRY.
JUST FOR THE RECORD, COULD YOU SAY YOUR NAME AND MY NAME IS DON DAH.
MY ADDRESS IS 1 5 2 5 BLUE RIDGE CIRCLE.
MS. VANSICKLE MENTIONED THE DRAINAGE CONCERN.
THAT IS ONE OF MY CONCERNS ALSO BECAUSE ALONG, YOU KNOW, THE OH ONE SIDE, AT LEAST 50% OF THAT PROPERTY IS THE CANAL BOUNDARY AND THERE IS NO DRAINAGE.
IF YOU SEE THAT LITTLE GREEN SPOT UP THERE, THAT IS THE DRAINAGE POND FOR THE REST OF THE SUBDIVISION, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DRAIN THAT FIELD THROUGH THE CANAL.
THEY'RE NOT GONNA GO OVER A CANAL, THEY'RE NOT GONNA TUNNEL UNDER A CANAL CUT ANCHORS.
THEY'RE NOT GONNA GO THROUGH A CANAL.
SO I HAVE TO ASK MYSELF, THAT'S WHERE THE DRAINAGE IS AT FOR THE ALL THE REST OF THE AREA.
AND THEN, THEN THERE'S ANOTHER ONTO THE, TO THE SOUTH OF THE IRONWOOD SUBDIVISION TO THE SOUTH, THERE'S ANOTHER DRAINAGE POND.
THERE IS NO ACCESS TO A CITY DRAINAGE POND FOR THIS PROPERTY.
I AM, UH, I'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
WE NEED TO ALLOW FOR THE APPLICANT.
OH, I ALWAYS FORGET WHETHER WHICH SIDE, I WAS DEFINITELY GONNA LET HIM, I JUST CAN'T REMEMBER WHICH, WHICH END OF, IF IT'S BEFORE OR AFTER.
SO YEAH, WE'LL LET THE APPLICANT MAYBE ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS.
[00:40:01]
ENGINEERING ONE 12 UNIT WEST MAIN, UNIT 2 0 2 RIGBY, IDAHO.UM, AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO, TO EXPRESS MY THANKFULNESS FOR THE COMMENTS TONIGHT.
WE DO WHAT WE CAN AS ENGINEERS AND DEVELOPERS TO, TO PUT AS MUCH WEIGHT INTO THESE COMMENTS AS WE CAN.
YOU KNOW, WE ULTIMATELY FEAR SEE OURSELVES AS DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS, UM, AND WE DO ACTIVELY TRY TO MITIGATE AS MANY OF THESE CONCERNS AS POSSIBLE.
UM, AND I JUST WANT TO, TO NOTE A FEW OF THE THINGS THAT WAS SAID.
UM, YOU KNOW, AND ULTIMATELY I WANT TO COMMENT ON OUR DRIVING.
OUR DRIVING DEVELOPMENT PLAN, WHICH IS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WITHIN THE SUBURBAN TRANSECT, IT CALLS FOR A VARIETY OF, OF HOME OPTIONS THAT ARE SIMPLY NOT POSSIBLE WITHOUT DIFFERING ZONING.
THAT SUBURBAN TRANSECT IS, IS DEVELOPED WITH, WITH A VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES AND A VARIETY OF PRICE POINTS.
THAT IN ITSELF WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE IF THIS WERE TO BE ONE SINGULAR ZONE.
YOU KNOW, I THINK THOSE THAT PUT TOGETHER THE COMP PLAN UNDERSTOOD THAT THIS AREA NEEDS TO BE A GOOD HOMOGENOUS MIXTURE OF ALL POSSIBILITIES AND ALL POTENTIALS.
OKAY? IN ORDER TO ACCOMPLISH THAT ULTIMATE GOAL OF PROVIDING A MIXTURE OF HOUSING TYPES AT, YOU KNOW, A MIXTURE OF HOUSING PRICE POINTS.
UH, AND I FEEL THAT R TWO MEETS AND ADVANCES THAT GOAL WHOLEHEARTEDLY.
IF WE WERE TO SIMPLY DO R ONE.
IT IS, IT'S, IT'S VERY, IT'S HARD TO IMAGINE HOW WE COULD PROVIDE WHAT IS CALLED FOR IN THE COMP PLAN WITH A, A MIXTURE OF HOUSING TYPES AND A MIXTURE OF, OF DIFFERENT PRICE POINTS, OKAY? IF WE ARE NOT AWARDED THE FLEXIBILITY AND GRANTED THE FLEXIBILITY OF BRINGING IN SOME OF THE ZONING DISTRICTS THAT ARE REQUIRED TO ACCOMPLISH THAT GOAL.
YOU KNOW, I'D ALSO LIKE TO TALK ABOUT HOW VALUABLE THE CON THE COMMENTS ABOUT PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AND, AND TRAFFIC, HOW VALUABLE THOSE ARE.
AND I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT, THAT WE GO THROUGH THOSE ITEMS. YOU KNOW, IN THE DESIGN PROCESS AT NAUSEUM, WE ARE CONSISTENTLY LOOKING AT WHAT POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, THE ASPECTS THAT IT HAS ON, ON PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AND, UM, TRAFFIC ACCESS AND TRAFFIC SAFETY.
YOU KNOW, AND I WANT TO SAY THAT REST ASSURED, THOSE ARE, ARE ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED AS WE MOVE INTO WHATEVER DEVELOPMENT PROCESS GETS IMPLEMENTED ON THIS PARCEL.
WE HAVE TO DO POTENTIAL TRAFFIC STUDIES.
ONE OF THE GREAT THINGS THAT I SEE IS, IS THIS IS A POTENTIAL FOR US TO ADDRESS THE CURVE, YOU KNOW, AND WHETHER THE CITY CAN WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER, UH, AND NOT ONLY STRAIGHTEN THAT CURVE, BUT POTENTIALLY WIDEN IT, OKAY? AND ACTUALLY CONTRIBUTE TO AN INCREASED TRAFFIC SAFETY YOU CONTRIBUTE TO AN INCREASED TRAFFIC LOAD CAPABILITY.
NOW ALL OF THESE THINGS COME WITH DEVELOPMENT, OKAY? AND IT'S ALL PART OF THE PROCESS, A GREAT PROCESS THAT YOUR STAFF HAS IMPLEMENTED IN WHICH WE WALK THROUGH PAINSTAKINGLY, UH, YOU KNOW, WE VALUE THESE COMMENTS AND WE JUST WANT TO REAFFIRM THAT A LOT OF THESE COMMENTS ARE VALID AND THEY ARE IN FACT LOOKED AT VERY CAREFULLY AS WE CONTINUE THE PROCESS.
YOU KNOW, I'D ALSO LIKE TO CLARIFY AND TO SAY THE ADDITIONAL COST FOR THE CITY TO EXTEND INFRASTRUCTURE OUTSIDE OF ITS ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT IS EXTRAORDINARY.
OKAY? NOW WHEN I SAY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF CITY SERVICES, OKAY, I THINK THAT WAS A, A MISSTATEMENT.
I THINK IT WOULD BE MORE APT TO SAY TO MAXIMIZE EFFICIENCY, OKAY? FOR US NOW AS DEVELOPERS, AS ENGINEERS.
SO ANY DEVELOPMENT THAT OCCURS IN THIS AREA IS GONNA BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING FOR THEIR OWN IMPROVEMENTS.
SO THEY'RE GOING TO BE INSTALLING THEIR OWN WATER LINES, THEIR OWN SEWER LINES, THEIR OWN STORM LINES, THEIR OWN SIDEWALKS WITHOUT ANY HELP FROM THE CITY.
SO IT'S, IT'S VERY EASY TO SEE HOW, HOW ANY POTENTIAL DEVELOPER THAT CHOOSES TO DEVELOP THIS PARCEL IS
[00:45:01]
GOING TO BE CONTRIBUTING.AND WHEN IT COMES TO, TO THE CITY'S ROLE, OKAY? IT, IT IS A PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN WHAT IS THE CITY WILLING TO PAY VERSUS WHAT ALREADY HAS TO BE PAID IN, IN INCREASING OUR FRONTAGE, BYSTANDER, THESE ARE ALL ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN WELL THOUGHT OUT.
AND WELL, THEY'VE BEEN WORKED THROUGH AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE WORKED THROUGH AS WE ADVANCE THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
AND I'D JUST LIKE TO CLOSE THAT.
I JUST WANT TO REITERATE THAT, THAT OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OKAY.
OKAY? IT'S WHAT WE HAVE DEVELOPED AS A CITY TO HELP GUIDE OUR DEVELOPMENT IN THE MOST EFFICIENT STRATEGIC WAY WE CAN.
AND BY THAT DOCUMENT, THIS AREA IS CALLED OUT AS A TRANSECT THAT IS INTENDED FOR THE EXACT ZONING THAT WE ARE, UH, ATTEMPTING TO APPLY FOR.
WE IN ESSENCE ARE DOING WHAT WE CAN TO FURTHER AND TO FACILITATE THAT GOAL THAT WAS MADE EVIDENT IN THE COMP PLAN.
AND WITH THAT, I'D JUST LIKE TO CLOSE AND ASK IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME AT THIS POINT? DO, DO THE QUESTIONS APPLY TO US TOO, OR NOT? UNFORTUNATELY, NO.
IT'S JUST, UH, ONE LAST CHANCE TO CLARIFY WITH HIM, AND THEN WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN WE'LL DISCUSS AMONGST OUR SUBJECT.
I, WE APPRECIATE YOUR, YOUR COMMENTS.
SO WITH THAT, UH, I WILL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, WHO WOULD LIKE TO GO FIRST? I'VE SEEN SOME PEOPLE WRITE SOME NOTES, SO, SO LIKE COMMISSIONER OGDEN'S, STILL WRITING.
ANYONE ELSE? UM, I HAVE A QUESTION, UM, CLARIFICATION ON, THERE WAS A COMMENT ABOUT THAT THE POTENTIALLY REQUIRED NOTICE WAS EVENT OR IT WAS CLOSED, SO I JUST WANTED CLARIFICATION ON THAT.
ON NEIGHBORHOOD NOTICE, ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD NOTICE BEING ONLY JUST MAYBE UNDER TWO WEEKS.
UM, YEAH, WE CAN, WE CAN ASK STAFF WHAT, WHAT'S THE PROTOCOL NORMALLY, UM, WITH YEAH, SENDING OUT NOTICE.
IS IT, IS IT A PRETTY STANDARDIZED THING? THE NOTICING REQUIREMENT COMES FROM STATE STATUTE, WHICH REQUIRES 14 DAYS NOTICE PRIOR TO ANY HEARING.
CARRIE, CAN YOU MAYBE ADDRESS, OR I'M WILLING TO SAY IF YOU CAN, UM, WHY WE DON'T DEVIATE FROM THAT EVER? SURE, I'LL TRY.
I WE ARE VERY STRICT WITH THE NOTIFICATION REQUIRED TO BE STRICT TO STATE STATUTE.
WE'VE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE ALWAYS RECEIVED COMMENTS, WELL, I DIDN'T GET A NOTICE, OR THE NOTICE DIDN'T REACH FAR ENOUGH.
I, ONCE YOU BEGIN MOVING OUTSIDE OF THE REQUIRED BOUNDARY FOR NOTIFICATION, IT BECOMES A QUESTION OF WHERE DO YOU STOP? AND THERE'S ALWAYS GONNA BE SOMEONE WHO FEELS LIKE THEY DIDN'T RECEIVE SUFFICIENT NOTICE OR NOTICE IN A CERTAIN WAY.
UM, I DON'T THINK WE'LL EVER RESOLVE THAT COMPLETELY.
UM, BUT BECAUSE OF THAT, WE STICK VERY STRICT TO THE REQUIRED STATE STATUTE SO THAT THINGS ARE DONE LEGALLY ACCORDING TO STATUTE AND ACCORDING TO THE, OUR OWN CITY'S ZONING AND NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
THAT'S, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, JUST FOR THE PUBLIC'S BENEFIT, GO COMMISSIONERS, WE GET COMMENTS ON THAT SOMEWHAT REGULARLY.
YOU KNOW, WHY IS THE NOTIFICATION ZONE SO SMALL? WHY IS THE TIME PERIOD SO SHORT? THESE THINGS ARE SET BY STATE STATUTE.
UM, IF WE GO OUTSIDE OF THE TIME LIMITS THAT ARE REQUIRED, IF WE GO OUTSIDE OF THE DISTANCE THAT IS REQUIRED FOR NOTIFYING NEIGHBORS, UM, WE RUN INTO ISSUES WHERE WE ARE MAKING POTENTIALLY ARBITRARY DECISIONS THAT THE COUNCIL CANNOT DEVIATE FROM.
SO IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT, UM, STAFF AND THE COMMISSION STICK TO THOSE REQUIREMENTS RATHER THAN TRYING TO MAKE JUDGMENT CALLS OUTSIDE OF THEM.
CAN YOU MOVE UP ONE SLIDE FOR ME? THANK YOU.
UM, I KNOW THIS IS A NON-BINDING MAP AND, AND OVER JUST AN OVERLAY OF GENERAL DESIGN CHARACTERISTIC AS WE, AS WE GROW THE CITY.
INTERESTING TO ME IS THAT THE, THE PARCEL IN QUESTION IS SQUARELY WITHIN THE SUBURBAN ZONE AND, AND MATCHING EVERYTHING AROUND IT.
UH, AND I FEEL, AND I'LL, I'LL PUT SOME OTHER THOUGHTS AND COMMENTS HERE, BUT THE SQUARELY WITHIN THAT SUBURBAN ZONE SHOULD LOOK, I THINK FAIRLY SIMILAR TO WHAT IS THERE.
UM, OUR TWO AND EVEN OUR THREE HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL,
[00:50:01]
OTHERS ARE PROBABLY MORE APPROPRIATE FURTHER TO THE SOUTH AND THE EAST IN THE, IN THE MOB OR BURGUNDY AREA THERE.UM, NOW GO DOWN TO THE ZONE MAP.
UH, TYPICALLY I KNOW WHEN WE WORK AS A COMMISSION, OUR FOCUS HAS BEEN, UM, TO FIND A ZONING WHEN A PROPER, WELL, LEMME BACK UP A LITTLE BIT.
WHEN PROPERTY IS ANNEXED, IT HAS TO HAVE A ZONING.
WE CAN'T ANNEX INTO THE CITY AND NOT ZONE SOMETHING.
UM, AND SO WHATEVER ZONING THE PLANNING COMMISSION COMES UP WITH, UM, IS A ZONE THAT THAT TENDS TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT.
AND WE, WHEN PLAT AND FUTURE THINGS COME JUST FOR YOUR, FOR YOUR INFORMATION, UM, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT, YOU KNOW, IF, IF IT'S ALREADY ALLOWED IN AN R TWO AND R THREE TO COME BACK AND SAY, WELL, WE DON'T WANT AN APARTMENT IF IT'S ALLOWED IN THAT ZONING.
UM, AND SO THIS IS OUR ONE CHANCE I THINK TO, TO REALLY DIRECT THAT AND SAY, YOU KNOW, WHAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE HERE? UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT HIGH DENSITY OR HIGHER DENSITY HOUSING WOULD BE SO APPROPRIATE HERE.
AS I SAID ON A PREVIOUS SLIDE, I FEEL IT'S MORE APPROPRIATE MAYBE ACROSS 17TH, ACROSS GRIZZLY AVENUE TO THE EAST AND THE SOUTH.
UM, SIMPLY BECAUSE I HAVE NO R TWO DIRECTLY TOUCHING THE CURRENT PARCEL.
I HAVE TWO ISLANDS OF R TWO TO THE SOUTH AND TO THE WEST, AND THEN I HAVE AN R THREE, UH, TOUCHING THE PROPERTY.
SO MAYBE R THREE NEEDS TO BE, BUT, BUT I THINK WHERE IT'S REALLY SURROUNDED BY R ONE THAT IS A MORE APPROPRIATE ZONE, IN MY OPINION FOR THIS PARCEL.
NOT ONLY DOES IT FOLLOW CITY GUIDELINES THAT WE HAVE TYPICALLY TRIED TO FOLLOW IN, IN FINDING A ZONE THAT MATCHES WHAT'S ADJACENT TO IT, BUT IT'S ALSO APPROPRIATE, I THINK FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND, AND WHAT'S DEVELOPED THERE.
UM, AGAIN, TO THE EAST AND THE SOUTH OF GRIZZLY AND 17TH, UH, I THINK AN R TWO OR R THREE SEEMS TO FIT A LOT BETTER AND WOULD WOULD BE A NICE BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL AND THE BIG DEVELOPMENT ALONG I 15 AND EVEN ACROSS TO THE EAST OF I 15 WITH THE MOUNTAIN AMERICA CENTER AND OTHER HIGH DENSITY APARTMENTS THAT ARE GOING IN THERE.
UM, SO I WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR, I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF ANNEXING, BUT I WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR OF AN R TWO ZONE FOR THIS PROPERTY.
I WOULD, I WOULD PROPOSE, AND, AND I DON'T MIND MAKING A PROPOSAL DEPENDING ON NOT READY TO, I WANT TO HEAR MORE DISCUSSION, BUT, UH, I WOULD ANTICIPATE MAKING A PROPOSAL FOR ANNEXATION ITS ZONING OF R ONE VERSUS R TWO OR, UH, HOLDING OFF.
UM, I GUESS I'LL SAY A FEW THINGS WHILE OTHERS, UH, MAYBE FORMULATE THEIR THOUGHTS BECAUSE I DEFINITELY WANT TO HAVE SOME GOOD DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS AND WE CONTINUE AND WE HAVE HAD GOOD DISCUSSION.
SO, UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WANTED TO REITERATE IS BEN MENTIONED IS THAT, UM, WHEN THE PRELIMINARY PLAT DOES COME OUT, THAT'S WHEN, UM, IT ADDRESSES, UH, ROAD ALIGNMENTS, UH, ROAD IMPROVEMENTS, IT ADDRESSES, UH, RECONFIGURING THE, YOU KNOW, THOSE THINGS.
IF THE CITY, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE CITY'S MOTIVATED TO MAKE THIS SAFER BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT'S ONLY AT COUNTY STANDARDS, BUT THE CITY HAS MUCH STRICTER STANDARDS WHEN IT COMES TO ROAD LAYOUT, UM, SIDEWALKS, UH, YOU KNOW, PATHWAYS, ALL SORTS OF STUFF.
SO NOW THAT THIS IS GETTING DEVELOPED, THE CITY HAS NOW BEEN AWARDED THE OPPORTUNITY TO FIX WHAT THEY SEE AS AN ISSUE.
UM, AND THIS AGAIN, I'D LIKE TO RE REITERATE THAT THE DEVELOPER WILL, BECAUSE THIS IS A, UH, COLLECTOR AND A MINOR ARTERIAL, THEY ARE ON THE HOOK FOR THOSE, UH, IMPROVEMENTS.
THEY ALSO HAVE TO BRING IN THE WATER AND THE SEWER AND ALL THAT STUFF CLOSE TO THEM OR TO THEM AND THEN THEY INSTALL IT ALL WITHIN THE PROPERTY.
UM, AND SO, UM, WHEN IT COMES TO, UH, THE COMMENT ABOUT THE DRAINAGE, UH, WHEN THE PRELIMINARY PLAT IS DONE, UH, THERE'S SO MANY REVIEWS AND A HUGE PROCESS THAT GOES THROUGH WITH PUBLIC WORKS, UM, AND WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO FIGURE OUT, OKAY, IF YOU HAVE THIS MANY DWELLINGS OR THIS MANY, UH, ELEVATION GRADE OR WHATEVER, THAT THEY, THAT'S HOW THEY DECIDE DO WE NEED, UH, A STORM POND OR CAN WE HAVE STORM WATER DRAINAGE GO INTO OTHER STORM, UH, UH, LINES.
I UNDERSTAND THAT IT CAN'T MAKE IT ACROSS THE CANAL.
UM, AND SO I'M NOT PROMISING, BUT THOSE DRAINAGE CONCERNS WILL BE ADDRESSED EITHER BY THE
[00:55:01]
DEVELOPER HAVING TO PUT IN THEIR OWN DRAINAGE POND OR CONNECTING TO OTHER STORM WATER LINES THAT MAY BE ALONG THE STREET.BUT MOST OF THE TIME I SEE, UM, YOU KNOW, LARGER DEVELOPMENTS LIKE THIS HAVE THEIR OWN STORM POND, UH, DEDICATED LOTS THAT THEN ARE, UH, DEDICATED TO THE CITY OR CITY OWNS THEM UNLESS, YOU KNOW, THE DEVELOPER DECIDES TO MAKE IT A PARK OR WHATEVER.
BUT IT'S A WHOLE NOTHER ARGUMENT.
I HAVE
WE DON'T WANT PEOPLE GETTING FLOODED OUT, UM, OR HAVING DRAINAGE ISSUES.
AND SO, UM, WHEN IT COMES TO R TWO, I THINK R TWO, IT PERSONALLY IS LIKE, WELL NOT PERSONALLY, BUT JUST HOW I SEE IT IS THAT IT IS, UM, KIND OF THE BUFFER BETWEEN I WOULD SAY, UH, THE R ONE ZONE AND THE MUCH DENSER R THREE ZONE.
SO THOSE BIG TALL APARTMENT BUILDINGS WE SEE AROUND TOWN, THOSE ARE ALL R THREES OR R THREE AS, OR UM, LC R TWO DOES NOT ALLOW THOSE BIG GIANT BUILDINGS BECAUSE THE REQUIREMENTS ARE MUCH STRICTER.
LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, UM, IN THE R TWO ZONE, THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE IS 6,000 SQUARE FEET, BUT R ONE IS MINIMUM IS 7,000, YOU KNOW, AND SO, UM, THEY, TO ME THAT'S PRETTY CLOSE.
AND THEN YOU GO TO R THREE A AND IT'S DOWN TO 5,000 AND SO IT'S LIKE THAT'S WHEN IT REALLY, YOU NOTICE A HUGE DIFFERENCE.
UM, THE R ONE ZONE ALSO DOES ALLOW TWIN HOMES.
AND DO THEY, DOES R ONE ALLOW LIKE, UH, MAYBE LIKE A FOURPLEX, POSSIBLY R ONE DOES NOT.
BUT IT DOES DEFINITELY DO DUPLEXES IN TWIN HOMES.
TWIN HOMES, IT WOULD ALLOW TWIN HOMES.
AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DUPLEX AND TWIN HOMES IS THE TWIN HOME IS EACH HOME, YES, THEY'RE ATTACHED, BUT THEY ARE ON THEIR OWN DEDICATED LOT, RIGHT? CORRECT.
UM, AND THEY HAVE TO STILL MEET THE OTHER SETBACK STANDARDS ON THE SIDES THAT AREN'T ATTACHED.
AND R TWO ALSO ALLOWS SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND IT DOES ALLOW, UH, TWIN HOMES, BUT ALSO IT HAS DUPLEXES AND FOURPLEXES, BUT THAT'S PRETTY MUCH AS BIG AS IT GETS.
IT HAS A HIGHER DENSITY, IT DOES ALLOW SOME ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNITS.
IF THOSE, THOSE TRIPLEXES AND FOURPLEXES, THEY CAN STILL BE THEIR OWN DEED OF Y EACH UNIT, CORRECT? THEY COULD THAT WAY, CORRECT.
I, I WOULD JUST WANT CLARIFY, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT SUBURBAN TRANSECT, IF YOU LOOK AT THE DEFINITION ON PAGE TWO OF THAT SUBURBAN TRANSECT, IT WAS NEVER INTENDED TO BE A SINGLE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, ALL THE SAME ZONE.
IF YOU LOOK ON THE HOUSING TYPES THAT ARE RECOMMENDED, RIGHT? IT INCLUDES DETACHED SINGLE UNIT, BUT ALSO TRIPLEXES, FOURPLEXES, DUPLEXES, IT'S INTENDED TO HAVE VARIOUS HOUSING TYPES, NONE OF WHICH COULD BE ACCOMPLISHED WITH THE R ONE ZONE.
RIGHT? AND, AND THAT'S ONE THING I WANTED TO LEAD TO IS THAT IT IS, UH, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOES ALLOW, UM, THAT SLIGHTLY HIGHER DENSITY.
I MEAN, IT'S NOT SAYING IT HAS TO BE THOSE BIG GIANT APARTMENT BUILDINGS OR ANYTHING, UM, BUT IT DOES ALLOW THE DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, THAT SLIGHT DIVERSITY OF IT AND CONSIDERING THIS IS NEAR TWO COLLECTOR ZONES, IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S SMACK DOWN AND THROWN INTO THE MIDDLE OF AN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND IF YOU KNOW THE DEVELOPER, WHICH I KNOW THEY WILL BE REQUIRED TO WIDEN THOSE ROADS, MAKE IT SAFER, UM, IT'S HARD FOR ME TO, TO SAY NO TO R TWO WHEN IT'S IT IN MY EYES.
YEAH, IT'S ALL R ONE AROUND IT.
I MEAN, LET'S BE REAL, YOU'VE GOT THAT LITTLE R FREE POCKET DOWN THERE, BUT THAT COULD JUST BE, I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON DOWN THERE, BUT, UM, IF, IF, IF THE DEVELOPER WAS TRYING TO COME WITH R THREE R THREE A, UM, I'D BE LIKE, HECK NO.
BUT R TWO I FEEL LIKE IS A NICE BUFFER.
AND WE'VE SEEN DEVELOPERS DO SINGLE FAMILY HOME NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE JUST R TWO JUST SIMPLY BECAUSE THE LOCK COVERAGE, UM, REQUIREMENTS IS, IS LESS ALLOWING THEM TO, MAYBE PEOPLE HAVE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT ARE AFFORDABLE, UM, BECAUSE THEY'RE ABLE TO PUT MORE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN A PIECE OF PROPERTY, UH, ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY.
UM, WE SAW THAT WITH, UH, UP NORTH OF FAIRWAY ESTATES.
[01:00:01]
WOODS CROSS, THEY HAVE AN R TWO AS WELL AND THEY'RE SURROUNDED BY R ONE.SO I, I DON'T, I PERSONALLY, IT'S HARD.
AND NOW GRANTED, I DO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING COMMISSIONER ABOUT THAT THIS IS, THE ZONING DOES PRETTY, THEY FOLLOW THE RULES, WHAT THE ZONING ALLOWS, AND SO THEY COULD GO TO ONE EXTREME OR THEY COULD BE, UM, JUST LOOK LIKE A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S HARD TO KNOW, BUT I JUST, I FEEL LIKE THERE'S, THEY, THEY FOLLOW ALL THE RULES IN MY, IN MY OPINION.
SO DID ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY, DOES ANYONE WANT TO ARGUE WITH ME PLEASE? NO, I'LL JUST KIDDING.
I'LL DO THE OPPOSITE TO ARGUE.
UM, IF YOU READ THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT A SUBURBAN TRANSECT IS NOT INTENDED TO JUST BE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
IT IS INTENDED FOR A VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES.
UM, WE DO NOT SEE ANY OF THOSE ON THE SCREEN IN THIS SUBURBAN TRANSECT AREA OF TOWN.
AND THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO, UM, ZONE IN AN AREA THAT COULD CREATE SOME DIFFERENT KINDS OF HOUSING IN THIS AREA.
I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT, UM, JUST BECAUSE IT'S A MAJORITY R ONE ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW THAT WE CANNOT HAVE AN R TWO ZONE THERE.
I THINK THEY ARE COMPATIBLE LAND USES, THEY ARE VERY SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT FROM EACH OTHER IN TERMS OF DENSITY AND LOT SIZES.
UM, YOU DO GET SOME DIFFERENCES OBVIOUSLY IN FOURPLEXES, YOU KNOW, CONNECTED TOWN HOMES.
I THINK THOSE ARE APPROPRIATE ADJACENT USES TO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
I LIVE IN A TOWN HOME AND WE HAVE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ACROSS THE STREET.
WE GET ALONG WITH OUR NEIGHBORS JUST FINE.
UM, WE SEE OTHER R TWO ON THE SCREEN HERE.
OBVIOUSLY THE SIZE OF THIS PROPERTY IS A DIFFERENT SCALE FROM THOSE, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT THAT'S NOT APPROPRIATE LAND USE IN THE AREA.
UM, WORKING WITH THE DEVELOPER HERE IS HOW WE GET IMPROVED ROADWAYS AND CONNECTIVITY.
UM, YOU KNOW, AS IT WAS TOUCHED ON, IMPROVEMENTS TO SIDEWALKS, POTENTIAL FOR BIKE LANES, THINGS LIKE THAT ARE NOT GONNA COME UNTIL THIS PROPERTY IS DEVELOPED.
UM, AND SO IF WE HAVE A, IF WE HAVE A LANDOWNER WHO WANTS TO COME INTO THE CITY AND WORK WITH THE CITY ON IMPROVING THE ROADWAYS HERE, UM, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD THING FOR THE CITY OVERALL.
UM, I HAD A THOUGHT BUT I LOST IT.
DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO SAY? YES, AND THEN COMMISSIONER SCOTT, I'LL LET YOU GO.
I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, UM, AFTER REVIEWING IT AND LISTENING TO FELLOW COMMISSIONER COMMENTS, I, I MORE APPROPRIATE, ALTHOUGH I FEEL LIKE THE SUBURBAN TRANSECT ALLOWS FOR THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO LOOK AT THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE DENSITY.
AND I JUST HAVE A, SO THAT'S WHERE I'M PLANNING ON IN UM, SUPPORTIVE ANNEXATION.
BUT I THINK OUR ONE WOULD BE, UM, WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE HERE, AND I DO HAVE A QUESTION ON, UH, THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT AND ON THE TABLE, THE LOT COVERAGE, BUILDING HEIGHT AND DENSITY, UM, AND LOOKING AT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OUR WARD AND OUR TWO, AND I JUST FELLOW COMMISSIONERS OR STAFF THAT LOT COVERAGE AND PERCENTAGE FOR R ONE IS 40, BUT R TWO IS 80, SO WOULD THAT BE LIKE TWICE AS DENSE AND SAME WITH MAXIMUM DENSITY BEING GROSS, UH, ENGROSSED UNITS PER ACRE.
YEAH, SO PRETTY MUCH WHAT IT, YEAH.
SO ESSENTIALLY, LET'S SAY YOU HAD A, UH, YEAH, AN 8,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT IN R ONE OR R TWO.
UM, IN R ONE, ONLY 4,000 SQUARE FEET OF THE UH, WAIT, NO, THAT WOULD BE, UH, THAT LESS, SO LET'S SAY 3000 SQUARE FEET COULD BE A HOME VERSUS, UM, AN R TWO.
IT WOULD BE, I MEAN IF YOU DO DIRECT, NOW LET'S PRETEND IT'S A 10,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT BECAUSE I'M NOT THAT SMART.
80% OF THE LOT COULD BE A STRUCTURE VERSUS R ONE WOULD BE ONLY 40% OF THE LOT IS A STRUCTURE.
SO YOU COULD STILL HAVE THE SAME LOT SIZE.
UM, BUT THEN WHAT THAT DOES IS IT ALLOWS YEAH.
DEVELOPMENTS TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, IT ESSENTIALLY YES, IT IS, IT IS DENSE.
SO LARGER HOMES WITH SMALLER LOTS, RIGHT? YEAH.
WHICH WE HAVE SEEN ARE SINGLE FAMILY.
BUT, AND I UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF HOUSING TYPES AND HOW THERE IS NEED FOR THOSE, BUT I JUST WANNA SAY I RECOGNIZE THAT, BUT I ALSO RECOGNIZE THE NEIGHBORHOOD CARE IN THE AREA.
[01:05:01]
OTHER THING I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT, UM, IF THE COMMISSION WAS TO CHOOSE TO, UM, PROPOSE ONE INSTEAD OF R TWO, UM, IS IT TRUE THAT DEVELOPER WOULD STILL BE ON THE HOOK? THIS IS MY UNDERSTANDING WOULD BE YES, FOR ANY ROAD IMPROVEMENT AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.SO WE WOULD STILL BE GAINING THAT OPPORTUNITY JUST POTENTIALLY BE TRADING OFF OF, UM, REDUCED VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPE PRICE POINTS POTENTIALLY.
AND IF, HOWEVER, IF IT IS R ONE, UM, THEY HAVE BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF, UH, OR YEAH, JUST THE LESS DENSITY.
I MEAN, I AM NOT IN THE BUSINESS.
I'M NOT IN THIS BUSINESS, BUT IT, IT COULD OR COULD NOT BE FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE FOR THEM ANYMORE IF IT'S R ONE.
UM, JUST BECAUSE PRICES OF DEVELOPMENT, UM, HAVE RISEN EXPONENTIALLY COMPARED TO WHEN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS SURROUNDED WERE LAND IS A LOT MORE EXPENSIVE NOW.
SO THE, OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, THE DEVELOPER NEEDS TO MAKE MONEY, THAT'S WHY HE'S DOING IT.
UM, AND THAT'S WHERE THE PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE DEVELOPER, UM, NOW I'M NOT IN THEIR POCKETBOOK BOOKS.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT IF IT'LL WORK OR NOT AS R ONE.
BUT, UM, IT MIGHT BE MORE OF A STRANGE, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE THEY HAVE ALL THE IMPROVEMENTS ALONG, UH, THOSE ROADS FOR EXAMPLE.
I BASICALLY JUST TOOK CAT AT PIGGY BACK ON THAT REAL QUICK.
YEAH, JUST TWO, YOU KNOW, SMALL LOWER DENSITY, YOU DO HAVE FEWER IMPACT FEES TO THE CITY.
THERE ARE OTHER NATIVES TO THE CITY WITH LESS DENSITY AND THAT'S WHY I THINK FREQUENTLY WE'RE IN FAVOR OF HIGHER DENSITY ZONES AND LOTS, AND I NORMALLY AGREE IN LOVE AND I JUST DUNNO THAT IT FITS THE EVERY CHARACTERISTIC YEAH.
I'M POINTING OUT THERE IS NEGATIVE TO THE CITY AS WELL.
FOR, FOR AN R ONE VERSUS R TWO.
WELL, TO GO OFF OF WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THOUGH, THAT COMMISSIONER SCOTTO, UM, EVENTUALLY I
UM, UH, YEAH, WITH THE R ONE ZONE, UM, NORMALLY, OR EVEN R TWO, SOME OF THE TIMES WE SEE DEVELOPERS, THEY GO IN ALONG AND OUR, THEY, THEIR ENGINE IS TO AN ARTERIAL LIKE MAJOR ARTERIAL, AND THEN THEY DON'T HAVE TO IMPROVE THAT SECTION AND THEN THEY ONLY HAVE TO PAY THE IMPACT FEES VERSUS, AND PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, SCOTT, BUT IN THIS SCENARIO, THE DEVELOPER IS HAVING TO PAY IMPACT FEES AND ALSO DO THE IMPROVEMENTS, WHETHER IT'S R ONE OR R TWO.
UM, AM I, THE ONLY CLARIFICATION I WOULD OFFER IS IT WOULD JUST BE GRIZZLY GRIZZLY'S, A COLLECTOR.
THAT WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED BY THE DEVELOPMENT.
17TH SOUTH IS AN ARTERIAL, SO THAT WOULD BE THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY.
BUT THEY WOULD STILL DEDICATE THE NEEDED RIGHT OF WAY.
UM, AND SO MAYBE IT, THE DEVELOPER COULD STILL HAVE, UH, THE DEVELOPER POTENTIALLY STILL HAVE SIDEWALKS ALONG, AT LEAST THEIR SIDE OF YES.
THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE, FOR SOME OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING POTENTIALLY TURNING LANES ON THE ARTERIAL IF THERE WANTS ON 17TH.
CAN YOU SHOW US WHERE ON THE MAP, UM, 17TH AND GRIZZLY? OFFICIALLY SEPARATE OR, YEAH.
17TH SOUTH CONTINUES ACTUALLY STRAIGHT.
YEAH, SO IT WOULD BE AT THIS POINT ROUGHLY.
UM, AND MAYBE JUST TO GIVE SOME PERSPECTIVE, IF I COME TO THIS DRAWING, ARIEL 17 SOUTH ISN'T IS THE ARTERIAL.
'CAUSE ONE, IT CONNECTS OUT INTO THE COUNTY.
IT ALSO CONNECTS TO BELLIN, WHICH WOULD BE AN ARTERIAL, AND THEN IT, IT'S INTENDED, I MEAN OBVIOUSLY THAT STREET SECTION'S VERY DIFFERENT TODAY THAN WHAT THE FINAL BUILD WILL BE, BUT IT IS INTENDED TO CONNECT DOWN TO, UH, THE FRONTAGE THERE ALONG I 15 AND THEN BACK TO SKYLINE DRIVE AND PAN CARRY, WHICH WOULD ALL BE ARTERIALS.
AND SO THAT'S THAT ARTERIAL LOOP THAT'S DESIGNED TO CARRY THE BULK OF THE TRAFFIC GRIZZLIES DESIGNED TO BE A COLLECTOR THAT WAS REALLY JUST GETTING, UH, TRAFFIC BETWEEN THE TWO ARTERIALS.
AND, AND ONE POINT TO NOTE IS THAT AT THE SKYLINE AND PAN CARRY, THAT IS ALREADY A LIGHTED INTERSECTION.
THE IDEA OF PEOPLE IN THIS AREA NEEDING TO GO THAT SIDE OF TOWN NATURALLY AS DEVELOPMENT HAPPENS AND THE ROAD GETS SAFER AND NICER, PEOPLE WOULD RATHER GO USE THE LIGHT VERSUS TRYING TO GET OUT ON GRIZZLY.
NOW, SOME PEOPLE WILL FOR SURE STILL HAVE TO GO OUT ON THE GRIZZLY IF NEEDED, BUT, UM, IT, IT, THE FLOW
[01:10:01]
IS INCREASED, CORRECT.I'LL JUST STATE MY POSITION FIRST.
I WANT TO, UM, THANK ALL OF YOU FOR COMING OUT AND, AND SPEAKING WITH US TONIGHT.
WE REALLY DEPEND ON YOUR INPUT.
I WISH WE HAD MORE PEOPLE HERE ALL THE TIME.
A LOT OF TIMES WE SIT HERE AND MAKE DECISIONS BY OURSELVES SO IT IT'LL BE CONGRATULATED FOR, FOR COMING IN AND SHARING YOUR IDEAS WITH US.
UH, THAT SAID, UM, I, I DO FEEL THAT IT IS, AS A PLANNING COMMISSION, IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO, TO WHATEVER EXTENT WE CAN TO FOLLOW THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT'S IN IT, BUT I THINK IT'S, UH, I, I WOULD LOVE TO JUST SAY, OKAY, WELL, WE'RE ONLY GONNA DO OUR ONE IN THE CITY, BUT WE SIMPLY CAN'T DO THAT.
UH, I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE IN THE COUNTY, AND, AND IF WE PUSH THOSE PEOPLE OUT INTO THE COUNTY, THEY'RE GONNA IMPACT THE CITY ANYWAY.
WE, WE ALL KNOW THAT, UH, I THINK IT'S PRETTY CLEAR FROM MY READING OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT OUR TWO DOES FIT HERE IN TERMS OF PROVIDING A, UH, A VARIETY OF HOUSING, UH, UM, AND MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT, UH, PEOPLE CAN AFFORD TO LIVE IN AND NOT HAVE TO MOVE FURTHER OUT INTO THE COUNTY AND DRIVE INTO TOWN.
SO, UM, I WILL BE VOTING FOR OUR TWO.
UM, ONE, ONE POINT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE TOO IS THAT, UM, THE HIGHER OF A DENSITY OR YEAH.
THE MORE UNITS THE CITY CAN PUT IN AN AREA.
NOW NOT ADVOCATING FOR THE MOST EVERYWHERE, BUT WHEN YOU START, UH, IMPLEMENTING LITTLE BITS OF POCKETS OF DENSITY THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY, THE HIGHER DENSITY ZONES, UM, PAY, HAVE A MORE CHANCE OF PAYING FOR THEMSELVES FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF THOSE ROADS AND THOSE SERVICES LONG INTO THE FUTURE.
BECAUSE UNFORTUNATELY, BECAUSE OF THIS AMERICAN GROWTH PATTERN THAT WE'VE HAD OVER THE LAST 70 YEARS, WE HAVE NOW LEARNED THAT SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED, UH, DEVELOPMENTS, UH, DO NOT AND WILL NOT EVER COVER THE COSTS OF THE MAINTENANCE OF THEIR, OF THE ROADS, THE SEWER, THE WATER, AND THE POWER THAT GOES IN FRONT OF THOSE HOMES.
AND THAT'S, AND SO IN ORDER FOR THE CITY TO CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN THOSE THINGS, THE CITY HAS TO CONTINUE TO GROW.
UM, AND MOST OF THE TIME WHAT WE'VE SEEN THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY IS WHEN THEY DO GROW, IT JUST CONTINUES TO BE SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS.
SO THE NEW IS JUST PAYING FOR THE, UH, THE OLD, BUT WHEN WE START IMPLEMENTING THESE POCKETS OF, UH, HIGHER DENSITY, THOSE ACTUALLY ARE A NET POSITIVE IN TAXES AND THEY HELP THE CITY BECOME MORE RESILIENT.
BECAUSE IF THE CITY EVER DID STOP GROWING, THE INL EVER DECIDED TO MOVE, NO ONE WANTED TO GO TO THE DOCTOR AROUND HERE ANYMORE OR WHATEVER.
UM, IN 20, 30, 40 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO SEE A LOT OF DEFERRED MAINTENANCE BECAUSE THE CITY JUST SIMPLY CANNOT KEEP UP.
UM, AND SO IN MY OPINION, LITTLE POCKETS LIKE THIS HELP THAT BLOW IN MY EYES BECAUSE IF WE ALSO STOP GROWING, WE'RE NOT GETTING IMPACT FEES EITHER.
AND SO, UM, THAT'S JUST SOMETHING I WANTED TO ADD TO THAT.
GIVEN THE FACT THAT WE HAVE A, A POTENTIAL CHANGE, UM, AND AT LEAST MAYBE A ROOM FOR A SECOND, I, I WOULD PROPOSE MAKING A MOTION, UM, OF, UH, UH, ANNEXING THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION WITH AN R ONE ZONE THAT GIVES THE COMMISSION A CHANCE TO VOTE.
IF THE VOTE IS NEGATIVE, THEN THE PROPOSAL AS IT IS, UH, CONTINUES FORWARD.
WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO VOTE A SECOND TIME.
RIGHT? WELL, WE, WE WOULD DO A NEW MOTION WITH THE PROPOSAL AS IS.
WITHOUT HAVING THAT FAIL AND BE DONE.
SO I WOULD, I WOULD MO MOVE, UM, ACTION TO, UM, ANNEX THIS PROPERTY, UM, ANNEX SANCTION OF THE 2 24 23 ACRES, SECTION 23 T TWO AND R THREE SEVEN E, UM, WITH AN INITIAL ZONE OF R ONE AND A CONTROLLED DEVELOPMENT AIRPORT OVERLAY ZONE.
IS THERE A SECOND FOR THAT? I'LL SECOND THAT.
[01:15:01]
COMMISSIONER PANZER NAY.'CAUSE THEN IT CAN, THEN WE CAN CONTINUE ON WITH THAT AS YES.
OPPOSED, WITHOUT ANY QUESTION IF WE DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH SUPPORT TO GIVE YOUR MONEY, BUT NOW WE KNOW WHERE, IF THERE WAS ENOUGH SUPPORT OR NOT.
SO IT'S NOT UP UP TO IF WE EVER WONDERED, SO, UM, BEFORE, I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE GONNA DO THIS NOW OR AFTER, BUT CONSIDERING THEY WAIT, DID YOU, WHAT, WHAT DID YOU VOTE? NO, UM, IN FAVOR OF, OF THAT.
DO WE NEED AT ANY POINT FOR HER TO SAY WHY SHE DID OR DID NOT VOTE? NO, NOT ON THIS ONE, I THINK, OR AT THE END OF THE NEXT DISCUSSION.
I THINK NOW WE'RE ON TO THE ACTUAL NO, NO, I UNDERSTAND.
BUT WE, WE'VE HEARD YOUR OPINIONS ON IT, BUT IF SHE VOTES NO NEXT ON THIS NEXT ONE, THEN WE MIGHT NEED, NORMALLY YOU WENT IT ON A SCALED MOTION.
YOU NORMALLY WOULD DO IT JUST ON A APPROVED MOTION.
THOSE THAT ARE IN THE OPPOSING.
YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO CLARIFY IS WOULD IT BE RIGHT NOW OR AFTER THAT? SO I APPRECIATE THAT.
WELL, IS THERE A MOTION TO, UM, DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE A MOTION OR WOULD LIKE TO DO ONE? COMMISSIONER MANN, MAKE SURE I'M ON THE RIGHT PAGE.
I MOVE THE COMMISSION, UH, RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ANNEXATION INITIAL ZONING WITH R TWO MIXED RESIDENTIAL WITH A CONTROLLED DEVELOPMENT AIRPORT OVERLAY MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FOR SECTION 23 T TWO NR 37 E.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
WE'LL HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE.
UM, GIVEN THE FAILED OF MY FAILURE OF MY PRIOR MOTION, I'LL VOTE.
UM, BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT, I HAVE A YES, LIKE TO HEAR YOUR REASON FOR OPPOSITION.
I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL SORT OF COMMENTS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN SHARED BY MY COCOMS HERE, UM, SITTING TONIGHT.
I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIS PARCEL AND THIS DEVELOPMENT.
I HEAR WHAT YOUR CONCERNS ARE AND I, I, I UNDERSTAND.
UM, I I DON'T THINK THAT R TWO IS INCONSISTENT WHOLLY, UM, BUT I, I THINK IT IS DIFFICULT WHEN WE MOVE INTO AN R TWO FROM AN INITIAL ZONING TO POTENTIALLY WRANGLE THAT AT SOME POINT.
THAT WAS PART OF MY JUSTIFICATION FOR STICKING WITH AN R ONE RECOMMENDATION.
UM, WELL WITH THAT, UM, MR. CHAIR, YOU SHOULD ALLOW COMMISSIONER HARDER TO HAVE THE SAME OPPORTUNITY TO VOICE HER CONCERNS.
IF THERE'S ANYTHING DIFFERENT THAT WOULD BE ADDED TO THE RECORD.
AS THE OTHER ONE END, I APOLOGIZE, JUST CONSIDER SHE HAD SPOKEN.
I, BUT YEAH, IS THERE ANYTHING ADDITIONAL, WELL, I GUESS BETWEEN THE TWO OF YOU, ANYTHING ADDITIONAL AT THIS POINT? THANK YOU MR. CHAIR, BUT NOT FOR ME.
AND I GUESS COMMISSIONER OGDEN'S.
I REALLY APPRECIATE THE DISCUSSION BETWEEN EVERYONE TONIGHT THOUGH.
IT REALLY HELPS US GET A BETTER IDEA AND IT ALSO SHOWS THE COMMUNITY THAT WE DON'T JUST RUBBER STAMP THINGS AROUND HERE.
WE DO GENUINELY DO CONSIDER THINGS.
SO I APPRECIATE EVERYONE FOR COMING OUT TONIGHT FOR THIS MEETING THE NEXT TIME, UH, THIS ITEM NOW WILL BE HELD HEARD BY CITY COUNCIL.
I DON'T KNOW WHEN THAT WILL BE, BUT YOU WILL ALSO GET ANOTHER NOTICE FOR THAT.
AM I CORRECT? THAT WOULD NOT BE FOR THE ZONING? YES.
ANNEXATION IS, IS HANDLED BY CITY COUNCIL.
SORRY, I THOUGHT IT COULD COME UP AGAIN.
WE'LL GO NOW TO THE THIRD ITEM,
[3.IV. RZN26-004 Allowing Drinking Establishments in LC, Limited Commercial as a Permitted Use. Ordinance amending Table 11-2-2 Allowed Uses in Commercial Zones to permit Drinking Establishments as an allowed use in the LC, Limited Commercial Zone.]
WHICH IS THE OR FOURTH ITEM, WHICH IS ALLOWING DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS IN LIMITED COMMERCIAL AS A PER, UH, PERMITTED USE, ASSUMING THE APPLICANT IS THE CITY.SO TODAY, UH, IN FRONT OF YOU IS A ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO SECTION 11 2 4, TABLE 11, 2 2 FOR ALLOWED USES IN THE COMMERCIAL ZONES TO ALLOW DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS IN THE LC.
UM, IF YOU'VE BEEN PAYING ATTENTION TO SOME OF THE COUNCIL, UM, ITEMS HAPPENING, THERE IS A FULL REWRITE ON ALCOHOL ORDINANCES THROUGHOUT THE CITY HAPPENING, UM, WITH THE CLERK'S OFFICE POLICE, A LOT OF DIFFERENT
[01:20:01]
ONES.SOME OF THAT INCLUDES SERVER TRAINING.
SO FOR THOSE WHO SERVE ALCOHOL DURING SERVER TRAINING, COMBINING, UM, LIQUOR, WINE, BEER LICENSES INTO ONE.
UM, AND SO A PART OF THIS IS THE IDEA THAT CURRENTLY DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS ARE PERMITTED, UM, IN H-C-N-C-C AND INDUSTRIAL ZONES AND SO AND SO, BUT IN THE LC ZONE, RESTAURANTS WITH BARS ARE CURRENTLY PERMITTED IN THE LC.
AND SO BY ALLOWING, UM, DRINKING S IN THE LC, YOU COME MORE IN LINE.
LIKE IT CAN BE A STANDALONE DRINKING ESTABLISHMENT, IT CAN ALSO BE AN ACCESSORY USE.
UM, AND SO BY ALLOWING THEM, IT KIND OF JUST BRINGS IT MORE INTO A LINE WITH THE ALCOHOL ORDINANCE THE CITY ARE DOING AS WELL AS, UM, THE, THE ACCESSORY USE AND STANDING AND OTHER COMMERCIAL ZONES THAT WE'RE SEEING.
UM, IT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW BY PERMITTING THIS THOUGH, TO GET A DRINKING ESTABLISHMENT, IN ORDER TO GET THOSE LICENSES FOR ALCOHOL, THEY STILL HAVE TO FOLLOW ALL OF STATE AND COUNTY AND CITY ORDINANCES.
UH, SO THIS IS JUST A, AND IN YOUR PACKET YOU SAW A BIG USE TABLE AND YOU'RE LIKE, I'M NOT QUITE SURE WHAT CHANGE.
THERE'S ONE VERY SMALL P IN BLUE THAT WOULD BE PERMITTED IN THE LCS.
UM, A QUESTION I HAVE IS, ARE THERE CURRENTLY ANY RESTAURANTS IN IDAHO FALLS THAT ARE AN LC THAT HAVE THE ACCESSORY USES DRINKING OR ALCOHOLIC? BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE THERE IS, BUT I COULD JUST BE WRONG.
SO LIKE, YEAH, SO YOU, SO THINK ABOUT, UM, LIKE ANY, I MEAN RED ROBIN AND TEXAS
BUT THAT'S, THAT'S, SORRY, GO AHEAD.
YEAH, SO THINK ABOUT REALLY ANY CHAIN RESTAURANT THAT'S GONNA BE IN A COMMERCIAL ZONE, THOSE ALL HAVE BARS THAT PEOPLE OKAY.
IS THE STIPULATION THAT IT, THERE'S FOOD IS LIKE SOME TYPE OF, OKAY, SO THAT'S THEIR DEVIATION THERE.
SO THEY CAN SERVE ALCOHOL BECAUSE THEY SERVE FOOD.
SO THAT DRINKING ESTABLISHMENT, LIKE THE DEFINITION IN THE ZONING WARNINGS FOR A RESTAURANT INCLUDES, LIKE, IT CAN HAVE A BAR WITH, SO LIKE FORS OR THE TAP ROOM OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT COULD EXIST IN AN LC WITH THIS OR EXCHANGE.
THEY'D HAVE TO BE LIKE A RESTAURANT AND HAVE THAT GUESS.
SO AS OF RIGHT NOW, THERE ARE NO THEN RESTAURANTS CURRENTLY IN LC THAT ALLOW DRINKING OF ANY NO, THEY DO.
THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING YOU CAN HAVE A RESTAURANT.
SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO FIX THIS SO THAT WAY THEY'RE, THEY'RE FOLLOWING THE LAW.
SO A RESTAURANT, I'M SO SORRY.
A RESTAURANT WITH A BAR IS PERMITTED LC.
BUT A STANDALONE DRINKING ESTABLISHMENT IS NOT AND AN ACCESSORY.
SO THINK THERE WAS AN EXAMPLE.
THERE WAS A DAY SPA THAT APPLIED, THAT'S AN LC FOR A WINE LICENSE.
RIGHT? A GLASS OF WINE WITH YOUR SERVICES THAT WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED.
SO IF PERMITTED DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS OKAY, THEN IT, IT CAN BE AN ACCESSORY USE TO THAT OTHER USES THAT'S IN THOSE ZONES.
SO WE CAN'T ALLOW DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS OR THOSE LIQUOR LICENSES IF THE USE ISN'T PERMITTED IN THE ZONE AS AN ACCESSORY USE TO THE MAIN USE.
UH, THIS JUST AN ASIDE, BUT I, I SO SOMEHOW HAD IN MY MIND THAT THERE, UH, WERE, UH, LIMITED NUMBER OF LIQUOR LICENSES AVAILABLE.
'CAUSE IS THAT TRUE? OR, OR ANYBODY THAT MEETS THE QUALIFICATIONS CAN GET A LICENSE? THAT'S NOT THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
WE DON'T KNOW AND WE DON'T, SINCE IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE REGULATE.
SO IT IS LIMITED BASED ON POPULATION.
SO YES, THERE IS A, A LIMIT TO THE NUMBER.
UM, WHETHER THEY AVAILABLE OR NOT NEAR CLOSE TO THAT, I DON'T KNOW HOW, HOW MANY WE'RE ALLOWED AND WHERE WE'RE AT IN THE TOTAL NUMBER? NO.
THIS IS A TOPIC I AM EXTREMELY PASSIONATE ABOUT
EVERY UNI EVERY INCORPORATED MUNICIPALITY GETS TWO AS AS A BASELINE.
AND THEN FOR EVERY 1500 ADDITIONAL RESIDENTS, THE CITY GETS TO ISSUE ANOTHER ONE.
LIQUOR LICENSES ARE DIFFERENT FROM BEER AND WINE LICENSES.
UM, SO YOU COULD HAVE WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION A DRINKING ESTABLISHMENT THAT DOES NOT SERVE LIQUOR.
UM, TAP AND FILL WOULD BE A GOOD EXAMPLE OF THAT.
THEY SERVE PRIMARILY OR ONLY BEER AND WINE.
UM, TIMELESS TAP HOUSE RIGHT DOWN THE STREET HAS SOME FOOD, BUT IS A, WHAT I WOULD CALL A DRINKING ESTABLISHMENT THAT DOES NOT HAVE LIQUOR AT IT.
AND MANY OF OUR LOCAL RESTAURANTS, SMALL BUSINESSES ESPECIALLY,
[01:25:01]
UM, WILL ONLY SERVE BEER AND WINE FOR THAT PURPOSE BECAUSE IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY EASIER TO GET A BEER AND WINE LICENSE THAN IT IS TO GET A LIQUOR LICENSE.I, I PARTIALLY BROUGHT THAT UP.
I WAS ON THE STATE COUNCIL IN TETON.
WE HAD, UH, QUITE AN INCIDENT, UM, INVOLVING AROUND THIS WITH A COUPLE OF, OF THINK ESTABLISHMENT.
JUST LOOKING, IF YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT RESTAURANTS IN THAT LC ZONE, IT WOULD BE AROUND THE MALL AND CHANNEL ON CHANNING ARE AROUND SAM'S CLUB ON 17TH STREET, IF ANY OF THOSE RESTAURANTS WERE TO SERVE YOUR WINE.
THE OTHER THING THAT YOU MIGHT NOTE TOO IS THAT YOU COULD HAVE A LIQUOR STORE IN LC BECAUSE IT'S CONSIDERED RETAIL.
UM, BUT YOU COULDN'T HAVE THE, THE DRINKING STUFF.
SORRY, CAN I CLARIFY, I APPRECIATE HAN'S DISCUSSION ON LIQUOR LICENSE VERSUS HEARING WHY NOT BEING, UH, UNDER OR TAKEN, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT OR ALREADY ON IT, BUT, UM, SO THAT I'M CLEAR WHERE ANY OF THE RESTAURANTS SAY ON 17TH AROUND SAM'S CLUB, IF THIS IS APPROVED, THEY CAN SERVE, THEY CAN APPLY FOR A LIQUOR LICENSE OR ONLY SERVE BEER AND WINE.
I THINK THEY'RE, THEY'RE ATTEMPTING TO HAVE A STANDALONE BAR BASICALLY JUST ALLOWED.
SO SOMEBODY WANTS TO OPEN A BUSINESS THAT IS JUST A STANDALONE BAR IN THAT ZONE ALLOWED SERVING BEER AND WINE, NO FOOD.
AM I, OR, OR HARD LIQUORS HARD LIQUOR.
I MEAN, THAT'S WHERE THAT, THE EXAMPLE CAITLIN MENTIONED.
SO WE HAD A SPA WHO WENT THROUGH THE ENTIRE PROCESS WITH THE STATE AND WITH BONNEVILLE COUNTY TO ACQUIRE A LIQUOR LICENSE AND PAID ALL OF THEIR FEES.
AND IT WAS ONLY BEER AND WINE.
BUT THEN THEY CAME TO THE CITY AND WE SAID, YOU CAN'T DO IT.
IT'S NOT ALLOWED IN THAT ZONE.
'CAUSE A DRINKING ESTABLISHMENT IS NOT PERMITTED.
SO DRINKING ESTABLISHMENT IS NOT NECESSARILY JUST BEER AND WINE OR NECESSARILY CORRECT.
HARDER FOOD IS TYPICALLY THE ASSOCIATED TRIGGER FOR THE ACCESSORY USE ALLOWANCE.
AND SO THIS ALLOWS MORE ACCESSORY USES TO THAT DEFINITION, ESSENTIALLY REGARDLESS OF THE BEVERAGE OF CHOICE? CORRECT.
SO AN ACCESSORY USE NORMALLY IS, IS TIED TO IF IT'S LIKE FOOD AND WHATEVER, IF THEY'RE ADJACENT USES.
BUT IF IT'S LIKE, GO TO MY BARBER AND GET, ALSO HAVE A, YOU KNOW, A BEER.
BUT, UM, BUT THAT ACCESSORY USE IS, IS NOW MORE CAPABLE OR COMPATIBLE? CORRECT.
THANK YOU FOR NOT REGULATING SWIG AND UP
WELL NOW THEY CAN ACTUALLY, I DON'T YEAH.
THEY GET THEM AT THE DRIVE THROUGH
SO IT'S REALLY JUST TO MAKE IT.
UM, SO REALLY AGAIN, JUST TO CLARIFY, WE'RE JUST MAKING IT SURE THAT THE, IT OPENS UP THE ACCESSORY USES TO THE BEER AND WINE AND LIQUOR OR WHATEVER.
AND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE SUPER ADJACENT.
WHILE WE'RE HERE,
NO, I'M JUST, I'M JUST, I'M SO CURIOUS.
LIKE WHY WOULD THIS HAVE BEEN LEFT OUT OF THIS ZONE IN THE FIRST PLACE? YOU KNOW, AS I LOOK DOWN THE USE OF COMMERCIAL TAPE, THE COM THE COMMERCIAL LAND USE TABLE, WOULD WE HAVE HERE, THERE'S ANOTHER COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I'M CONFUSED.
LIKE, WHY IS DRY CLEANING NOT ALLOWED IN THIS ZONE, EVEN THOUGH, YOU KNOW, WE SEE ELSEWHERE IN TOWN WHERE THERE'S A DRY CLEANER ADJACENT TO A GROCERY STORE, FOR EXAMPLE.
DRY CLEANERS ARE INTERESTING 'CAUSE THEY HAVE A CHEMICAL THING ASSOCIATED TO IT.
UM, AS FAR AS DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS, LC, IT IS A MIXED ZONE.
IT'S A RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL ZONE WHERE HC UM, WHY ISN'T, AND CC'S REALLY YOUR DOWNTOWN AREA.
UM, I WOULD JUST SAY OTHER COUNCILS AND PLAINTIFF COMMISSIONS MAKE DIFFERENT DECISIONS ON HOW THEY FELT DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS FEEL IN COMMERCIAL.
OH, WELL THIS IS TECHNICALLY A, UH, PUBLIC HEARING.
DO YOU HAVE ANY, I'D LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
THEN WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO, UM, ANY DISCUSSION AMONGST THE COMMISSION? NO.
WELL, WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? I THINK YOU, I
[01:30:01]
HAVE TO.I'M GONNA TAKE EVERY MOTION TONIGHT.
UM, I MOVE THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 11 DASH TWO DASH FOUR, TABLE 11 DASH TWO DASH TWO ALLOWED USES IN COMMERCIAL ZONES TO PERMIT DRINKING ESTABLISHMENT IN THE LC LIMITED COMMERCIAL ZONE.
WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SECOND THAT? SECONDED? PERFECT.
UM, THEN WE WILL TAKE IT, WE'LL DO A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE.
[4.I. PLT26-020 Final Plat for Wood's Crossing Division No. 2. NW % of Section 4, Township 1 North, Range 38 East. Located north of Tide Pool Drive, east of S 15th East, south of E 49th South, and west of Providence Point Drive.]
WHICH IS, UH, THE FINAL PLAT FOR WOODS CROSSING.UH, COMMISSIONER MN I KEPT MEANING TO TELL YOU, BUT I FORGOT.
UM, I DIRECTLY WORK WITH THE, UH, OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY.
SO, UM, I'M GOING TO, UH, RECUSE MYSELF FROM THIS ONE.
IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE NO CRAP, BUT THERE YOU GO.
UM, BUT YEAH, YOU TAKE IT AWAY.
IT'S THE FIRST TIME I'VE EVER GOTTEN TO HOLD THE GAVEL.
UH, IN THE ABSENCE OF AN APPLICANT, UM, WE'LL HEAR FROM STAFF.
UM, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE FINAL PLAN FOR WOODS CROSSING DIVISION TWO.
UH, THIS IS THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT DOWN HERE.
UM, THIS IS AN R TWO, UH, DEVELOPMENT.
UM, THE REQUESTED ACTION IS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
THE FINAL PLAT FOR WOODS CROSSING DIVISION TWO, MARY AND COUNCIL OF, UH, WITH THE INITIAL ZONING OF R TWO AND R THREE A UP ON THE NORTH.
I FORGOT TO MENTION THAT INITIALLY.
UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, IT IS, UH, IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO BE ADJACENT I GUESS, BUT IT'S ADJACENT TO R TWO TO THE SOUTH AND R THREE A JUST A LITTLE BIT THERE TO THE NORTH AS WELL AS R ONE TO THE NORTH.
UM, AND THEN SOME COUNTY RESIDENTIAL AG ON WEST END SIDES.
I MIGHT NOT HAVE A COMP CLAIM BACK, SO I APOLOGIZE, BUT IT IS, UM,
IT'S CONSISTENT WITH OUR COMP PLAN, UM, FOR THE AREA, WHICH I HAD A MAP TO SHOW YOU, I APOLOGIZE.
UM, SO OUR RECOMMENDATION TO YOU WOULD BE, UH, THAT THE STAFF HAS REVIEWED THIS FINAL PLAN, FINDS IT CONSISTENT WITH THE COMP PLAN.
I PROMISE THE PLAT ALSO MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AND COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE.
UM, SO I RECOMMEND THE, UH, FINAL PLAT AND, UH, OH, I SAID INITIAL ZONING.
IT'S NOT ANNEXATION OR INITIAL ZONING.
UM, BUT WE RECOMMEND THE APPROVAL STAFF RECOMMENDS THE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL WITH THE FINAL.
AND I QUESTIONS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I FAMILIAR WITH IT.
ANY DISCUSSION AMONG THE COMMISSION? ANYBODY HAVE ANY STRONG FEELINGS THAT THEY WANNA GET OUT? I'D BE WILLING TO MAKE A MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT OF WOODS CROSSING DIVISION TWO.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
UH, WE'LL HAVE A ROLL CALL BY THE COMMISSIONER, SCOTT.
I WILL WELCOME THE CHAIR BACK TO THE COMMISSIONER.
UM, THANK YOU FOR, UH, COMMISSIONER MN.
UH, SO THE NEXT ITEM IS THE FINAL
[4.II. PLT26-021 Final Plat for Alpine Ridge Division No. 2. E% of the SE % of Section 7, Township 2 North, Range 38 East. Located north of E Anderson Street, east of Boge Avenue, south of Ronald Avenue, and west of N Holmes Avenue.]
PLAT FOR ALPINE RIDGE DIVISION NUMBER TWO, ASSUMING WE DON'T HAVE AN APPLICANT, SO WE'LL HEAR FROM THE CITY.THE REQUESTED ACTION TONIGHT IS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT FOR ALPINE RIDGE DIVISION NUMBER TWO TO THE MART CITY COUNCIL.
THIS IS A TWO LOT PLAT, SO PRETTY SIMPLE.
UM, WE DID JUST HEAR, WE JUST JUST BROUGHT
[01:35:01]
TO YOU, I THINK LAST MONTH, UM, THE PLA FOR THE REST OF THIS PROPERTY.UM, SO THIS IS JUST PLOTTING THE REMAINDER.
UM, IT'S A TWO LOT PLA UH, AS YOU CAN SEE, ONE OF THE LOTS IS JUST A SMALL LOT RIGHT HERE.
I WAS REALLY STRUGGLING TO FIND THE SECOND LOT
IT'S JUST THIS LITTLE STRIP RIGHT HERE.
AND THAT'S DESIGNATED AS A UTILITY EASEMENT.
AND IT WILL ALLOW FOR ACCESS FOR THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH TO THIS ROAD.
UM, SO THAT'S JUST POINT OUT THAT SECOND LOT THERE.
UM, THE LC ZONE, UH, LC LIMITED COMMERCIAL OWNED BY SMALL SCALE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY RETAIL AND SERVICES THAT MEET DAILY NEEDS OF THE CITY RESIDENTS.
UM, R THREE, OR SORRY, RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THIS ZONE WILL NEED TO MEET THE R THREE A STANDARDS.
UM, BUT IT IS ALLOWED, UH, UM, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOES INTO AREA IS GENERAL URBAN, UM, WHICH THE, THIS PLA UH, MEETS ALL THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THAT AS WELL.
THE STAFF REVIEW THE FINAL PLA PLANS.
IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AND THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING CODE AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLA ALPINE DIVISION.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR CONCERN? NO.
UM, ANY DISCUSSION FIRST BEFORE WE HEAR A MOTION? NO.
HEARD YOU GOT, I HEARD YOU GOT VOLUNTEERED.
UM, I RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT FOR ALPINE RIDGE DIVISION NUMBER TWO TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL.
[4.III. PLT26-024 Final Plat for South Lawn Addition First Amended. Lot 1 Block 3, Southlawn Addition. Located north of W 16th Street, east of Alice Avenue, south of W 15th Street, and west of Calkins Avenue.]
TONIGHT.UH, THE FINAL PLAT FOR SOUTH JUAN EDITION FIRST AMENDMENT LOT.
UM, I GUESS WE'LL HEAR FROM THE STAFF AGAIN.
IT'S NOT, NO ONE'S SHOWING UP.
THESE, THESE DEVELOPERS ARE REAL COMPLIMENT TONIGHT.
SO THIS IS THE REQUESTED ACTION FOR THIS ONE IS ALSO TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAN FOR THE SOUTHBOUND EDITION.
FIRST AMENDED TO AMERICAN CITY COUNCIL.
UM, THIS IS A SMALL TWO LEFT PLAT ON THE CORNER OF KINS AVENUE AND, UM, SIX 15TH STREET, WEST 15TH STREET, WHICH IS WEST OF POPCORN, UH, RIGHT HERE.
THIS IS ONE OF THE OLDEST PLA NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE CITY.
ORIGINALLY PLATTED IN, UM, 1891 IN ANNEX CITY IN 1892.
IT WAS RE PLATTED AS SOUTH LAWN AS PART OF THE SOUTH LAWN EDITION IN 1901.
UM, THE PROPERTY WAS REZONED FROM R TWO TWO TN IN 2018.
UM, THE ORIGINAL PLAT FOR THIS PROPERTY, THEY WERE THE TRADITIONAL 25 FOOT WIDE LOTS.
UM, WHEN IT WAS RE PLATTED IN THE SOUTH LAWN ADDITION, THEY PLATTED THEM INTO DOUBLES SIZE LOTS.
UM, THE TN ZONE ALLOWS FOR A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 3000 SQUARE FEET.
THIS IS, UH, JUST OVER 6,000 SQUARE FEET.
UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE HOUSE WAS BUILT ON THE SOUTHERN HALF OF THIS LOT FACING CALPERS AVENUE.
AND THE OWNER WANTS TO BE ABLE TO DIVIDE A LOT INTO TWO, UM, AND HAVE ANOTHER HOUSE BUILT THERE ON THE CORNER.
THE PLAT DOES MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONE AS WELL AS THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE.
UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT AND HAVE ANSWER QUESTIONS.
JUST, UM, UNDERSTANDING THESE REQUIREMENTS, BUT IT JUST SEEMS LIKE SUCH AN ODDBALL, LIKE, OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO YOU SEE A LOT OF THIS IN THE TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD ZONE WHERE THE, THE LOTS ARE PLOTTED VERY LONG IN FRONTING THE NUMBERED STREETS.
BUT ON THE CORNERS, AND IF YOU GO
[01:40:01]
DRIVE DOWN THE AVENUES AND THE NUMBERED STREETS, NOW YOU'RE GONNA NOTICE THEM EVERYWHERE.BUT THIS HAS BEEN VERY COMMON THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE OLDER PARTS OF THE CITY TO BUILD TOWARDS THE AVENUE AND THEN SPLIT THE LOT, UM, IN THIS MANNER.
SO IT'S NOT TOO UNUSUAL, UM, FOR THIS FORMAT.
I MEAN, IT DOES LOOK UNUSUAL BASED ON HOW THE REST OF THE BLOCK IS, BUT IT'S PRETTY COMMON, UM, IN THE TM ZONE TO SEE SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
IT, IT IS A LITTLE BIT CHALLENGING OF COURSE, BECAUSE THE LOT IS SO LONG AND NARROW.
UH, IN THIS CASE IT'S NOT TOO BAD BECAUSE THERE ARE BOTH SEWER AND WATER IN CALKINS AVENUE AND WATER IN 15TH STREET.
SO THIS CORN NEW CORNER LOT WILL HAVE FULL ACCESS TO UTILITIES.
AND MR. CHAIR, IF I CAN JUST TAKE TWO SECONDS.
JUST 'CAUSE IT'S A GOOD OPPORTUNITY WITH NO IN THE ROOM.
AND TO UNDERSTAND THE COMMISSION WEARS A COUPLE DIFFERENT HATS.
AND YOU'LL NOTICE ON YOUR AGENDA, YOU'VE NOW MOVED FROM A HEARING SECTION TO A BUSINESS ITEM SECTION.
SO YOU SHOULD BE SWITCHING YOUR HATS.
YOU'RE IN THIS FINAL PLAT THAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU IS NOT A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING.
UM, SO, AND THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE IS VERY DIRECT.
IT SAYS THAT IF IT MEETS ALL THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS, THE COMMISSION AND THE COUNSEL SHALL APPROVE THE PLAT.
SO YOU HAVE LESS ABILITY TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS PROVIDED IT MEETS THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS.
SO JUST A REMINDER OF THOSE THINGS SINCE WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY HERE TO KIND OF SEE THAT CHANGE IN THE AGENDA.
APPRECIATE, I APPRECIATE THAT.
CAN COMMISSIONER ME IN? CAN YOU SAY SOMETHING? YEAH.
SO JUST LOOKING AT THE OVERHEAD MAP AND THEN THE WAY THIS PROPERTY WOULD'VE TO BE SPLIT, WE OBVIOUSLY HAVE A STRUCTURE THAT'S GONNA BE VERY CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE ON THE SOUTHERN PORTION.
ARE WE GOING TO CREATE A SITUATION WHERE WE HAVE TO IN IMMEDIATELY GRANT A CONDITIONAL USE OR A VARIANCE BECAUSE OF THAT? SO PROXIMITY TO THE PROPERTY LINE OF THAT STRUCTURE? SO THAT'S, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
THE ORIGINAL PADDED LOTS DON'T REALLY CONSIDER THIS SCENARIO, RIGHT? YEAH.
UM, NORMALLY A VARIANCE CANNOT BE GRANTED BECAUSE OF SOMETHING A PROPERTY OWNER DID.
SO, RULES AS WRITTEN, UM, WE WOULD NOT GENERALLY SUPPORT A VARIANCE AFTER A LOT HAS BEEN SPLIT LIKE THIS BECAUSE OF A SPLIT BY THE PROPERTY OWNER.
THE SITUATION WHERE A VARIANCE WOULD BE APPROPRIATE WAS CREATED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? SO NORMALLY WE, WE WOULDN'T, UM, IN THIS CASE IT DOES MAKE A VERY SMALL LOT.
AND AGAIN, IT WAS ORIGINALLY PLOTTED AS TWO LOTS AND THEN REPOTTED A SINGLE LOT.
UM, SO THERE'S A LOT GOING ON HERE THAT'S BEYOND THE PROPERTY OWNER'S CONTROL.
SO IT, BUT IT WOULD JUST DEPEND ON HOW THEY APPLY FOR THAT.
BUT GENERALLY, NO, WE WOULD NOT SUPPORT A VARIANCE FOR SOMETHING THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR, FOR CAUSED BY PROPERTY OWNERS OVER.
SO WHEN YOU SAY WE, WE WOULD NOT SUPPORT A VARIANCE, DOES THAT MEAN THAT, THAT THERE'S THE POTENTIAL FOR THE SOUTHERN LOT HERE TO BE OUTSIDE OF THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS FOR THAT PROPERTY? NO.
OH, THAT'S, SO THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
THE EXISTING HOUSE MEETS ALL THE, THEIR
THAT THE ONE THING THAT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE ESPECIALLY IS THAT THERE ARE SITES SET BACK ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE HOUSE, UH, WAS THE MINIMUM REQUIRED.
AND WE WEREN'T PUTTING THE EXISTING HOUSE INTO A NONCOMPLIANCE.
SO WE'RE ESSENTIALLY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE NORTHERN LOT HERE IS GOING TO BE VERY SMALL, VERY POTENTIALLY VERY DIFFICULT TO DEVELOP IN A WAY THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PARCEL.
BUT THE, THE PARCEL PRESENTED DOES MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ZONE, CORRECT? YES, IT DOES.
AND THEN SO IT'S, IT, IT REALLY IS A SHALL PASS.
AND IF I CAN CLARIFY TOO, WHEN DAVID SAYS WE WOULDN'T SUPPORT A VARIANCE, THE ZONING ORDINANCE, WHICH MIN, WHICH IS A DIRECT QUOTE FROM STATE STATUTE, WOULD NOT ALLOW, WELL, HE'S QUOTING THAT NOT BE DONE BY THE PROPERTY OWNER COMES FROM STATE STATUTE ON STATE CODE.
AND IF YOU LOOK ON THE PICTURE, IF YOU GO FOUR HOUSES DIRECTLY TO THE WEST, FOUR LOTS DIRECTLY TO THE WEST, THERE'S PROBABLY A HOUSE THERE THAT WOULD FIT ON THAT LOT.
UM, COMMISSIONER IAN, I WANT TO KIND
[01:45:01]
OF HELP YEAH.SO, I MEAN, IF YOU LOOK, SO THIS LOT IS EFFECTIVELY BEING SPLIT IN HALF AND RIGHT NOW THERE'S ALREADY A HOUSE.
SO REALISTICALLY YOU COULD MEET ALL THE, UM, UH, REQUIREMENTS TO HONESTLY BUILD A NICE SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
SO NOW THEY COULDN'T BUILD A DUPLEX HERE, RIGHT? UM, YEAH.
JUST SO IT'S JUST GONNA BE ONE SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
UM, BUT, UH, I THINK THIS IS A GREAT LAND USE.
UM, AND I APPRECIATE THE TN ZONE FOR THIS BECAUSE NOW WE'RE, WE'RE SLOWLY FILLING IN ALL THESE LIKE, REALLY UNUSED PIECES OF MAYBE PEOPLE'S PROPERTY THAT THEY WERE NEVER REALLY USING OR IT WAS JUST A W THAT THEY HAD TO TAKE CARE OF.
NOW CAN BE EFFECTIVELY, YOU GET ONE MORE HOUSE.
UM, TO BE HONEST, I'M JEALOUS I DIDN'T BUY THIS PROPERTY TO SPLIT IT BECAUSE, UM, I, A PARTNER AND I LOOK FOR THIS TYPE OF STUFF ALL THE TIME HAD BEEN FOR YEARS.
SO, UM, I THINK ONCE A HOUSE GETS BUILT THERE, IT'LL ACTUALLY LOOK PRETTY NORMAL, UM, JUST CONSIDERING, DEPENDING ON WHETHER IT FACES, UH, 15TH OR CALKINS.
BUT, UH, THIS IS THE CHANCE FOR THEM TO, I MEAN, IT'S NOT LIKE IT CAN BE A GIGANTIC HOME.
SO THIS IS A CHANCE FOR A BUILDER TO BUILD AN ACTUAL AFFORDABLE HOME FOR A YOUNGER FAMILY THAT IS STILL SINGLE FAMILY, UM, A DETACHED HOME.
AND SO I I, I JUST THINK THIS IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY PERSONALLY.
I I SHOULD NOT HAVE SAID VERY DIFFICULT TO PUT SOMETHING ON THE SPOT AND IT'S CLEAR THAT THE HOME TO THE SOUTH DOES FIT THERE AND OTHERS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD DO AS WELL.
SO THAT WAS, THAT WAS MEAN MIS SO GOOD.
IT, IT IS PRETTY EXCITING, HONESTLY, YOU DON'T SEE THIS BEING ABLE TO HAPPEN IN A LOT OF CITIES IN THE AREA OR EVEN THE REGION.
UH, JUST JUST A GENERAL QUESTION ABOUT THE T IN ZONE, ASIDE FROM LOT SIZES AND SETBACKS AND THAT SORT OF THING, ARE THERE ANY BUILDING GUIDELINES THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, THE BUILDING SHOULD YES.
TRADITIONAL SOMEHOW? SO THE, THE TAN ZONE HAS, UM, SOME SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS THAT TALK ABOUT THE FORM OF THE STRUCTURE.
UM, IT REQUIRES A CERTAIN ROOF TYPE, UM, WHICH IS GABLE OR A HIP ROOF.
UM, IT TALKS ABOUT THE HEIGHT IS LIMITED TO THE TALLEST STRUCTURE ALONG THE BLOCK.
UM, THERE'S, UH, CERTAIN APARTMENTS FOR WHERE PARKING CAN BE LOCATED.
A GARAGES NEED TO BE SET BACK FROM THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOME SO THAT THEY, THE PRIMARY ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE OF THE HOME.
SO THERE IS A LIST OF SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS THAT APPLY ONLY TO THE TM.
SO WE TALK ABOUT THE FORM OF THE BUILDING AND THOSE HELP MAKE IT SO NEW HOMES, BRAND NEW BILLS CAN BE MORE COHESIVE.
WHAT DEFINITELY THESE MORE HISTORIC AREAS.
SO I, I TELL YOU OFF, APOLOGIZE.
UM, WELL WE ALREADY HAD OUR DISCUSSION AS WELL, I'M ASSUMING.
UH, WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION? I'LL TAKE IT.
UM, I RECOMMEND THAT THE FINAL PLAT FOR THE SOUTH LAWN EDITION FIRST AMENDED BE, UM, ACCEPTED BY OR PUSHED TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FOR ACCEPTANCE.
[Additional Item]
ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS? ANYTHING FOR NEXT MONTH? ANY? WE HAVE A FULL AGENDA FOR NEXT MONTH.UM, JUST ONE THAT'S MAYBE GONNA BRING SOME, WELL TWO THAT WILL BRING SOME DISCUSSION.
UM, I DIDN'T WANT TO ANTICIPATE IT BEING A LONG NIGHT, BUT A FULL NIGHT.
UM, YOU ALSO SHOULD KNOW THE CITY COUNCIL HAS DIRECTED CITY STAFF TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE THAT WILL COME TO YOU NEXT MONTH TO REMOVE AND RESEND THE PLAN UNIT, DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE FROM THE ZONING CODE.
SO BASICALLY REMOVING THE ABILITY TO HAVE PUDS WITHIN THE CITY OF IOWA FALLS.
SO THE REASON I WOULD MENTION IT TO YOU, BECAUSE AGAIN, WE TALKED ABOUT DIFFERENT HATS.
THIRD HAT, UM, BECAUSE SIMILAR TO THE ALCOHOL ONE YOU SAW TONIGHT, THAT IS A LEGISLATIVE
[01:50:01]
ACTION.LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS ARE COMPLETELY OPEN TO, UM, EX PARTE COMMUNICATION, WHICH MEANS YOU CAN TALK TO YOUR NEIGHBORS AND FRIENDS.
PEOPLE CAN STOP YOU AT WORK OR AT THE GROCERY STORE AND TALK TO YOU ABOUT IT IF YOU'RE OPEN TO TALKING TO 'EM ABOUT IT.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING YOU DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH.
UM, THAT BEING SAID, UM, YOU MIGHT HAVE DEVELOPERS OR UH, FOLKS REACH OUT TO YOU BECAUSE OF THAT.
UM, TYPICALLY PLANNING COMMISSION SEES LESS OF THAT, WHICH I WOULD THINK NO.
ALSO, WE PROTECT YOUR INFORMATION.
WE'RE NOT GONNA GIVE OUT YOUR EMAIL OR YOUR PHONE NUMBER TO ANYBODY WHO CALLS OUR OFFICE.
YOUR NAMES ARE POSTED ON THE WEBSITE, SO SORRY ABOUT THAT.
BUT, UM, THEY CAN DO, THE REST OF THE PEOPLE CAN DO THE REST OF THE DIGGING.
SO IF THEY FIND YOU, IT IS TOTALLY, IT'S OKAY FOR YOU TO TALK TO PEOPLE ABOUT IT.
YOU DO NOT HAVE TO RECUSE YOURSELF AT THE HEARING NEXT MONTH IF YOU DO TALK TO SOMEONE ABOUT IT BECAUSE IT IS A LEGISLATIVE MATTER.
WOULD IT BE ALSO APPROPRIATE FOR US TO TALK TO OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS ABOUT THIS? ABOUT THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY PROHIBITION UNTIL YOU TALKING TO THE COUNCIL.
UH, I, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION THAT CAME UP DURING THE COUNCIL MEETING AND WATCHED IT.
BUT YOU KNOW, WHERE DID THEY END UP THE FINAL MOTION THAT CAME THROUGH FROM COUNSEL? WAS IT JUST TO RESCIND THE PUD ORDINANCE OR WAS IT TO RESCIND AND THEN COME BACK IN A YEAR WITH SOMETHING NEW? THE FINAL MOTION WAS TO RESCIND.
THEY DID HAVE SOME CONVERSATION THAT IF THEY WERE TO PUT SOME SORT OF DATE WHERE WE HAD COME BACK WITH SOMETHING NEW OR MAYBE AN AMENDMENT OR THAT THEY WOULD DO THAT AS PART OF THEIR ACTION ON THE ORDINANCE TO REMOVE.
SO IT IS THE INTENT OF COUNSEL TO REMOVE THE PUD ORDINANCE AND NOT REPLACE THAT IS THE CURRENT INTENT.
I THINK THERE'S SEVERAL PUBLIC HEARINGS AND A RECOMMENDATION FROM YOU THAT'S STILL TO BE HAD.
AND SO WHETHER THAT WOULD CHANGE THAT OUTCOME, I DON'T KNOW.
THAT'S THE POINT OF GOING THROUGH THAT PROCESS.
SO I WOULD, UH, RECOMMEND THE COMMISSION DOES THEIR HOMEWORK ON UDS AND UNDERSTAND THEIR IMPACTS AND THE BENEFITS OR POSSIBLY CONS THAT THEY HAVE.
AND WHAT YOU'VE SEEN AS A COMMISSION COMMISSIONER, UH,
THE STATE STATUTE HAS A PUD SECTION.
THAT PORTION OF THE STATUTE SAYS, UH, CITY'S WHO HAVE A PLANNING COMMISSION OF OUR SIZE MAY HAVE A PUD ORDINANCE.
IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT THAT WE DO.
SO THIS CHANGE ISN'T LEGISLATIVE FROM BOISE.
THIS IS LEGISLATIVE MEANING FROM OUR COUNCIL CORRECT.
INTO THE CITY BECAUSE WE'RE DEALING WITH THE CODE, THE ZONING CODE ITSELF.
IT'S LEGISLATIVE BECAUSE I KNOW THE LEGISLATURE.
WE HAVE A LOT OF CHANGES YEAH.
BUT NO, THIS IS DIRECTION FROM THE COUNCIL TO OKAY.
SO QUESTION FOR THE THINGS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN LIMBO, UM, OR UNDER SOME SORT OF RECOMMENDATION BY THIS COMMISSION THAT COULD BE AFFECTED BY, IF THIS CHANGE GOES INTO EFFECT, UM, HAS THAT IMPACT BEEN EVALUATED YET? SO THE WAY LAND USE LAW WORKS ONCE AN APPLICANT HAS MADE IT A COMPLETE APPLICATION AND PAID ALL OF THEIR FEES WITH THAT APPLICATION, IT THEN IS INVESTIGATED, IF YOU WILL, WITH THE CURRENT PROCESS.
SO ANYTHING THAT'S COME BEFORE YOU RECENTLY IN THE PREVIOUS MONTHS, BUT MAYBE IT HASN'T GOTTEN CITY COUNCIL YET, 'CAUSE THEY'RE NOT THROUGH THE REVIEW PROCESS YET.
THOSE ARE STILL ENTITLED TO PROCEED UNDER THE EXISTING ORDERS.
THAT ALSO BEING SAID, IF THE COUNCIL WERE TO, IF THE COUNCIL WERE TO VOTE TO REMOVE THE PUD, THE EARLIEST THAT THEY COULD DO THAT WOULD BE THEIR NOVEMBER 12TH.
MEANING WE'VE ALREADY NOTIFIED ENGINEERING FIRMS, DEVELOPERS OF THIS POTENTIAL THAT THEY COULD STILL MAKE APPLICATION UP TO NOVEMBER 11TH AND PROVIDED WE HAD A COMPLETE APPLICATION AND ALL THE FEES WERE PAID, THAT THEY WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO BE PROCESSED THROUGH THE CURRENT SYSTEM.
LOOKING AT THAT, I WAS LOOKING AT THAT FOR THE DEVELOPER DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY EARLIER TODAY, DOES PLANNING COMMISSION BECAUSE OF TIMEFRAMES AND HEARING NOTICES, YOU WOULDN'T SEE THAT PUD UNTIL JANUARY.
SO EVEN INTO 2027, IF SOMEONE HAD MADE A COMPLETE APPLICATION, WE WOULD STILL BE LOOKING THROUGH THAT PUD PROCESS.
SO EVEN IF, EVEN IF COUNSEL VOTED TO CHANGE THE ORDINANCE OR REMOVE IT AT THEIR NOVEMBER MEETING, ANYTHING IN THE SYSTEM CORRECT.
AND, AND WOULD CONTINUE TO BE PROCESSED ACCORDING TO EXISTING LAW.
WHICH ALSO COULD BE, YOUR JANUARY MEETING MIGHT BE PRETTY RIGHT IF, IF THERE'S A, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPERS ARE LOOKING TO
[01:55:01]
TRY TO GET AN APPLICATION IN BEFORE A CHANGE.CAN WE ASSUME THAT THE REASON BEHIND THE CHANGE WILL BE PRESENTED AS PART OF THE DISCUSSION NEXT MONTH? MAYBE? UM, THE REASON I, IT IS UNCLEAR TO STAFF THE COMPLETE REASONING FROM COUNCIL.
IF YOU GO WATCH SOME OF THE PREVIOUS HEARINGS AND DISCUSSION, WE HAVE DISCUSSION FROM INDIVIDUALS ON THE COUNCIL AND COMMENTS MADE ON THE COUNCIL AS INDIVIDUALS WE DO NOT HAVE, OTHER THAN THEIR DIRECTION TO HAVE STAFF REMOVE IT.
THEY DID NOT MAKE A MOTION, REMOVE IT FOR THESE REASONS.
SO WE DON'T REALLY HAVE A UNIFIED REASON THAT THE COUNCIL HAS SAID DO THIS.
WHAT WE HAVE IS DISCUSSION AND COMMENTS FROM THAT MEETING AS WELL AS PREVIOUS PUD MEETINGS AND SOME PD TRAININGS WE'VE DONE WITH THE COUNCIL.
AND SO I DON'T WANT TO PUT WORDS IN THE ELECTED OFFICIALS MOUTHS.
SO FOR STAFF TO COME TO YOU AND SAY, HERE'S WHY IS GONNA BE VERY CHALLENGING, UM, OTHER THAN TO, YOU KNOW, REFER YOU TO THE MEETING MINUTES FROM, FROM THOSE EVENTS AND YOU TO JUDGE YOU FOR YOURSELF.
SO THAT'S WHY, UH, FORTUNATELY WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO COUNSEL INDIVIDUALLY AND OURSELVES, WHICH IS ACTUALLY, IT WAS JUST NICE.
UM, AND THEN WHAT ARE OUR RULES ABOUT TALKING TO EACH OTHER WHEN WE'RE NOT ON THE DA? AGAIN, IT'S NOT QUAI JUDICIAL.
UM, YOU CAN TALK WITH EACH OTHER.
PLEASE DON'T GO SOMEWHERE AS A GROUP OF FIVE OR MORE OF YOU.
'CAUSE THAT WOULD CONSTITUTE A QUO.
UM, THERE'S STILL, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT THAT YOU CAN'T ALL GO TO BOOK CLUB TOGETHER, BUT IF YOU GO TO BOOK CLUB AND TALK ABOUT PLANNING COMMISSION STUFF AND MAKE DECISIONS, THAT'S A PROBLEM, RIGHT? MM-HMM
SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO THAT AS, YOU KNOW, LESS THAN THAN FIVE, WHICH CAUSES YOUR CALL.
NO, I'M JUST GONNA SAY THIS IS, THIS IS ALL NEW TO ME, BUT I'M, I'M CURIOUS IF THIS IS A COUNSEL INITIATED ACTION, WHY ARE THEY BRINGING IT TO US? THEY HAVE TO, THEY HAVE TO BY LAW BECAUSE IT IS A, A CHANGE TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
THE STATE STATUTE REQUIRES THAT ANY AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING OR SUBDIVISION CODE COMES BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION FIRST FOR A RECOMMENDATION AND THEN TO THE CITY COUNCIL, JUST LIKE THE DRINKING THING.
UM, THAT WAS INITIATED BY COUNCIL IN A ROUNDABOUT WAY, BUT IT STILL HAS TO COME TO US BECAUSE IT'S CHANGING THE LAWS THAT WE HAVE TO CONSIDER AND FOLLOW.
BUT ASSUMING THEY'VE ALREADY MADE UP THEIR MINDS BEFORE IT COMES TO US, THEN FOR US, IT IS JUST A PROCEDURAL THING THEN ALREADY.
I, I, YOU, YOU CAN CERTAINLY TREAT IT THAT WAY, BUT I MEAN, MAYBE A LOT OF, UH, CITY COUNCIL MIGHT NOT BE CONSIDERING CERTAIN THINGS THAT WE COULD EASILY BRING UP IN OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH.
'CAUSE IT'LL BE A PUBLIC HEARING WITH THE PUBLIC, OUR OWN OPINIONS.
'CAUSE THEY WILL READ THROUGH THOSE MINUTES AND YOU CAN ALWAYS GO TALK TO 'EM YOURSELF TOO.
SO IF IT'S SOMETHING YOU FEEL REALLY STRONGLY ABOUT, UM, WE, WE DEFINITELY STILL VERY MUCH HAVE A SAY AND WE VERY MUCH CAN STILL SWAY CITY COUNCIL WITH THIS ONE, EVEN THOUGH THEY MIGHT HAVE INITIATED IT, RIGHT? YEAH.
AND YOU HAVE YOUR FULL ABIL LIKE YOU CAN DO, YOU CAN RECOMMEND APPROVAL, YOU CAN RECOMMEND DENIAL, YOU CAN TABLE IT AND REQUEST ADDITIONAL RESEARCH AND INFORMATION.
ALL OF THAT IS OPEN TO YOU, JUST LIKE ANY OTHER ITEM.
UM, EVEN THOUGH IT DOES COME FROM THE COUNCIL THERE, THE POINT IS FOR YOU TO USE YOUR EXPERTISE AND HAVE THE HEARING AND, AND GATHER THAT TESTIMONY FOR THEM.
HOW MUCH STAFF TIME CAN WE USE REQUESTING INFORMATION? UM, SEND ME YOUR REQUEST.
THAT, THAT'S WHY, YOU KNOW, IF, IF MULTIPLE OF US ARE GONNA HAVE THE SAME QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS, WHERE WE DO THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS IT AHEAD OF TIME, IT MAY MAKE SOME SENSE TO TRY AND SEND ONE THING.
IF WE DO GET ON A GROUP EMAIL, WE CAN'T REPLY ALL BECAUSE IT CONSTITUTES A MEETING.
SO WE DO NEED A LITTLE CAREFUL THERE.
BUT, UM, AND WHATEVER INFORMATION IS VALUABLE, IF YOU HAVE THINGS YOU'D LIKE TO SEE IN A REPORT, HAVING THAT INFORMATION WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR US TO TRY TO PUT IT TOGETHER FOR YOU.
AND, AND I, I WOULD ENCOURAGE EVERYONE ON THE COMMISSION TO WATCH AT LEAST THIS SECTION OF, THIS WAS LAST THURSDAY'S CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
UM, IT'S ABOUT A 22 MINUTE, UM, CLIP.
IF YOU GO TO THE COUNCIL, UM, CITY COUNCIL MEETING LAST THURSDAY, YOU CAN GO TO THE AGENDA AND ACTUALLY CLICK ON THE AGENDA ITEM AND IT'S ABOUT 22 MINUTES LONG.
[02:00:01]
OUTTA YOUR DAY.AND I THINK IT WILL GIVE YOU SOME INSIGHT INTO WHAT SOME OF OUR COUNSELORS WERE THINKING WHEN THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT IT.
UM, BUT I HAVE STRONG FEELINGS ABOUT THIS ONE AND I THINK EVERYONE SHOULD BE PREPARED TO MAKE A INFORMED LONG AND WE WHAT EVERYTHING'S TIMESTAMPED, WHICH IS REALLY NICE.
SO SHE'S WEBSITE, IF YOU CLICK ON THE AGENDA ITEM, IT WILL LINK YOU TO RIGHT TO THE, THE AUDIO FOR THAT ITEM.
SO YEAH, I WOULD RECOMMEND EVERYONE, UH, UNDERSTAND WHAT COUNCIL SAID, BUT THEN ALSO DO YOUR RESEARCH ON PUD.
SO YOU CAN BE VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE ON PUDS IN GENERAL IN THE CITY OF IDAHO, IDAHO FALLS, UM, AND HOW THEY AFFECT WHAT COULD OR COULD NOT HAPPEN GOING FORWARD.
SO THAT WOULD JUST BE MY RECOMMENDATION, UNOFFICIAL RECOMMENDATION.
SO WITH THAT, WE CAN, UH, GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE MEETING.
THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR YOUR, UH, COMMENTS TONIGHT AND YOUR DISCUSSION.