[ 1. Call to Order & Roll Call] [00:01:13] OKAY, NOW IT IS THE TIME OF THE NIGHT WHERE OUR STAFF IS HERE TO GIVE ANY RESPONSES TO PRIOR PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WAS GIVEN FROM LAST WEEK, OR ANYTHING THAT THEY ARE HEARING, COMMUNITY WISE, THAT THEY THINK WOULD NEED TO BE ADDRESSED, BUT THEY ARE SEEING DEVELOPING WITHIN THEIR DEPARTMENTS. OKAY. THEN WE WOULD NOW TURN THE TIME TO PUBLIC COMMENT. WE WELCOME [4.public Comment] YOU TO THE PODIUM. WE HAVE ROUGHLY THREE MINUTES TO ADDRESS COUNCIL. COUNCIL WON'T HAVE A BACK AND FORTH DIALOG WITH YOU BECAUSE IT IS NOT ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA. HOWEVER, ONE OF THE DIRECTORS, ONE OF THE DEPARTMENT DIVISIONS WILL GET BACK WITH YOU TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION. AND THEN IN THAT PRIOR MOMENT THAT I WAS JUST INVITING STAFF TO COME UP, THAT IS WHEN THEY WOULD COME AND SPEAK TO, YOU KNOW, LIKE WHAT THE RESOLUTION WAS THAT THEY CONNECTED WITH YOU. AND THEN IT'S A WAY FOR COUNCIL TO KNOW THAT THAT THAT WAS, HAS BEEN AT LEAST TRYING TO BE ADDRESSED. SO WE WOULD TURN THE TIME TO THE PUBLIC TO COME AND ROUGHLY THREE MINUTES TO TALK TO COUNCIL ABOUT ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO. YES, PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM IF YOU'LL JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND WHETHER YOU'RE A RESIDENT OF THE CITY OF IDAHO FALLS. YES. MY NAME IS ANDREAS. I LIVE HERE IN IDAHO FALLS. I'VE LIVED HERE SINCE FEBRUARY. I'M ORIGINALLY FROM DENMARK AND NOW IT'S GETTING DARK OUTSIDE AND I'VE NOTICED A LITTLE BIT OF A LACK OF LIGHTING AROUND THE GREENBELT. IT'S SUPER NICE TO GO RUNNING THERE, ESPECIALLY IN THE EVENING, AND YOU GO THERE FOR A WALK WITH YOUR DOG OR GO FOR A WALK WITH YOUR WIFE OR YOUR HUSBAND, AND THINK IT WOULD BE NICE IF WE COULD GET MORE LIGHT AROUND THE CITY. AND I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THOSE BIG WIDE SPOTLIGHTS WOULD BE NICE FOR SOME LOW LIGHTING THAT'S BELOW EYE HEIGHT SHINES ON THE PATH LIKE WARM, WARM LIGHT. LIKE SLIGHTLY LIKE, YOU KNOW, THIS WARM LIGHT YOU CAN GET FROM THE OLD LIGHT BULBS. NOT THIS MODERN LED STUFF. TWO OTHER PEOPLE ALSO THINK THIS IS A GOOD IDEA. SURE. CAN WE GET THAT ON AN AGENDA OR CAN YOU GUYS CONSIDER THAT? THAT WOULD BE SUPER NICE. TELL ME. REMIND ME YOUR NAME AGAIN. ANDREAS. ANDREAS. OKAY. THERE ARE A FEW PEOPLE IN THE ROOM THAT CAN ADDRESS THIS FOR YOU, IF THEY WILL. YES. THANK YOU ANDREAS, WE APPRECIATE IT. SO WE JUST. YES. YES. YES, PLEASE. MY NAME IS BRUCE. I LIVE HERE, I'VE LIVED HERE OVER 65 YEARS. I GOT A COUPLE COMPLAINTS. I'VE NEVER BEEN TO ONE OF THESE. I'VE NEVER HAD ANY REASON TO COMPLAIN. BUT I DON'T KNOW. I'VE JUST. I HAD A SINGLE MOM I'LL GET TO. I'M NOT GOING TO TELL YOU MY LIFE HISTORY, BUT A SINGLE MOM. AND I'M TALKING ABOUT THE POWER GRID, OKAY? SHE NEVER. WELL, SHE NEVER. BUT SOMETIMES YOU GOT LIKE, OKAY, SO SHE'D TAKE ME AND WE'D COME DOWNTOWN AND SHE'D MAKE A, MAKE A PAYMENT, MAKE ARRANGEMENTS, MAKE BILL NO PROBLEM. RIGHT. THIS IS WHERE I'M GETTING ANGRY. AND UNFORTUNATELY, I HAD TO USE IT. OKAY. BUT I'VE NEVER THEY'VE ALWAYS WORKED WITH. WELL, HERE, LET'S DO IT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I'LL PAY IT. I HAVE A BRAIN INJURY. SO NOW THAT I FORGET STUFF. AND APPARENTLY I FORGOT TO PAY MY POWER. I HAVEN'T DONE IT FOR YEARS. I KNOW THAT, BUT YOU ALWAYS TELL ME BEFORE. SO ANYWAY, I GO IN AND I'M $148 BEHIND. I PAY THAT AND I PAY ON MY CURRENT BILL. THAT'S NOT LIKE THIS PROBLEM I GOT. IT'S NOT LATE. WHY 80 [00:05:07] BUCKS? THEY SAID, WELL, WE WON'T TURN YOUR POWER ON FOR 80 BUCKS. SO OKAY, THAT'S FINE BECAUSE I KNOW YOU GUYS WILL WORK. ME. YOU USED TO, I'LL SAY YOU USED TO WORK WITH PEOPLE, THE PUBLIC. SO I GO AND THEY SAID, WE DON'T DO THAT ANYMORE. I'M LIKE, WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU DON'T DO IT NO MORE? WHEN DID YOU QUIT? I DON'T KNOW, I'VE BEEN HERE A YEAR AND YOU'VE NEVER DONE IT. WELL, WHO DO I TALK TO? WELL, GO DOWNSTAIRS, SO I GO DOWNSTAIRS. I NEED THE MANAGER. SO THE MANAGER. SO, WHAT'S GOING ON? YOU GUYS USED TO HELP? YEAH. WE DON'T DO THAT. WHY? BECAUSE WE DON'T. I SAID, WHO DO I TALK TO ABOUT THIS? WELL, GO TO THE MAYOR. OKAY. SO I GO TO THE MAYOR. I DON'T KNOW WHO THE MAYOR IS. YOU AIN'T MARRIED. OKAY, MAYBE IT WAS YOU. I'D TALK TO YOU. OKAY. ANYWAY, SHE LOOKS JUST LIKE YOU ANYWAY, SO I'M DOING MY COMPLAINTS. WELL, YOU HAVE TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL. THAT'S YOU GUYS, APPARENTLY. AND THE BIGGEST PROBLEM. I WANT TO KNOW WHY YOU GUYS QUIT HELPING THE PEOPLE. IT'S JUST NOT ME. YOU'RE PROBABLY THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE. YOU'VE DONE THIS, TOO, OKAY? JUST NOT ME. AND THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO. OKAY, SO THEY'RE LOOKING FOR MONEY. AND I WAS TOLD, WELL, GO OVER HERE AND GET HELP. I'VE DONE THAT. WHEN I NEEDED HELP, I HAD NO FEAR OF ASKING FOR HELP. OKAY, I CAN PAY MY ELECTRIC BILL. I FORGOT YOU GUYS ARE PUNISHING ME BECAUSE I FORGOT FOR $80. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS NEED 80 BUCKS, GET A LOAN. I MEAN, THAT'S RIDICULOUS. 80 BUCKS. OKAY, THAT'S MY COMPLAINT. I NEED TO KNOW WHO I TALK TO. IS IT YOU? YOU. YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY MADE THAT LAW. YOU NEED TO PUT IT BACK TO HELP PEOPLE. HERE'S THE SECOND COMPLAINT. THE WATER METERS YOU GUYS ARE PUTTING IN. OKAY, I KNOW IT'S A VERY BAD IDEA. APPARENTLY YOU GUYS DON'T. I NEED YOU GUYS TO TAKE A TRIP TO UTAH. AND I SAY THAT MY BROTHER LIVES IN UTAH. HE HAD A HOME. IT'S ON A WELL, RIGHT? GREEN GRASS, LIVE TREES. THE CITY DOES A HOUSING THING NEXT TO IT. THEY TALK HIM IN TO DOING METERED WATER. YOU'LL LOVE IT. YOU NEVER LOSE PRESSURE. ALL THIS STUFF. OKAY, SO HE DOES IT. WHAT? THEY DIDN'T TELL ME IS WE'RE GOING TO CHARGE YOU A LOT OF MONEY OR KEEP RAISING IT. WELL GUESS WHAT? HIS YARD IS DEAD. HIS TREES ARE DEAD. NOW YOU GUYS NEED TO MAKE A TRIP TO UTAH OR ANYWHERE. AND LOOK AT THE NEIGHBORHOODS. THEY'RE ALL DEAD. NO GRASS ANYWHERE. AND I HOPE YOU DON'T WANT TO LOOK LIKE THAT. YOU GUYS COULD PROBABLY AFFORD THE WATER. I'M ON SOCIAL SECURITY, AND A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE PROBABLY AIN'T. THEIR GRASS IS GOING TO DIE. SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE GRAVEL FOR YARDS. AND THAT'S AND THE BIGGEST PROBLEM I HAD IS I HAVE GRANDKIDS. YOU KNOW, YOU'VE DONE THEM IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I'M LOOKING ACROSS THE STREET, BUT I SEE MY KIDS PLAYING ON THE SLIDE WITH BUBBLES. I USED TO PLAY IN THE WATER. DID YOU GUYS IN YOUR YARD? I NEED TO KNOW WHY YOU GUYS DON'T WANT THE KIDS NOWADAYS TO PLAY IN THE WATER. I DON'T KNOW WHY, BECAUSE I LOOKED AT THAT AND I REALIZED I GOT A TWO YEAR OLD IN MY HOUSE IN A FIVE. YOU GUYS PUT METERED WATER IN. I GUARANTEE YOU THEY WON'T BE PLAYING IN THAT YARD LIKE WE GOT TO. AND I HOPE YOU GUYS QUIT. I HOPE YOU DON'T PUT ME TO WATER. AND I KNOW WE'RE NOT OUT OF WATER BECAUSE ALL THE CAR WASHES YOU GUYS ARE AUTHORIZING PUT IN. SO I KNOW WE DON'T HAVE NO WATER. AND I WAS TOLD YOU GUYS DON'T CARE THAT IT'S GOING TO GO IN ONE EAR AND OUT THE OTHER, AND I'M JUST A CRYBABY BOOBIE. BUT THIS IS GOING TO AFFECT EVERYBODY. YOU MIGHT NOT SEE IT NOW, BUT BOY GOD, YOU PUT THOSE IN AND WE GOT NOTHING BUT DEAD YARDS. YOU WANT TO SAY, GOD DAMN, WE SHOULD HAVE DONE SOMETHING. MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE DID SOMETHING ELSE. CHARGE $5 MORE FOR THE WATER. ANYWAY, THAT'S ALL I GOT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE DO APPRECIATE YOU COMING AND TESTIFYING FOR COUNCIL. I KNOW YOU SAID IT'S YOUR FIRST TIME AND WE DO APPRECIATE IT. SO THANK YOU. OH. ANYONE ELSE PLEASE. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS COLBY HATTON. I AM A CITIZEN OF IDAHO FALLS AND I AM HERE REPRESENTING STRONGER IDAHO FALLS, WHICH JUST WENT DARK. MY HEART JUST. SO WHAT DO YOU THINK BRINGS IN MORE NET [00:10:04] REVENUE FOR THE CITY? A TRAILER PARK OR A SUBDIVISION OF GIGANTIC MCMANSIONS? IT SURPRISED ME TO LEARN THAT IT WAS THE TRAILER PARK. HOW ABOUT A WALMART VERSUS THE SMALL COLLECTION OF BUSINESSES OVER ON MAPLE STREET? AND SPECIFICALLY, WE'LL SAY. MAPLE STREET LAUNDRY. AGAIN, THE WINNER IS THE LAUNDROMAT. HOW COULD THIS BE? HOW COULD THESE SEEMINGLY RICH AND PROSPEROUS HOMES AND BUSINESSES BE A BIGGER DRAG ON THE CITY THAN THE FAR MORE HUMBLE OFFERINGS? THE ANSWER IS ALL IN DENSITY. A GIANT MCMANSION BRINGS THE MORE PROPERTY TAX FOR THE CITY THAN A TRAILER HOME. BUT IN SPACE, YOU FIT A SINGLE SUBURBAN HOUSE LIKE THAT. A TRAILER PARK EASILY FITS 3 TO 6 UNITS, WHILE EACH INDIVIDUAL UNIT IS A SMALLER SOURCE OF REVENUE, THEY COLLECTIVELY CONTRIBUTE FAR MORE TO CITY TAXES. THIS IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE WHETHER A HOUSE TAKES UP HALF AN ACRE OR TEN ACRES, THE CITY MUST PROVIDE SERVICES TO THEM PER CITIZEN. LOW DENSITY SUBURBIA HAS FAR MORE ROADS TO BUILD AND MAINTAIN, FAR MORE TO PLOW BIGGER AND MORE COSTLY WATER AND SEWAGE INFRASTRUCTURE TO MAINTAIN, AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. IT'S A VERY SUBTLE PATTERN, BUT ONE THAT COSTS CITIES IN AMERICA WITH OUR FINANCIAL SOLVENCY FROM COAST TO COAST. THE BIG CHALLENGE IS NEW SUBDIVISIONS BRING IMMEDIATE FINANCIAL BENEFITS, WHILE THE LONG TERM MAINTENANCE DO SIT OVER A DECADE AWAY, MANY CITIES RELY ON BUILDING NEW SUBDIVISIONS TO GET THE SHORT TERM BOOST IN TAXES TO COVER OBLIGATIONS FOR SUBDIVISIONS BUILT IN PREVIOUS GENERATIONS. EVENTUALLY, THOUGH, THE NEW REVENUE SIMPLY CAN'T KEEP UP WITH THE LONG TERM OBLIGATIONS OF ALL THAT CAME BEFORE AND A CITY BECOMES INSOLVENT. THIS IS A TRAP. OR THIS IS A TRAP OF WHAT WE AT STRONG TOWNS OFFICIALLY CALL THE SUBURBAN GROWTH PONZI SCHEME. SUBURBIA IS FUNDAMENTALLY INSOLVENT AND MUST BE SUBSIDIZED BY MORE PRODUCTIVE AREAS OF THE CITY. SPECIFICALLY, DOWNTOWN WALMART IS SUBSIDIZED BY A VERY SMALL BUSINESSES THAT IT'S DRIVING OUT OF TOWN. OUR SOLUTION TO SUBURBAN GROWTH PONZI SCHEME IS SHOCKINGLY SIMPLE. UPZONE ACROSS THE BOARD AND STOP GREENFIELD DEVELOPMENT OF LOW DENSITY SUBURBIA WHILE ALLOWING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WILL BE REDEVELOPED INTO DUPLEXES, TRIPLEXES, COTTAGE COURTS AND SMALL APARTMENT BUILDINGS, THE CITY GETS FAR MORE REVENUE PER UNIT OF INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTAINED. THIS HAS MADE EXTRA EFFECTIVE WHEN MIXED USE ZONING IS ALSO ALLOWED ACROSS THE BOARD. IT'S FAR EASIER ON OUR INFRASTRUCTURE FOR SOMEBODY TO WALK TO THE CORNER STORE INSTEAD OF DRIVING THEIR HEAVY VEHICLE TO A GROCERY STORE ACROSS TOWN. DENSE, MIXED CITIES ARE A HALLMARK OF STRONG TOWNS BOTH IN AMERICA AND ACROSS THE WORLD, ABANDONING THE SUBURBAN PATTERN OF DEVELOPMENT SEEN SINCE THE 1950S FOR TRUE TRADITIONAL URBANISM WILL NOT ONLY MAKE THE CITY FINANCIALLY STRONG, IT WILL IMPROVE THE LIVES OF EVERYBODY HERE AS WELL. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, MR. HOFFMAN. ANYONE ELSE WHO IS HERE TO TESTIFY GIVE PUBLIC COMMENT. THANK YOU. OKAY. WE ARE READY TO MOVE ON THEN TO [5.Consent Agenda] OUR CONSENT PORTION OF THE AGENDA. I KNOW THAT WE HAVE A FEW COMMENTS THAT COUNCILOR FRANCIS WOULD LIKE TO MAKE OR, OR SOME QUESTIONS ANSWERED PRIOR TO TAKING A VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. YES. I ASKED CHIEF JOHNSON. OKAY. I ASKED CHIEF JOHNSON IF SHE WOULD SPEAK ABOUT THE FIRST ITEM ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, THE TECHNOLOGY PUBLIC SAFETY SUITE. YES. THANK YOU, MAYOR COUNCIL. SO THIS IS AN UPGRADE OF OUR RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. WHEN COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRANCIS AND I WERE TALKING. IT'S NOT A REPLACEMENT. WE'RE NOT SWAPPING ONE OUT THE OTHER. IT'S AN UPGRADE. TYPICALLY, YOU WOULD REPLACE A RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ABOUT EVERY 7 TO 10 YEARS. I THINK I'VE HAD FOUR DIFFERENT ONES IN THE LAST 30 OR SO YEARS. THE LAST TIME WE DID AN UPGRADE OR A REPLACEMENT, IT WAS ABOUT 11 OR 12 YEARS AGO. SO WE'RE SEVERAL YEARS PAST THAT. SO IT'S STILL A TYLER TECH. THE COST DOES GO UP FROM WHAT OUR OLD TYLER TECH SYSTEM WAS, AND THERE'S DIFFERENT WAYS TO LOOK AT THAT, YOU KNOW, THE OPTIMISTIC WAY TO LOOK AT THAT. AND I REALIZE IT'S THE OPTIMISTIC WAY IS WE GOT 11 YEARS OF GETTING GETTING THE DEAL THAT WE GOT IN 20 WHATEVER YEAR THAT WAS AND HAVEN'T HAD ANY INCREASES SINCE THEN. SO THEY ARE CATCHING UP SOME INFLATION OVER A DECADE. AND THE NEW PRICE, THE OTHER POINT THAT I THINK COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRANCIS WANTED ME TO MAKE IS WE GET TREMENDOUS SAVINGS BY DOING THIS COLLABORATIVELY WITH BONNEVILLE COUNTY. I DID LOOK AT DOING OUR OWN RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND REPLACING IT WITH ONE THAT WE WOULD STAND ALONE WITH, AND THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN ABOUT 1.2, $1.3 MILLION TO THE CITY IN THE FIRST YEAR. AND THIS IS SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER. SO A GREAT PARTNER WITH BONNEVILLE COUNTY THAT HELPS US GET THIS AT A RATE TYPICALLY NOT AVAILABLE TO THE CITY. WERE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT ANYONE HAVE? SO WE SHOULD THINK ABOUT SAVING A LITTLE BIT FOR 7 TO 10 YEARS FROM NOW, BECAUSE [00:15:04] WE'LL HAVE ANOTHER LARGE HIT PROBABLY EVERY 7 TO 10 YEARS. AND YOU KNOW, THIS IS ABOUT 100, $150,000 MORE THAN WHAT WE WERE PAYING EVERY YEAR LAST YEAR. AND IF YOU TAKE THAT OVER TEN YEARS OF INFLATION, YOU'RE PROBABLY LOOKING PRETTY CLOSE WITH THAT INFLATION RATE WOULD HAVE BEEN SO INTERESTING THING ABOUT TECHNOLOGY IS I CANNOT PROMISE YOU TWO YEARS FROM NOW THAT THE TECH COMPLETELY CHANGES AND TWO YEARS FROM NOW THEY'RE COMING IN AND SAYING, OH MY GOODNESS, YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS AND EVERYTHING CHANGES. THAT'S JUST THE PACE OF TECHNOLOGY. I THINK IT PRUDENT TO SAY IT'S GOING TO BE 7 TO 10 YEARS, AND IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE EXPENSIVE THAN WHAT WE'RE CURRENTLY SPENDING. AND WE DON'T USUALLY THINK ABOUT MURPHY AND SOFTWARE, BUT IT'S ALMOST BECOME A CAPITAL EXPENSE. YEAH, CERTAINLY A BIG ONE, A BIG EXPENSE. YEAH. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. I THINK THEN WE'RE READY FOR UNLESS ANYBODY ELSE HAS ANY QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. WE'RE READY FOR A MOTION TO PLEASE READ IT INTO THE YES PLEASE. THE CITY CLERK WILL READ IT INTO THE RECORD, PLEASE. THANK YOU. WE HAVE SEVEN ITEMS TONIGHT FOR CONSENT. THE FIRST IS WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR TYLER TECHNOLOGIES PUBLIC SAFETY SUITE UPGRADE FOR A TOTAL OF 227,811 AND $0.76. PARKS AND REC HAS A. THEY'RE REPLACING THEIR ICE ARENA ZAMBONI FOR A TOTAL OF $142,050.12. THE AIRPORT HAS A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS GRANT, F 278. IDA FOR 75,000. PUBLIC WORKS HAS THREE. THE FIRST IS AN. EQUIPMENT PURCHASED FROM THE WASTEWATER DIVISION WITH JCB FOR 113,670. EXCUSE ME, 113 673,000 $0.63. THEY ARE HAVING A PURCHASE FOR WATER METERS AND MATERIAL FOR A TOTAL OF 465,235.90, 425,250 IS GOING TO FERGUSON AND 39,985.90 TO MOUNTAINLAND SUPPLY. THEIR THIRD ITEM IS A CITY SNOW REMOVAL POLICY RESOLUTION, AND THE LAST ITEM IS FROM THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE FOR CITY COUNCIL AND WORK SESSION MINUTES FROM OCTOBER 8TH, 19TH AND 22ND. NOW WE ARE READY FOR A MOTION. THANK YOU, CITY CLERK. ALL RIGHT. I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE ACCEPT TO RECEIVE ALL ITEMS IN THE CONSENT AGENDA ACCORDING TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS PRESENTED. SECOND, RADFORD. A. LARSON. YES. FREEMAN. YES. FRANCIS I. DINGMAN. YES. LEE. YES. THANK YOU. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. WE ARE MOVING TO OUR REGULAR AGENDA AND. OH YES, PLEASE, COUNCIL MEMBER, WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT HERE BECAUSE WE JUST DEALT WITH THE CITY SNOW REMOVAL POLICY UPDATE AND THE CONSENT AGENDA. AND I WAS ASKED TO KIND OF SPEAK TO THE TWO THINGS ABOUT THAT. ONE IS THE AMERICAN DISABILITIES ACT REQUIRES THAT WE HAVE OUR HOMEOWNERS CLEAR THEIR SIDEWALKS WHEN IT SNOWS. AND I THINK OUR RESIDENCES DO A PRETTY GOOD JOB OF THAT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. I THINK MOST OF US THAT OWN PROPERTY WANT TO DO THAT AND TRY TO DO THAT PRETTY WELL. WHERE I SEE A CONCERN IS IN OUR PUBLIC THOROUGHFARES LIKE 17TH STREET AND SOME OF OUR LARGER ARTERIAL ROADS, WE SEE PEOPLE THAT OWN PUBLIC BUILDINGS OR BUSINESS BUILDINGS IN THOSE AREAS THAT GET THEIR SNOW PLOWS AND PAY FOR THEIR PARKING LOTS TO BE CLEARED, BUT THEY'RE NOT CLEARING THEIR SIDEWALKS. AND WE HAVE SO MANY PEOPLE THAT WALK TO WORK ALONG THE 17TH STREET CORRIDOR, AND WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR IN A WHEELCHAIR THAT NEED THOSE TO BE CLEARED. AND SO WE'RE JUST REALLY ASKING PROPERTY OWNERS, PARTICULARLY PROPERTY OWNERS, THAT ARE ALONG MAJOR ARTERIES TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE CLEARING THEIR SIDEWALKS AND INCLUDING THAT IN THEIR CONTRACTS WITH THEIR SNOW REMOVAL CONTRACTS SO THAT IT CAN ALL BE DONE AT ONCE. THE SECOND THING IS, WE DO HAVE A NEED FOR PEOPLE WHO JUST CAN'T CLEAR SNOW BECAUSE THEY'RE THEY'RE NOT SELF-SUFFICIENT AT HOME AND THEY CAN'T GET OUT AND MOVE SNOW. OR MAYBE THEY SHOULDN'T BECAUSE OF A HEART CONDITION OR OTHER THINGS. WE AS A CITY DON'T REALLY HAVE AN ENTITY THAT'S COORDINATING THAT EFFORT. BUT WE DO KNOW ABOUT JUST SERVE FROM THAT'S AVAILABLE ONLINE FOR A WAY FOR PEOPLE TO LIST THAT THEY'RE WILLING TO REMOVE SNOW FOR PEOPLE WHEN WE HAVE SNOWSTORMS, AND THAT PEOPLE COULD THEN GET IN CONTACT. SO IF YOU HAVE A GROUP, EITHER A NONPROFIT OR A CHURCH OR A CHURCH GROUP, WE WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE PEOPLE [00:20:06] SIGNING UP WITH THAT. JUST SERVE AND MENTIONING THAT THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO HELP FOLKS THAT HAVE THAT NEED. SO THEY JUST REGISTER ON JUST SERVE. AND THEN SOMEBODY WHO NEEDS HELP COULD GO TO JUST SERVE AND SAY, OH, IN IDAHO FALLS, HERE'S A GROUP YOU COULD CALL ON AND FIND SOMETHING. OKAY, BOTH THINGS COULD BE TRUE. I THINK WE'LL JUST SERVE. OKAY. THANK YOU, COUNCILOR RADFORD. NOW WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR REGULAR AGENDA. THIS FIRST ONE IS [6.A.1) Resolution to approve intergovernmental agreement to receive donation of Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting apparatus from the City of Bois] COMING TO US FROM THE AIRPORT. IT IS SOMETHING THAT IS VERY FORTUNATE FOR OUR CITY AND FOR OUR AIRPORT. SO WELCOME, DIRECTOR TURNER TO THE PODIUM. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR COUNCIL, THE ITEM BEFORE YOU ACCEPTS THE TRANSFER OF A 2009 OSHKOSH STRIKER, 3000 FROM THE CITY OF BOISE. IN SEPTEMBER, THE BOISE AIRPORT CONTACTED ALL THE COMMERCIAL SERVICE AIRPORTS IN THE STATE, INDICATING THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BE SURPLUS. THIS AIRCRAFT RESCUE FIREFIGHTING TRUCK FALLS REGIONAL AIRPORT AND ROLES IN LEWISTON NEZ PERCE COUNTY AIRPORT EXPRESSED INTEREST. I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THE DIRECTOR OF THE AIRPORT IN LEWISTON, AND WE DECIDED THAT IDAHO FALLS HAD THE HIGHEST NEED, PARTICULARLY FOR A COUPLE REASONS. NUMBER ONE, OUR GROWTH IS PUTTING US IN A PLACE WHERE WE WILL HAVE TO ENHANCE OUR AIRCRAFT RESCUE, FIREFIGHTING CAPABILITIES IN THE AIRPORT, MEANING PRETTY SOON WE WILL NEED AN ADDITIONAL RESERVE FIRE TRUCK. WE HAD ALSO INCLUDED IN THIS FISCAL YEAR AN AIRCRAFT RESCUE FIREFIGHTING ACQUISITION IN OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. AND SO WE WORKED WITH AIRPORT STAFF AT THE BOISE AIRPORT TO DRAFT THE RESOLUTION AND AGREEMENT BEFORE YOU. WE POSTED OUR REQUIRED NOTICES ON OCTOBER 30TH AND NOVEMBER 6TH. STATE LAW DOES REQUIRE THAT THIS VOTE BE OR THIS ITEM BE APPROVED BY A TWO THIRDS VOTE. THE CITY OF BOISE DID APPROVE THEIR SIDE OF THE AGREEMENT ON TUESDAY, AND IT PROVIDED THAT SIGNED AGREEMENT TO THE CITY CLERK HERE A FEW MINUTES AGO. A COUPLE OF ITEMS OF NOTE THE TRUCK DOES COME WITH FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION GRANT OBLIGATIONS. JUST JUST TO BE CLEAR ON THAT, THERE'S NOTHING NEW THAT WE ARE NOT ALREADY SUBJECT TO WITH THAT. BUT WHILE THE ITEM HAS A FAIR MARKET VALUE OF $430,000, WE WILL BE ACQUIRING THAT VEHICLE FOR FOR NO MONETARY CONTRIBUTION OTHER THAN TRANSPORTING THE APPARATUS TO IDAHO FALLS, OUTFITTING IT, WHICH WE WILL WORK ON WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ONCE IT ARRIVES, AS WELL AS MAKING ANY NECESSARY ALTERATIONS THAT WE SEE ARE NEEDED. I DO ANTICIPATE THAT THAT WILL SAVE OUR BUDGET APPROXIMATELY $600,000 ON THIS ON THE LOW END, IF NOT MORE THAN THAT. SO IT'S QUITE FORTUNATE FOR US TO GET A USED APPARATUS THAT'S IN AS GOOD A SHAPE AS IT IS. BEFORE I ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE, I DO WANT TO PUBLICLY THANK PAM AND STAN FOR MUNICIPAL SERVICES, AS WELL AS FIRE CHIEFS OLSON AND RADFORD, FOR SENDING TODD AND STEVE FROM FLEET SERVICES, AS WELL AS FIREFIGHTER STEPHEN BOOTH WITH ME TO BOISE A FEW WEEKS AGO TO VISIT THAT ARFF TRUCK AND INSPECT IT. IT WAS A LONG DAY, BUT IT WAS WELL WORTH IT AND WE ARE GETTING QUITE THE GIFT, IF YOU WILL, FROM THE CITY OF QUINCY. SO THANK YOU. YES, COUNCIL, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR JUST COMMENTS OF THAT? THIS IS GREAT BECAUSE THE LAST FIRE TRUCK WE PURCHASED WAS $1 MILLION, I THINK, AND WAITED 18 MONTHS. SO THIS IS A IT IS A TRULY AMAZING VALUE TO THE TAXPAYERS. I AM. I AM INCREDIBLY PLEASED THAT WE ARE ON THE RECEIVING END OF THIS FROM ANOTHER MUNICIPALITY. I KNOW THAT WE HAVE SURPLUS CARS, WE SURPLUS SOME OF OUR OWN STUFF. AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT THIS IS KARMA, BUT I DO THINK THAT WHEN MUNICIPALITIES OUT LIVE OR SOME OF THEIR EQUIPMENT IS OUTLIVED FOR WHAT IS SERVING THEM, IT IS NICE TO BE ABLE TO SHARE IN TAXPAYER PURCHASED ITEMS THAT WE ARE ABLE TO, TO MOVE AROUND THE STATE. SO I AM GRATEFUL ONCE AGAIN FOR THE GROUP OF, OF MUNICIPAL SERVICE WORKERS WHO ALSO, YOU KNOW, WORK TO PUT THIS DEAL TOGETHER. SO THANK YOU. WE'RE READY. YES. OKAY. THEN I WOULD MOVE TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION APPROVING THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR THE DONATION OF AN AIRCRAFT RESCUE AND FIREFIGHTING APPARATUS FROM THE CITY OF BOISE, WITH A FAIR MARKET VALUE OF $430,000, AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE RESOLUTION. SECOND. MARTHA. YES, FRANCIS I. LEE. YES. DINGMAN. YES. FREEMAN. YES. RADFORD, I THANK YOU. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. OUR NEXT [6.B.1) Approval to Write Off Utility Service Past Due Accounts] ITEM IS COMING TO US TONIGHT FROM FINANCE DIRECTOR HAGEDORN. WELCOME TO THE PODIUM. AND WE [00:25:03] WILL TALK ABOUT THE APPROVAL OF RIGHT OFF UTILITY SERVICES. THANK YOU, MAYOR COUNCIL, WHAT I'M BRINGING TO YOU TODAY IS THE WRITE OFF OF ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE FOR UTILITY ACCOUNTS. AS FAR AS OUR PRACTICE AND POLICY IS TO WRITE OFF ANYTHING THAT'S OVER FIVE YEARS OLD, CAN YOU JUST SPEAK A LITTLE LOUDER INTO THE MICROPHONE? I KNOW IT'S IT'S LOW. YES. AND SO WE'RE WRITING OFF THINGS THAT ARE OVER FIVE YEARS OR THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN IN BANKRUPTCY OR HAVE BEEN UNCOLLECTIBLE DUE TO. DUE TO A DECEASED ACCOUNT HOLDERS. SO THIS OF THE $133,650.38 THAT WE'RE ASKING TO BE WRITTEN OFF, 117,000 OF THAT IS COMING FROM THOSE THAT ARE OVER FIVE YEARS OF COLLECTIONS. THAT REPRESENTS LESS THAN ONE TENTH OF A PERCENT OF OUR ANNUAL OPERATING REVENUE FOR THE YEAR 2021. SO WE HAVE A PRETTY GOOD COLLECTION RATE IN THE LOW RIGHT OFF WITHIN THE CITY. AND THAT HAS TO DO WITH OUR PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES THAT WE HAVE PUT IN PLACE. SO I JUST THINK THAT EVEN THOUGH 133,000 DOES SEEM LIKE A LOT, IT'S LESS THAN ONE TENTH OF A PERCENT OF WHAT WE ARE COLLECTING. ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR CONCERNS? OH, I DO WANT TO SAY THAT WHEN WE SAY WRITE OFF, THAT MEANS WE ARE NO LONGER ACTIVELY COLLECTING ON THESE ACCOUNTS, WHICH MEANS THAT THEY WE WRITE TO OFFER BOOKS, AND THEN IF THEY COME BACK IN AND WANT TO RESTORE SERVICE, WE NO LONGER HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE TO WHAT THAT BALANCE WAS. YES. OKAY. COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE DIRECTOR? AND I DID NOTICE THAT YOU HAVE MADE THE CONNECTION WITH BRUCE HERE. SO THANK YOU. BECAUSE THAT THAT IS THE PERSON WHO WILL CONNECT WITH YOU ON THE ON THE UTILITIES. SO THANK YOU. ANY ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY, THEN WE'RE READY FOR A MOTION. BRANDON. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE WRITE OFFS OF $133,652.38 IN UNPAID UTILITY SERVICE ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE, WHICH HAVE BEEN DETERMINED AS UNCOLLECTIBLE SECOND. DINGMAN. YES. BRADFORD. A. LARSON. YES. LEE. YES. FRANCIS I. FREEMAN. YES. THANK YOU. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. AND OUR NEXT ITEM IS [6.B.2) IFPD Vehicle Replacement] COMING FROM FINANCE AS WELL WITH THE IDAHO FALLS POLICE DEPARTMENT VEHICLE REPLACEMENT. OKAY. SO WHAT WE'RE WHAT WE'RE REQUESTING APPROVAL FROM COUNCIL IS A NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT TO ENTER INTO SOME FINANCING OF 18 POLICE VEHICLES, FOR A TOTAL OF 1.9 1,950,000, AND OF WHICH TWO OF THESE WOULD BE PURCHASED OUT OF IMPACT FEES. WITH A TEN YEAR REPLACEMENT CYCLE WHERE THE OTHER VEHICLES, THE OTHER 16 WOULD BE AN EIGHT YEAR REPLACEMENT CYCLE. THIS GOES ALONG WITH ALL THE QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS THAT RECEIVED DURING WORK SESSION, AND WANT TO KNOW IF THERE WAS ANYTHING ELSE YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO ANSWER OR EXPLAIN ON THIS REQUEST. ANYTHING FURTHER THAT CAME OUT? WE DID HAVE A LENGTHY CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS DURING WORK SESSION AND RECEIVED THE LADDERING, AND WE HAD A LENGTHY CONVERSATION. SO IF IF WE DON'T HAVE ANY FURTHER CONVERSATION, IF A MEMBER OF THE. THIS MIGHT BE COMING FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, BUT I KNOW COUNCIL MEMBER LEE IS ASKING FOR EITHER ONE. YES. I MOVE THAT WE AUTHORIZE THE LEASE OR PURCHASE OF UP TO 18 VEHICLES, OF WHICH TWO ARE FUNDED FROM IMPACT FEES FOR A NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT OF $1,950,000. SECOND. DINGMAN. YES. FREEMAN. YES. FRANCIS I. RADFORD. NAY. LEE. YES. LARSEN. YES. THANK YOU. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. OUR NEXT ITEM IS COMING [6.C.1)Development Agreement - Millcreek Metals] TONIGHT FROM PUBLIC WORKS. IT IS THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. AND NORMALLY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS WOULD BE COMING TO US FROM CDS. BUT TONIGHT THIS IS DIFFERENT. SO WE WOULD TURN THE TIME TO DIRECTOR CANFIELD TO TALK TO US ABOUT WHY WE'RE GETTING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FROM PUBLIC WORKS TONIGHT. THANK YOU MAYOR. THANK YOU COUNCIL. SO BEFORE YOU TONIGHT, I'VE GOT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH MILLCREEK METALS. AS MAYOR INDICATED, NORMALLY WE ATTACH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS WITH THE PLANNING PROCESS. WHEN YOU COME THROUGH WITH THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT WAS NOT NECESSARY TO HAVE A PLAT COMPLETED. THEY'RE EITHER NOT SUBDIVIDING OR THEY DON'T HAVE ANY SPECIAL PARAMETERS FOR ACQUIRING THOSE ITEMS. SO WHAT WE DO IS WE DO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND WE COME WITH PUBLIC WORKS TO PRESENT TO YOU THE ITEMS THAT WE'D NORMALLY INCORPORATE WITH THE PLANNING PROCESS. THIS DEVELOPMENT [00:30:01] AGREEMENT FOCUSES ON ITS OWN PROPERTY HOME 15TH EAST WOODRUFF, NORTH OF THE BOONE PROPERTY. IN THE AREA OF THOSE SALVAGE YARDS AND THINGS, IT'S A. IT'S A RECYCLING STATION. AND IT'S IT'S NORTH AND WEST OF FIRE. STATION SIX IS A POINT OF REFERENCE. IT TO THE AGENDA THINGS. IT ALLOWS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION FOR THE SITE PLAN THAT I ALSO REFERENCED IN THE AGENDA. AND IT ADDRESSES ACCESS OFF OF 15 EAST TO KIND OF JOIN WITH THE SOUTH PROPERTY DEVELOPER AND THE, THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WATER LINE. SO WHAT WE DO IS IN OUR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS, WHEN THEY CONSTRUCT THE WATER LINE, WE TRY TO PUT IN THERE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM TO COLLECT CONNECTION FEES TO RECOVER SOME OF THOSE COSTS FOR THAT CONSTRUCTION ACROSS THEIR FRONTAGE. THIS ONE WILL HAVE TO BE COORDINATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT TO THE SOUTH, BECAUSE THE CONNECTION OF THAT WATER IS COMING FROM YELLOWSTONE, WHERE THE BOONE PROPERTY WILL BRING IT UP. AND THEN THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WOULD ATTACH TO THAT AND SERVE THERE. SO WITH THAT, I'LL ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS. I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. YES, PLEASE. BECAUSE WE'RE NOT USED TO SEEING THIS MUCH DETAIL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. THIS IS SORT OF A FINAL PLAQUE FROM APPLYING FOR THE WHAT WE WOULD NORMALLY SEE AS A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. I DON'T KNOW, BECAUSE I USUALLY DON'T SEE ALL THESE DRAWINGS AND THINGS LIKE THAT WHEN I LOOK AT THE DEVELOPMENT DREAMS, PROBABLY BECAUSE IT'S BRINGING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO YOU. SO I JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU A LOT OF INFORMATION. I LOVE IT, THANK YOU. AND SO I JUST KIND OF ATTACHED THOSE EXHIBITS TO THE CORE OF IT IS THE AGREEMENT ITSELF. AND THAT'S WHAT'S RECORDED AGAINST THE PROPERTY. THE SITE PLANS ARE NOT THAT'S NOT AN APPROVED SITE PLAN. THAT'S A REVIEW VERSION KIND OF THING. WELL, THANK YOU, BECAUSE IT'S INTERESTING TO LOOK AT HOW IT'S GOING TO LAY OUT. OKAY. OKAY. COUNCIL, IF YOU'RE READY FOR A WE'RE READY FOR A MOTION. IF THERE'S NO FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR DIRECTOR KENDALL, THIS WOULD BE COMING TO US FROM PUBLIC WORKS. OKAY, OKAY. I MOVE THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR MILL CREEK METALS AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL TO SIGN THE DOCUMENTS. SECOND. LEE. YES. DINGMAN. YES. FRANCIS I. FREEMAN. YES. LARSON. YES. RADFORD, I THANK YOU. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. THANK YOU. OUR [6.D.1) Extension for the Final Plat for Recycle Road Commercial Park.] NEXT SEVERAL ITEMS ARE COMING TONIGHT, THEN FROM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. THIS ONE IS TO AN EXTENSION FOR THE FINAL PLAT FOR THE RECYCLE ROAD COMMERCIAL PART. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER DIRECTOR SANDER, IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME UP AND JUST GIVE US A QUICK EXPLANATION AND THEN WE CAN, I DON'T THINK IT TAKES A LOT. IT'S QUITE EXPLICIT IN THE MEMO. SO VERY, VERY THIS IS SOMETHING, THOUGH, THAT CITY COUNCIL DOESN'T TYPICALLY SEE. THIS IS AN EXTENSION OF A FINAL PLAT WITHIN OUR SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, YOU HAVE TO RECORD A PLAT OF 180 DAYS FROM APPROVAL. SO THIS WAS APPROVED ON MAY 21ST OF 2026. I DON'T KNOW THE FULL REASON OF WHY THEY'RE REQUESTING THE EXTENSION, BUT THE APPLICANT HAS CONTACTED STAFF AND IS WANTING TO EXTEND IT FOR 60 DAYS, SO THAT 60 DAYS WOULD START ON 180 DAYS FROM MAY 20TH 1ST TO NOVEMBER 21ST, APPROXIMATELY. SO THE 60 DAYS WOULD START FROM THAT POINT. SO THAT'S ALL THAT'S BEING REQUESTED. THIS DOES NOT CHANGE THE ANYTHING WITH THE LAYOUT OF THE PLAT. SO JUST BE COGNIZANT OF THAT. SOMETIMES THESE ARE REQUESTED BECAUSE MAYBE THEY CAN'T GET A SIGNATURE IN TIME OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE. SO THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE REQUESTING. IF IT WERE NOT TO BE APPROVED TONIGHT, JUST SO YOU'RE AWARE, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND RESUBMIT FOR THE PLAT. SO JUST TO GIVE YOU KIND OF THE FULL GAMUT OF WHAT'S AHEAD. SO WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION ON HOW TO WORD THE MOTION. BECAUSE DO WE SAY NOVEMBER 21ST, 2026 OR JUST SAYING THE 60 DAYS COVERS FROM WHATEVER IT TAKES. IT'S UP TO YOU ON YOUR PREROGATIVE WHEN YOU WANT THAT TO START. BUT JUST SAYING 60 DAYS, I THINK, OKAY, JUST BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY FIXED IN THE REST OF THE CONTRACT AND THE TIMELINE. OKAY, YEAH. I'M READY. MOTION. OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCIS, I MOVE COUNCIL APPROVE THE EXTENSION REQUEST FOR THE FINAL PLAT FOR RECYCLED ROAD COMMERCIAL PARK FOR 60 DAYS. SECOND. FREEMAN. YES. BRADFORD. I. LARSON. YES. DINGMAN. YES. LEE. YES. FRANCIS, I THANK YOU. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. AND OUR NEXT ITEM IS A FINAL PLAT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT [6.D.2) Final Plat, Development Agreement, and Reasoned Statement of Relevant Criteria and Standards, Fairway Estates Division No. 30] AGREEMENT AND READS AND STATEMENT OF RELEVANT CRITERIA AND STANDARDS FOR FAIRWAY ESTATES DIVISION NUMBER 30. IT IS A FINAL PLAT. IF COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS TO ASK OF DIRECTOR CENTER. IF NOT, THEN WE WOULD JUST MOVE THROUGH THIS MOTION. CONSIDERING THAT [00:35:06] IT IS A FINAL PLAT. I HAVE NO QUESTIONS. I'M READY FOR A MOTION. OKAY, PLEASE. THEN I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE FINAL PLAT FOR FAIRWAY ESTATES DIVISION NUMBER 30, AND GIVE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN SAID AGREEMENT. SECOND. LEE. YES. DINGMAN. YES. FRANCIS I. FREEMAN. YES. LARSON. YES. BRADFORD. I. MOTION CARRIES. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE FINAL PLAT FOR FAIRWAY ESTATES DIVISION NUMBER 30 AND GIVE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR, CITY ENGINEER AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN SAID FINAL PLAT SECOND. BRADFORD I DINGMAN. YES. FRANCIS I. FREEMAN. YES. LARSON. YES. LEE. YES. MOTION CARRIES. AND I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE RECENT STATEMENT OF RELEVANT CRITERIA AND STANDARDS FOR THE FINAL PLAT FOR FAIRWAY STATES DIVISION NUMBER 30, AND GIVE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS. SECOND. LEE. YES. DINGMAN. YES. FREEMAN. YES. FRANCIS I. LARSON. YES. RADFORD. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. OUR NEXT TWO [6.D.3) Quasi-judicial Public Hearing-Rezone from LC, Limited Commercial to RMH, Residential Mobile and Manufactured Home Zone, Zoning Ordinance and Reasoned Statement of Relevant Criteria and Standards for approximately 15.9 acres in the SE ¼ of Section 6, Township 2 North, Range 38 East.] ITEMS ARE ACTUALLY HEARING ITEMS. THE FIRST ONE IS THEY'RE BOTH ACTUALLY QUASI JUDICIAL. I'M GOING TO OPEN THE HEARING AND DECLARE THAT ALL OF THE INFORMATION GIVEN IS NOW PART OF IT WAS ALREADY GOING TO BE PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD, BUT IT IS NOW ALSO PART OF THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND WE IT'S WE HAVE A REZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 15.9 ACRES IN FROM LIMITED COMMERCIAL TO THE RM ZONE. AND IF WE HAVE A DEVELOPER HERE TO PRESENT THE PROJECT TONIGHT. MR. JOLLY, WELCOME TO CITY COUNCIL, AND WE'D LIKE TO PRESENT YOU STEAL SOME SLIDES. THAT'S FINE. BLAKE JOLLY WITH CONNECT ENGINEERING. I'M SORRY. COUNCIL MEMBER LEE NEEDS TO MAKE A STATEMENT BEFORE WE. YEAH, I JUST NEED TO STATE THAT I KNOW THE APPLICANT. I HAVE KNOWN HIM FOR YEARS FROM A PROFESSIONAL STANDPOINT AS WE'VE WORKED TOGETHER ON SEVERAL PROJECTS, BUT I HAVE NO FINANCIAL BEARING WHATSOEVER ON THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT KNOWN. OKAY. THANK YOU. NEXT SLIDE. OKAY. CONNECT ENGINEERING AND I GOTTA REVISE MY ADDRESS BECAUSE WE JUST MOVED ON. 795 NORTH HOLMES BEND AT 2295 NORTH YELLOWSTONE FOR TOO MANY YEARS AND THEN GET IT IN MY HEAD. SO ANYWAY, THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT NOW. SO I'M HERE REPRESENTING IBEX PRO IN THIS REQUEST FOR REZONE FROM TO RMH. AND I'M GOING TO TRY NOT TO OVER TALK IF YOU WANT TO CALL IT THAT WAY OR WHAT. IT'S GOING TO PRESENT ALL THESE FACTS TO HIM, BUT MAYBE SOME DECENT THOUGHTS AND REASONS BEHIND THE REQUEST FOR THIS REZONE AND MAYBE SOME GENERAL LOCATION SO NEAR THE RV. SO YOU'VE GOT HIGHWAY 20 AND THEN RECYCLE ROAD THAT YOU JUST EXTENDED IS JUST TO THE EAST OF THIS PROPERTY. AND THEN IT'S NORTH OF 33RD AND JUST SOUTH OF THE CONSTRUCTION PIT ON HATCH PIT. SO THAT'S GOING TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHERE IT'S AT. AND THE CREEKSIDE TOWNHOMES IS A TOWNHOME PLAT THAT YOU JUST APPROVED EARLIER THIS YEAR. TO THE EAST OF THAT, IT WAS ON ONLY 12 ACRES. IT WAS 22 DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS APPROVED FOR SOME TOWNHOMES. AND THEY ARE PLANNING AT THIS POINT FOR CONSTRUCTION STARTING IN THE SPRING. IS THE IS THE HOPE THERE? SO CAN WE GIVE YOU A BRIEF IDEA OF WHERE IT'S AT AND PUSH THE RED BUTTON HERE JUST A LITTLE BIT CLOSER. SO OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN SEE WHERE. DISHES RV IS. AND I THINK THE TOP LEFT IS THE. THERE YOU GO. SO YOU'VE GOT MAVERICK. THE NEW MOUNTAIN LIONS IS GOING HERE. AND I BELIEVE COUNCIL HAS HEARD THE LITTLE CREEK TOWNHOMES PROJECT RIGHT HERE TO THE WEST. LA LA LA LA. SO ANYWAY, I JUST DID THOSE GUYS EARLIER YESTERDAY. BUT JUST TO GIVE YOU A BRIEF IDEA OF WHERE WE'RE WHERE WE'RE SITTING, AND ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE'RE LOOKING AT AND REQUESTING A REASON FOR LC TO IS IF WE LOOK AROUND ACROSS THE CITY OF LITTLE FALLS, I BELIEVE, AND I COULD CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, I THINK THERE'S ONE OTHER VACANT PROPERTY IN ALL OF CITY HALL THAT IS ZONED RM CURRENTLY. AND WE BELIEVE THAT THERE'S ROOM AND NEED FOR ALTERNATIVE TYPES OF HOUSING TO COME INTO THE CITY OF ROCK FALLS, AND WE BELIEVE THIS IS A GOOD FIT FOR WHERE THAT COULD [00:40:02] BE. IT GENERALLY GIVES US A, YOU KNOW, SOME BUFFERS BETWEEN SOME COMMERCIAL THAT'S POTENTIALLY GOING TO HAPPEN AT SOME HOUSING TO THE SOUTH, TOWN PROJECTS TO THE EAST HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL TO THE EAST AS WELL. AND THEN YOU'VE GOT THE HATCH BIT THAT KIND OF FITS BACK IN AN AREA WHERE SOMEDAY WE ALL HOPE THAT THE HATCH THAT WILL TURN INTO A PARK, JUST LIKE FREEMAN PARK DID. AND THAT KIND OF GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT THAT COULD BE SOMEDAY. AND THAT'S THE GENERAL HOPE, I THINK, OF A LOT OF INDIVIDUALS. OH YEAH. IF I GO BACK. I WISH THE POINTER WAS TIGHTER. SO WE'RE ALL PRETTY AWARE. I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S EXACTLY IDENTIFIED, BUT I'M BELIEVING THAT IT'S GOING TO END UP THERE. THE US 20 AND I-15 CONNECTOR IS GOING TO COME DOWN BRIEFLY RIGHT DOWN IN HERE AND ACROSS THIS GENERAL AREA OVER TO I-15. SO THIS IS GOING TO BE A AREA EVENTUALLY THAT SEES LOTS OF GROWTH INSIDE THE CITY, OUT OF FALLS. AND I BELIEVE THAT GOOD THINGS WILL HAPPEN IN THIS AREA. AND THIS COULD BE ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT COULD HAPPEN. AND SPURS LAST FIT THE NEED OF MANY PEOPLE THAT AREN'T NECESSARILY IN OUR WALLS RIGHT NOW, COULD BE IN OUR VAULT, BUT ALSO COULD PROVIDE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO BE IN IDAHO FALLS TO BE THERE. AND SO THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE FEEL LIKE OUR MH IS A GREAT FIT. YOU'VE GOT PEOPLE COMING UP AND DOWN THE I-15 PLUS THE US 24 BORDER, REXBURG, REALLY THOSE AREAS. AND WE WOULD HAVE OPPORTUNITY FOR INDIVIDUALS THAT WOULD FIT THAT NEED. SO THAT'S IN GENERAL THE REQUEST. AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY. COUNCIL ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY. OKAY. IF WE'RE GOING TO KEEP THE HEARING OPEN AND WE WILL IF SOME QUESTIONS COME UP, WE WILL ASK YOU BACK TO THE PODIUM. WE ARE READY THEN FOR DIRECTOR CENTER TO GIVE US THE STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. SURE, I WILL ADD TOO MUCH. AS THE APPLICANT HAD ALREADY STATED, I DID WANT TO JUST POINT OUT ONE THING THAT THE RESIDENTIAL, THE RM ZONE IS NOT ONE THAT WE TYPICALLY GET FOR REQUEST FOR REZONE, BUT STAFF. THE REASON WE WE BROUGHT THIS FORWARD IS IN. WHEN WE LOOK AT REZONES, WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND WHAT'S GUIDING US TOWARDS THAT LAND USE REGULATION. AND THIS PROPERTY IS IN THE GENERAL URBAN. SO THAT'S THE ORANGE RIGHT HERE, THE GENERAL URBAN TRANSECT OF IMAGINEFX. AND ONE PART OF THAT, THOUGH THE R MH IS NOT HERE. SO THE ZONING IS CURRENTLY LC AND YOU HAVE INDUSTRIAL TO THE NORTH. THE REASON STAFF WAS FINE WITH BRINGING THIS FORWARD. WE ACTUALLY FELT THAT IT WAS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE REASON FOR THAT. THE APPLICANT POINTED OUT WE HAVE A PUD THAT'S PURELY RESIDENTIAL TO THE EAST. WE HAVE SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED TO THE SOUTH THAT ARE UNDER COUNTY JURISDICTION, BUT WE ALSO HAVE A PEU DE ELARA HOMES COMING TO THE WEST. AND SO WE FELT LIKE THE RM ACTUALLY DOES SUPPORT WHAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS DOING HERE, BECAUSE WE'RE SLOWLY CHANGING THIS AREA TO MULTIPLE TYPES OF RESIDENTIAL. SO WE DIDN'T SEE THAT THIS WAS OUT OF CHARACTER. WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WE FELT THAT THIS WAS ACTUALLY RIGHT IN LINE WITH IT, HENCE WHY WE BROUGHT IT FORWARD. THIS DID. OH, AND JUST A NOTE, THIS IS IN AN AIRPORT OVERLAY ZONE. SO IT'S UNDER THE CONTROL DEVELOPMENT. SO THAT WOULD BE ATTACHED TO THE ZONING. THIS DID GO TO PLANNING COMMISSION ON I BELIEVE IT WAS JUNE 6TH. OH NO. THIS ONE WENT ON OCTOBER 6TH. AND THE THE COMMENTS THAT WERE THERE, THE PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE ATTACHED TO THIS TO THE STAFF REPORT. NO PUBLIC SPOKE TO THIS AND IT PASSED UNANIMOUSLY FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION. SO WE WERE FINE WITH THIS PROPOSAL MOVING FORWARD. WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. YES, WE'LL I THINK WE'VE GOT THREE DOWN THE LINE. YES. OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER LEE. OH, OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER FREEMAN. I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY AND WHERE THAT'S COMING FROM. YEAH. DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT RECYCLE ROAD? YEAH. SORRY, I SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT THAT UP. IT WAS ON MY NOTES TO BRING UP COUNCILMAN. SO I'M GOING TO ZOOM IN JUST A LITTLE BIT. A LITTLE BIT. SO THIS WILL WORK. SO THE PROPERTY IS GOING TO HAVE YOU'VE GOT ACCESS THROUGH RECYCLE ROAD. THIS DIVIDING LINE BETWEEN THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS APPROVED EARLIER. THERE'S A CROSS ACCESS EASEMENT THAT GETS TO THIS PARCEL. AND SO THEN THIS SIDE ON THE WEST SIDE, NORTH BOULEVARD, THE CITY ACTUALLY OWNS 50 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY ON NORTH BOULEVARD CURRENTLY. AND SO WHAT IT'S GOING TO DO IS YOU'LL END UP HAVING THE ABILITY FOR TWO ACCESSES WITHOUT RECYCLE ROAD POTENTIALLY GOING THROUGH, BUT [00:45:04] YOU HAVE THE CROSS ACCESS EASEMENT THAT COMES THROUGH HERE. AND IT ALSO FULFILLS A NEED THAT THESE THIS DEVELOPER WILL HAVE TO CREATE A SECOND ACCESS. SO YOU'LL HAVE OFF NORTH BOULEVARD AND BACK TO RECYCLE ROAD. OKAY. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR COUNCIL FOR DIRECTOR SANDER. OKAY. SO READING THE WHAT'S ALLOWED IN THIS ZONE WOULD EACH MANUFACTURED HOME SIT ON 3000, A MINIMUM OF 3000FT■S? IS THAT THE WAY? AM I READING IT CORRECTLY? YEAH, THE ZONE IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. OKAY. IT OPERATES HOW TO DESCRIBE IT. IT KIND OF OPERATES BETWEEN A PUD AND A STANDARD SUBDIVISION. THE RM ZONE ALLOWS THEM A COUPLE OPTIONS. REALIZE THAT IT'S NOT ALWAYS A MOBILE HOME PARK. IT COULD BE A AN RV PARK AS WELL. SO IN SOME INSTANCES THE RM IS NOT PLATTED ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS. WE HAVE A COUPLE OF THOSE IN THE CITY. WE ALSO HAVE SOME THAT ARE PLOTTED ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS. THE R.M. ZONE THOUGH REQUIRES THAT THEY BE THAT THERE BE AN HOA ESTABLISHED NO MATTER HOW THEY DO THAT, AND THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE, IF THEY CHOOSE TO INDIVIDUALLY PLAT, WOULD BE A 3000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM LOT. SO JUST DEPENDS ON WHAT THE DEVELOPER WANTS. ON HOW HE WANTS TO ADDRESS THE FUTURE PRODUCT. BUT THE ZONING ALLOWS FOR THIS. MOBILE HOME PRODUCT IS THE END RESULT. SO I'M CURIOUS KIND OF ON THAT SAME FRONT, IF IT DOESN'T GET DIVIDED UP INTO LOTS, ARE THERE LIMITATIONS ON THE NUMBER OF UNITS PER ACRE OR. YES, THAT'S THAT'S ALL PART OF THE ZONE. THAT'S WHERE IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT. IT HAS PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH. LET'S SAY THIS IS A MOBILE HOME PARK, FOR EXAMPLE. SO IT DOES HAVE PARKING REQUIREMENTS ATTACHED TO IT. THEY DO HAVE TO HAVE INTERNAL CIRCULATION. THEY HAVE A DENSITY REQUIREMENT AS WELL. SO IT'S ALL REGULATED UNDER THAT RM ZONE. GREAT QUESTIONS. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COUNCILMEMBER LEE? I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION. JUST A COMMENT. I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU AND YOUR STAFF USING. IMAGINE IF AS IT'S INTENDED, RIGHT, THAT IT WAS A GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND RECOGNIZING THAT THAT IT STILL WAS MEETING ITS INTENDED. THIS STILL MEANT THE USE, RIGHT. AND ITS INTENT. AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. YEAH. MOBILE HOMES, MOST OFTEN WE DON'T THINK OF THEY ACTUALLY SERVE A TREMENDOUS NEED IN TERMS OF HOUSING, NOT ADVOCATING FOR OR AGAINST THIS PRODUCT, BUT WE OFTEN DON'T THINK ABOUT THAT. BUT THERE'S A SUBSTANTIAL PORTION OF OUR POPULATION THAT UTILIZES THIS TYPE OF HOUSING, RIGHT. OKAY. COUNCIL, DID YOU HAVE A JUST JUST A COMMENT, I GUESS, IS THAT I, I THINK THIS IS THE FIRST ONE OF THESE I'VE SEEN IN NINE YEARS. OH, YEAH. I DON'T KNOW WHEN THE LAST ONE. I MEAN, WE'VE, WE'VE ANNEXED TRAILER PARKS, MOBILE HOME PARKS, A COUPLE OF THEM NEAR COSTCO AND WENT OUT ON SUNNYSIDE. BUT WE HAVEN'T SEEN ANY YET. BUILT. YEAH. OKAY. I GUESS THAT IS THE PRODUCT, RIGHT. SORRY. I'M SORRY. I HAVE ONE MORE. YES, PLEASE. SO THERE REALLY ISN'T A DENSITY SITUATION HERE. THE. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE CODE, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE. IN SHORT, THERE THEY'RE RESTRICTED. YEAH. THE MOBILE HOME PARK. LIKE THERE'S A BUFFERING REQUIREMENT. THERE'S A SIZE REQUIREMENT FOR EACH MOBILE HOME PAD IN WHICH IT'S ON. AND THERE ARE SETBACKS AND SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS. SO THAT WOULD LIMIT YOUR DENSITY AS WELL. I JUST SAID IT IN GENERAL TERMS, BUT NO, I MEAN, I THINK IT'S GOOD. I THINK IT'S AN OPTION FOR HOUSING. I THINK WE HAVEN'T HAD A LOT. WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF THESE. WE DO HAVE ONE THAT WE TALKED ABOUT THAT EXISTS IN THE CITY. BUT I WENT AND LOOKED UP. WE ACTUALLY HAVE FOUR. OH WE DO. YEAH. SO THERE'S IN LIAISON MEETING. THIS WAS ASKED ABOUT MOBILE HOME PARKS. AND THERE'S ONE ON THE NORTHEAST, THE ONE ON SUNNYSIDE, AND THEN THERE'S ONE OVER ON WOODRUFF AS WELL. THAT WAS INDIVIDUALLY PLATTED BY LOT. THIS ONE IS ACTUALLY ON THE SMALLER RANGE. MOST OF THEM ARE AROUND BETWEEN 30 AND 40 ACRES, BUT THIS ONE IS. HOW BIG WAS THIS ONE? 15, 15, 1515 ACRES. SO SO IT'S YEAH. THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. YEAH. THE DENSITY CAP IS 35 UNITS PER [00:50:06] ACRE, WHICH IS YEAH. WHICH IS THE SAME. SO THANK YOU. THANK COUNCIL MEMBER MEAD, IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE READY FOR A MOTION. OH, YOU KNOW WHAT? I AM SO SORRY. I YES, I'M LOOKING AT THE WE HAD SO MANY COMMENTS HAPPENING HERE AMONGST COUNCIL THAT WE DO HAVE. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. IF PEOPLE ARE HERE AND WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS TO THIS REZONE, WE WOULD WELCOME YOU TO THE PODIUM AND STATE YOUR NAME. AND IF YOU LIVE IN THE CITY OF IDAHO FALLS. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS COLBY HATTON. I'M A CITIZEN OF FALLS. YOU'RE REPRESENTING IDAHO FALLS. AND A LITTLE EMBARRASSED SOMEHOW. I TOTALLY MISSED THESE LAST TWO ITEMS IN OUR MEETING THIS WEEK. SO KIND OF GOING OFF THE CUFF A LITTLE BIT HERE. BUT KNOWING OUR ORGANIZATION, WE DO, WE WOULD APPROVE IT THIS YEAR TO JUST OFF THE TOP OF MY SEEING THIS FIRST, MY COMMENTS WOULD BE WHEN THE HIGHWAY EVENTUALLY GETS MOVED. WE WOULD LOVE TO SEE, ESPECIALLY WITH ALL THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT HERE. WE WOULD LOVE TO SEE WHAT IS CURRENTLY A FREEWAY BE CONVERTED INTO, SPECIFICALLY SOMETHING THAT IS SAFE AND EFFICIENT TO USE, ESPECIALLY FOR BICYCLING. THAT WOULD BE INCREDIBLE FOR CONNECTING THESE COMMUNITIES. IN ADDITION TO THE COMMUNITIES UP NORTH TO THE CITY. AND THEN, OF COURSE, MY USUAL COMMENT OF MIXED USE ZONING WOULD BE WONDERFUL FOR THESE KINDS OF DEVELOPMENTS HERE. BUT AS A WHOLE, THIS WOULD BE KIND OF DENSITY THAT PAYS FOR ITSELF THAT I MENTIONED AT THE OPENING COMMENT. AND WE APPROVE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO GIVE COMMENT ON THIS REZONE? OKAY, COUNCIL, AS WE HAVE STARTED TO DO, WE ARE NOT GOING TO CLOSE THE HEARING IMMEDIATELY. WE WILL ALLOW FOR BACK AND FORTH SO THAT COUNCIL CAN DELIBERATE, KEEP THE HEARING OPEN, AND THEN IF THERE'S ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO JUST ASK OF OUR OF THE PUBLIC OR OF MR. JOLLY OR MR. SANTER. SO WE ARE ANY ANY DELIBERATION? YES, PLEASE. WE'LL START WITH COUNCIL MEMBER BRADFORD AND THEN COUNCIL MEMBER LARSON. JUST THAT THESE URBAN TRANSECTS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT FOR A WHILE. SO THIS IS REALLY GOING TO BE A GREAT SPOT. AND ALSO BECAUSE OF THE MAVERICKS THAT'S THAT'S THERE. AND THEN WITH THAT EXIT COMING, ESSENTIALLY THERE SHOULD BE OTHER GROCERS AND OTHER THINGS THAT WILL BE WALKABLE FOR PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THESE KIND OF AREAS. AND SO THIS IS IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE A MIXED USE RIGHT NOW, BUT IT IN ESSENCE WILL BE BECAUSE OF WHAT WILL DEVELOP AROUND IT. YEAH. COUNCIL MEMBER YES, I JUST LIKE TO, I GUESS, GO ON RECORD SAYING, I'M PLEASED TO SEE THIS AS WELL. AND THE COMMENTS ABOUT HOW WE'VE NOT SEEN MUCH OF THIS KIND OF ACTIVITY. THERE'S NEED FOR THESE KINDS OF HOMES WITH ZONING THAT IS THERE, AND I THINK KEEP IT AN ATTRACTIVE PLACE THAT PEOPLE CAN LIVE. ENJOY. SO I'M PRETTY PLEASED TO SEE THIS. I AM TOO. I ACTUALLY JUST TO GO OFF OF WHAT MR. HATTON HAD SAID, THERE IS A SECTION OF THIS TOWN THAT IS DIVIDED BY THAT DIVIDED HIGHWAY THAT AS THAT GETS REROUTED, THEN I'M REALLY HOPEFUL THAT WE AS WE AS IT COMES FORWARD. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT WILL BE TO THIS COUNCIL AND OR AS ME AS A MAYOR, BUT AS IT COMES FORWARD, I REALLY HOPE THAT WE ARE MORE THOUGHTFUL ABOUT WHAT BIG HIGHWAYS DO TO A TOWN AND HOW THEY DIVIDE THEM AND SEPARATE. I THINK THAT NOTHING WOULD PLEASE ME MORE THAN TO SEE THIS BE A BOULEVARD TO CONNECT OUR TOWN, THAN IT IS TO JUST HAVE NO ACCESS ONTO THAT, YOU KNOW, MILES AND MILES OF, OF ROADWAY. SO I AM A PROPONENT OF MR. HUTTON. WHEN THIS ROAD GETS REROUTED, THAT WE ARE VERY THOUGHTFUL ABOUT WHAT THE NEW ROAD LOOKS LIKE AND HOW WE'VE SEEN IN THE PAST, HOW IT CAN REALLY SEPARATE A COMMUNITY. SO THAT IS THAT'S MY COMMENT ON IT. IF ANYBODY ELSE HAS ANYTHING FURTHER TO DISCUSS BEFORE WE CLOSE THE HEARING. OKAY, THEN I WILL DECLARE THE HEARING CLOSED AND ASK COUNCIL TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AND VOTE. OKAY, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE ORDINANCE REZONING APPROXIMATELY 15.9 ACRES IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION SIX, TOWNSHIP TWO NORTH, RANGE 38 EAST FROM LC LIMITED COMMERCIAL TO RM RESIDENTIAL, MOBILE AND MANUFACTURED HOME ZONE. UNDER A SUSPENSION OF THE RULES REQUIRING THREE COMPLETE AND SEPARATE READINGS AND REQUESTS THAT IT BE READ BY TITLE AND PUBLISHED BY SUMMARY. SECOND. DINGMAN. YES. LARSON. YES. FRANCIS I. FREEMAN. YES. LEE. YES. RADFORD. I. MOTION CARRIES, AND I'LL READ THAT IN AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF [00:55:06] IDAHO FALLS, IDAHO, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF IDAHO, PROVIDING FOR THE REZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 15.9 ACRES, AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION ONE OF THIS ORDINANCE, FROM LC LIMITED COMMERCIAL TO R.M. RESIDENTIAL, MOBILE AND MANUFACTURED HOME ZONE AND PROVIDING SEVERABILITY PUBLICATION BY SUMMARY AND ESTABLISHING EFFECTIVE DATE. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE REASONS, REASON, STATEMENT OF RELEVANT CRITERIA AND STANDARDS FOR THE REZONE FROM LC TO R, M, H AND GIVE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS. SECOND. LEE. YES. DINGMAN. YES. FRANCIS I. BRADFORD. I. LARSON. YES. FREEMAN. YES. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. AND THEN OUR FINAL ITEM IS ALSO A QUASI [6.D.4) Quasi-judicial Public Hearing-Rezone from RE, Residential Estate to RP, Residential Park, Zoning Ordinance and Reasoned Statement of Relevant Criteria and Standards for approximately 1.062 acres in the NE Corner of the NE ¼ of the SE ¼ of Section 31, Township 2 North, Range 38 East.] JUDICIAL HEARING. AND ONCE AGAIN, I WILL ORDER THIS HEARING TO BE OPENED WITH ALL OF THE INFORMATION GIVEN IN PUBLIC TESTIMONY TO BE PART OF THE HEARING. AND I DO SEE THAT OUR APPLICANT IS HERE TONIGHT. IF HE WOULD LIKE TO APPROACH THE PODIUM. MAYOR, BEFORE I ALSO HAVE A STATEMENT I'D LIKE TO MAKE ON THIS ONE. OKAY. OH, YES. OKAY. I THOUGHT YOU WERE LEAVING. AND I'M LIKE, NO, NO. SO I PERSONALLY I KNOW THE APPLICANT. I'VE ALSO REVIEWED THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE DURING THE TESTIMONY AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING. AND I'M CLOSE FRIENDS WITH MANY PEOPLE WHO HAVE A VARIETY OF OPINIONS ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE. AND SO I AM GOING TO RECUSE MYSELF FROM THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO IF YOU ARE GOING TO RECUSE YOURSELF, IF YOU WOULD MIND, THEN STEPPING DOWN FROM THE PODIUM AND. WE WILL WE WILL TURN THE TIME OVER TO MR. OGDEN. THANK YOU SO MUCH, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, GLENN OGDEN. I AM A RESIDENT OF IDAHO FALLS LIVE AT 4146 SOUTH HOLMES. I APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE. IF I READ SOME OF MY REMARKS TONIGHT, I DIDN'T WANT TO LEAVE THINGS OUT. I KNOW MUCH OF WHAT I HAVE TO SAY. WELL, THANK YOU IS ALREADY IN YOUR PACKET FROM PLANNING AND ZONING, BUT I WANTED TO START WITH JUST A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY. EXPLAIN WHY WE'RE REQUESTING THIS CHANGE AND SOME OF THE ADDRESS, SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED. THIS HOME WAS BUILT IN 1954, WHEN THE AREA WAS STILL ON THE OUTSKIRTS OF IDAHO FALLS. AT THAT TIME, THE PROPERTY WAS PART OF A MUCH LARGER FARM THAT INCLUDED LAND WHERE TERRY MIDDLE SCHOOL SITS, THE CANTERBURY PARK NEIGHBORHOOD AND CACHE ESTATES. OVER THE YEARS, PORTIONS OF THAT ORIGINAL FARM WERE SOLD OFF, DEVELOPED AND EVENTUALLY LEAVING A FINAL HOMESTEAD OF 1.25 ACRES. WHEN MY WIFE AND I PURCHASED THE PROPERTY IN JUNE OF 2018, IT WAS A COUNTY ISLAND SURROUNDED BY PROPERTY ALREADY ZONED RP WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS. THE FOLLOWING MONTH, AFTER WE PURCHASED IDAHO FALLS, ANNEXED OUR PROPERTY AS PART OF A BROADER EFFORT TO ELIMINATE COUNTY ISLANDS THAT WERE ALREADY UTILIZING ONE OR MORE SERVICES BECAUSE OF THE WELL FOR THIS PROPERTY WAS CAPPED WHEN TAYLORVILLE MIDDLE SCHOOL WAS BUILT. WE WERE CONNECTED TO CITY WATER, AND SO OUR HOME WAS INCLUDED IN THAT INVOLUNTARY ANNEXATION TO ELIMINATE COUNTY ISLANDS. AT THE TIME, THE CITY ESTABLISHED THE RESIDENTIAL ESTATE ZONE DESIGNATION TO PRESERVE AGRICULTURAL RIGHTS ASSOCIATED WITH THESE PROPERTIES, AND CONSEQUENTLY, OUR PROPERTY RECEIVED THAT DESIGNATION. EVEN THOUGH ALL OF THE NON COUNTY SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE ALREADY ZONED FOR RESIDENTIAL PARK. IN 2021, THE CITY APPROACHED US ABOUT PURCHASING A 25 FOOT STRIP ALONG HOLMES AVENUE WIDE FROM THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD INTO THE PROPERTY FOR FUTURE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT OF HOLMES AVENUE. WE COOPERATED WITH THAT REQUEST, AND THE SALE OF THAT PROPERTY REDUCED OUR SIZE TO APPROXIMATELY THE CURRENT 1.062 ACRES. OUR HOME IS NOW JUST OVER 70 YEARS OLD. IT HAS GALVANIZED STEEL, WATER LINES, CAST IRON, DRAINPIPES AND AN ORIGINAL CESSPOOL WASTEWATER SYSTEM THAT LAST GOT A REFURBISHMENT IN 1968. WHILE WE HAVE ENJOYED LIVING THERE, THIS HOME IS APPROACHING THE POINT WHERE REPLACEMENT MAKES PRACTICAL, MAKES IT MORE PRACTICAL AND FINANCIAL SENSE THAN CONTINUED RENOVATION. BUT UNDER THE EXISTING REZONE, THE ONE ACRE MINIMUM LOT SIZE PER HOME PREVENTS US FROM SUBDIVIDING THE PROPERTY TO CONSTRUCT A REPLACEMENT HOME WHILE WE CONTINUE OCCUPYING OUR CURRENT RESIDENCE. REZONING TO RP WOULD PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO SUBDIVIDE, SUBJECT TO APPLICABLE CITY REQUIREMENTS, AND POTENTIALLY CONSTRUCT A NEW HOME BEFORE DEMOLISHING THE EXISTING ONE. A SECOND CONSIDERATION IS THE LONG TERM SUSTAINABILITY OF MAINTAINING MORE THAN AN ACRE OF LANDSCAPED PROPERTY. THE CITY HAS ALREADY BEGUN METERING, WATER SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL SECTORS WITH THE INTENTION OF EXPANDING METERED WATER TO INDIVIDUAL RESIDENCES, SO REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF LAND DEVOTED TO IRRIGATED LANDSCAPING BECOMES INCREASINGLY PRACTICAL AND COST EFFECTIVE, PARTICULARLY AS WE HAVE SEEN IN RECENT DROUGHT [01:00:02] YEARS. I HAVE A LOT OF YELLOW ON THIS SIDE. THESE ARE TWO PRIMARY REASONS FOR OUR REQUEST. FOLLOWING THAT ORDINARY REPLACEMENT OF URGING HOME AND PROVIDING A GREATER FLEXIBILITY FOR FUTURE USE AND MAINTENANCE OF THE PROPERTY. DURING THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING THAT WE HELD AND IN THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HEARING, SEVERAL QUESTIONS WERE RAISED ABOUT OUR ULTIMATE DEVELOPMENT PLANS. I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS AND APPRECIATE OUR NEIGHBOR'S INTEREST IN FUTURE CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD FOR THE SAKE OF TRANSPARENCY. MY WIFE AND I ALSO OWN THE ADJOINING VACANT PARCEL OF LAND DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH BETWEEN REDLAND CASTLE ROCK LANE. THERE. HOWEVER, THAT PROPERTY IS NOT PART OF TONIGHT'S REQUEST AS IT IS ALREADY ZONED RP. WE'VE NOT FINALIZED ANY DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR EITHER PROPERTY. WE'RE CONSIDERING SEVERAL POSSIBILITIES, BUT FUTURE DECISIONS WILL REALLY DEPEND ON FAMILY CIRCUMSTANCES. OUR FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS IN THE CITY'S APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS. I DO RECOGNIZE THAT THE RP ZONE PERMITS SMALLER LOTS THAN THE ONE HOME PER ACRE OF OUR CURRENT REZONE, AND I UNDERSTAND WHY THAT RAISES QUESTIONS FOR OUR NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS. HOWEVER, TONIGHT'S REQUEST IS FOR A ZONING DESIGNATION CHANGE, NOT THE APPROVAL OF A PARTICULAR SUBDIVISION OR DEVELOPMENT PLAN. ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WOULD STILL NEED TO COMPLY WITH THE CITY'S APPLICABLE ORDINANCES AND APPROVAL PROCESSES. I FEEL IT WOULD BE PREMATURE TO COMMIT TO A PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT CONFIGURATION BEFORE WE'VE EVEN ESTABLISHED WHETHER OR NOT WE COULD LEGALLY SUBDIVIDE. HAVING SERVED FOR FIVE YEARS ON THE PLANNING CITY'S PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, I APPRECIATE THE IMPORTANCE OF EVALUATING REZONING REQUEST BASED ON FUTURE LAND USE COMPATIBILITY, THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND LONG TERM INTERESTS OF THE COMMUNITY. AND WE'VE NOT COME TO THE CITY REQUESTING A HIGHER DENSITY ZONE THAN WHAT CURRENTLY ALREADY EXISTS ALL AROUND US. WE'VE COME SIMPLY ASKING FOR THE SAME REASON THAT EXISTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IN AN EFFORT TO REMAIN CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER AND FEEL OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. AS YOU'RE AWARE FROM READING THE NOTES IN YOUR PACKET, THE CITY HAS REVIEWED THE APPLICATION, FINDS THE REQUEST CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND SURROUNDING ZONING OF THE AREA, AND RECOMMENDED APPROVAL TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. AND THE COMMISSION ALSO VOTED ON A 5 TO 1 TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL. I APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION OF OUR REQUEST TONIGHT, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TO GIVE SOME COMMENTS. THANK YOU, MR. OGDEN. WE WILL NOW ASK OUR DIRECTOR TO COME AND GIVE A STAFF REPORT. THANK YOU MAYOR. AS WAS STATED, I'LL GO THROUGH THESE A LITTLE BIT QUICKLY, BUT THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED HERE IN RED AT THE CORNER OF HOLMES AND CASTLE ROCK, JUST NORTH OF THE CORNER, NORTH OF THE CORNER. THANK YOU. YES. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE, AS THE APPLICANT STATED, IF YOU'LL SEE FROM THE PUBLIC COMMENTS, THEY COMMENTED ON THIS SOUTHERN PORTION PROPERTY. THAT'S THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY THAT'S OWNED BY THE APPLICANT. BUT WE ARE JUST LOOKING AT THIS SINGLE ONE ACRE LOT TO THE NORTH OF THAT CORNER. THIS IS THE SURROUNDING ZONING. YOU CAN SEE THAT R P IS THE SURROUNDING ZONE FOR ALL PROPERTIES AROUND. THERE ARE SOME PROPERTIES TO THE EAST THAT ARE UNDER COUNTY JURISDICTION. HOWEVER, THEY ARE OCCUPIED BY LARGE LOT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND THIS PROPERTY IS THE ONLY R E ZONED PROPERTY IN THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. THE PRIMARY DIFFERENCE, JUST SO YOU'RE AWARE, IS REALLY IT CAME UP IN THE PUBLIC HEARING, BUT IS ONE THAT RE REALLY HAS ANIMAL RIGHTS ON IT. SO THE APPLICANT WOULD BE RELINQUISHING THAT AS PART OF THIS. IF THIS WERE TO PASS TO THE R P ZONE. THE OTHER ASPECT IS THE APPLICANT HAD MENTIONED IS THAT THE RE ZONE REQUIRES A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF ONE ACRE. AND. AND SO THERE IS A SMALLER MINIMUM LOT SIZE IN RP OF 12,000FT■!S. SO THAT'S REALLY TE DIFFERENCE OF THE TWO. THE TRANSECT IS IS COMPLETELY SUBURBAN. THE R E AND THE R P ZONES ARE AND THE R1 ZONE ARE ALL UNDER THAT TRANSECT DESIGNATION. SO THIS IS NOT INCONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IN FACT, IT FALLS RIGHT IN LINE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THERE WAS I'M JUST GOING TO JUST IN TRANSPARENCY. THIS DID GO TO PLANNING COMMISSION ON OCTOBER 6TH. THERE WAS QUITE SUBSTANTIAL PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS. THIS APPLICATION PRIMARILY WHAT WAS BEING DISCUSSED, AND I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE IS THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN FOR THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, HOW THE LOTS ARE GOING TO BE SUBDIVIDED, ACCESS TO HOMES AND THOSE TYPE OF THINGS. I'LL JUST SIMPLY PUT THAT THAT REALLY COMES ABOUT IN THE SUBDIVISION PROCESS. RIGHT NOW, WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT THE [01:05:01] ZONING AND LAND USE REGULATION FOR THE PROPERTY. AND WHEN WE LOOK AT THAT, WE LOOK AT IT IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WHAT IS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE WANTING FOR THIS AREA? AND, AND THE TRANSECT OF THIS IS SUBURBAN DEVELOPMENT. AND SO, SO I JUST BRING THAT UP BECAUSE THAT WAS THE SUBSTANTIAL PART OF THE COMMENTS ABOUT WHAT DEVELOPMENT IS COMING. WHAT ARE THE LOTS GOING TO LOOK LIKE? HOW ARE THEY GOING TO BE CONFIGURED? ALL OF THAT COMES THROUGH THE SUBDIVISION PROCESS. AND WE HAVE EXTENSIVE REVIEW TO MAKE SURE THAT IT DOES MEET THE SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS AS IT GOES THROUGH. ALSO, AS PART OF SUBDIVISION PROCESS, THERE'S THE DEDICATION OF RIGHT OF WAY, IF THAT'S NEEDED IN THIS LOCATION. ALSO, PART OF THAT PROCESS WOULD DELINEATE IN REGARDS TO ACCESS POINTS, WHETHER ACCESS POINTS CAN REMAIN, WHETHER THEY HAVE TO BE SHARED. ALL THESE THINGS COME ABOUT AS PART OF THIS SUBDIVISION PROCESS. SO ALL THESE ISSUES WERE BROUGHT UP. BUT REALLY WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT THE REZONING DOES. AND REALLY THE QUESTION HERE IS, DOES THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GUIDE US TO AN R, P OR AN R ZONE? THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE R P. SO DOES THAT MEET THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. STAFF'S VIEW IS WE HAVE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES BEING R P. AND SO IT'S NOT OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SHOWS A SUBURBAN TRANSECT. AND SO IT'S IN LINE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THIS WAS VOTED ON. THE APPLICANT ALREADY STATED IT. IT DID PASS. THERE WAS ONE DISSENTING VOTE ON THIS. SO IT PASSED 5 TO 1. AND WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCIS. JUST A QUICK QUESTION. I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THE MAP CORRECTLY. THAT AND WHAT THE APPLICANT SAID IT. THE RIGHT OF WAYS ARE ALONG HOMES ALREADY SOLD TO THE CITY. IT'S ALREADY DONE BECAUSE I LOOK AT THE LINE, IT DOESN'T GO ALL THE WAY OUT TO THE STREET. RIGHT? I BELIEVE THAT RIGHT OF WAY IS ESTABLISHED, I COULD AND CHRIS THAT HIS PARCELS OFFICE OVER THE CITY. IF YOU GO BACK TO THE ONE THAT HAD THE RED LINE ON IT, I CAN SEE IT. YEAH. SO THAT STRIP OVER THERE BY THE ROAD IS ALREADY DONE. YEAH. GOT IT. AND, DIRECTOR SENATOR, MY QUESTION FOR YOU IS, IF I'M REMEMBERING CORRECTLY, THERE IS NO MAXIMUM LOT SIZE IN THE RP ZONE. SO IF IF. A SUBDIVISION NEVER CAME FORWARD TO US, HE COULD JUST BUILD ON THE ONE ACRE THAT HE ALREADY HAS AN R P, WE WOULDN'T SAY NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE THAT BIG OF A LOT. THERE IS NO MAXIMUM SIZE. SO THIS IS HIS PROPERTY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE WASN'T A MAXIMUM. THAT'S A VERY GOOD POINT. THERE IS NO MAXIMUM. AND IF HE WERE TO REBUILD HIS HOME, IT WOULD JUST BE A BUILDING PERMIT. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE. YEARS AGO WHEN WE WHEN WE CHANGED TO THE RESIDENTIAL ESTATE AND WE AND WE WANTED TO BRING THOSE PEOPLE IN AND NOT HAVE THEM LOSE THEIR ANIMAL RIGHTS. AND THAT SEEMS TO BE KIND OF AT THE CENTER OF THIS. THE REASON IT WAS IT WAS ZONED THAT IN THE FIRST PLACE, WHEN WE WHEN WE CHANGED IT, IF I'M IF I REMEMBER RIGHT, IT SEEMED LIKE IF WE CHANGED OWNERSHIP ON THOSE PROPERTIES. SO IF HE SOLD THIS PROPERTY, THE NEXT PERSON WOULD NOT HAVE THOSE ANIMAL AREAS ANY LONGER. IS THAT CORRECT? I, I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE THE FULL I DON'T KNOW IF I KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. IF IT'S ZONED R E, HE WOULD STILL HAVE THE SAME LAND USE REGULATION. SO HE WOULD STILL HAVE HIS PROPERTY. RIGHT. OR THAT THAT ANIMAL RIGHTS. I COULD ADDRESS THAT. IF YOU WANTED THE ANIMAL RIGHTS, GO WITH THE REZONE, NOT THE OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. IT JUST SEEMS LIKE I REMEMBERED IT THAT WAY, THAT, YOU KNOW, I KNOW THAT WE THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WE WE CREATED THAT ZONE WAS BECAUSE PEOPLE HAD ANIMALS AND THEY WANTED TO KEEP THEM. AND FORGIVE ME, I WAS THINKING OF CHICKENS. NO CATTLE OR HORSES, ANYTHING. BUT I THOUGHT, I CAN STILL HAVE CHICKENS. ALL RIGHT, SO I FORGIVE ME. I JUST WAS THINKING OF UTAH, WHERE I WORKED AT IT. IT WOULD BE ANIMAL RIGHTS LAWS HERE IN THE STATE. SO THAT'S WHY. OKAY, I THINK I'M MISTAKEN. THAT. OKAY. THAT'S OKAY. THAT'S OKAY. OKAY. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR DIRECTOR CENTER? ALL RIGHT. THEN WE WILL OPEN THIS ONE UP TO THE PUBLIC. IF THERE IS ANY PUBLIC HERE TO GIVE PUBLIC COMMENT. I KNOW WE DID RECEIVE MANY OF THE COMMENTS IN OUR PACKET, BUT IF I DON'T, I DON'T SEE ANYONE HERE WHO IS HERE TO GIVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS. BUT NOW WOULD BE THE TIME. OKAY COUNCIL, LET'S CONTINUE WITH THE DELIBERATION AND AND BE ABLE TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS OF MR. OGDEN OR MR. SANDER. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I'M I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT YOU KNOW, MR. SANDER STATED THAT THE. AND [01:10:07] THIS THIS ISN'T THE WAY YOU SAID IT, BUT THIS IS THE WAY I'M GOING TO SAY IT IS THAT THE PUBLIC'S GETTING A LITTLE TOO FAR AHEAD OF THE PROCESS, RIGHT. THAT THAT THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES IN THE FUTURE TO ADDRESS THE DENSITY AND THE THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO HAPPEN TO THIS PROPERTY IF THEY HAPPEN TO THIS PROPERTY. AND THAT THE FACT THAT ALL OF THE PROPERTY SURROUNDING IT IS OF THIS ZONE. SO ANY ONE OF THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS THAT SURROUND THIS PROPERTY COULD DO EXACTLY THE THING THAT THEY WERE AFRAID THAT HE'S GOING TO DO. SO I'M JUST TELLING I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS. AND I THINK IT'S A GOOD A GOOD MOVE. AND IT FITS VERY NICELY. TO ME. I THINK THIS IS THE EASIEST REZONE I'VE EVER SEEN. YEAH. GO AHEAD. GO. YOU GO AHEAD. WELL, WHEN REASONS ARE TRICKY BECAUSE THEY CAN BE HORRIBLE DECISIONS. BUT ONE OF THE TWO WELL, TWO THINGS I LOOK AT WHEN I THINK ABOUT REZONES AND I'VE SOMETIMES REJECTED THEM IN THE PAST, IS, IS IT A SPOT ZONE? DEFINITELY NOT THIS CASE. DEFINITELY NOT. IT'S CONSISTENT. AND SECOND, IS IT IMPOSING SOMETHING NEW ON THE NEIGHBORS? AND THE ANSWER IS NO, BECAUSE THE ALL THE REST OF THIS AROUND HERE IS ALREADY ZONED THAT. SO IT IS NOT IMPOSING A NEW ZONE ON THE NEIGHBORS. THOSE ARE TWO THINGS THAT YOU LOOK AT WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT REZONE, WHICH DOES AFFECT THE WAY THE PEOPLE AROUND. BUT IN THIS CASE IT'S RFP ALL AROUND. THIS IS THE ODD ONE. SO I WILL BE SUPPORTIVE OF THE REZONE. OKAY. IT LOOKS LIKE WE ARE READY TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING THEN, AND WE ARE READY FOR A MOTION FROM COUNCIL. OKAY. I CAN BE THE MOTION. YEAH. THAT'S GOOD. SO I MOVE COUNCIL APPROVE THE ORDINANCE REZONING APPROXIMATELY 1.062 ACRES IN THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP TWO NORTH, RANGE 38 EAST FROM R E RESIDENTIAL ESTATE TO R P RESIDENTIAL PARK. UNDER A SUSPENSION OF THE RULES REQUIRING THREE COMPLETE AND SEPARATE READINGS AND REQUESTS TO BE READ BY TITLE AND PUBLISHED BY SUMMARY. SECOND. DINGMAN. YES. FRANCIS. HI. FREEMAN. YES. LARSON. YES. RADFORD. I MOTION CARRIES AND I'LL READ THAT IN. AND ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF IDAHO FALLS, IDAHO, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF IDAHO, PROVIDING FOR THE REZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 1.062 ACRES, AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION ONE OF THIS ORDINANCE, FROM RE RESIDENTIAL ESTATE TO R P RESIDENTIAL PARK AND PROVIDING SEVERABILITY PUBLICATION BY SUMMARY AND ESTABLISHING EFFECTIVE DATE. AND THE REASON STATEMENT. EVERYONE. IF YOU NOTICE ON THE DAIS HERE THERE IS A CORRECTED VERSION OF THE REASON STATEMENT AND THE CORRECTION IS UNDER RELEVANT CRITERIA AND STANDARDS. NUMBER TWO IN THE PACKET, IT'S INCORRECTLY LOCATED IN THE CITY. IT IS CORRECTLY LOCATED HERE. YES. THANK YOU. I FORGOT TO CALL THAT OUT. SO THANK YOU. I PUT A NEW. WE ARE PASSING THE ONE ON OUR DESK. OKAY, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO READ IT THAT WAY IN THE AMENDMENT. I'M JUST GOING TO SAY RECENT STATEMENT. AND I MEAN THIS ONE. OKAY. I LIKE IT WHEN THE ATTORNEY NODS HIS HEAD. OKAY, I MOVE. COUNCIL APPROVED THE RECENT STATEMENT OF RELEVANT CRITERIA AND STANDARDS FOR THE REZONE FROM R E TO R P, AND GIVE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS. SECOND, LARSON. YES. RADFORD. I. DINGMAN. YES. FREEMAN. YES. FRANCIS. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. [7.Announcements] OKAY. I DO HAVE A FEW ANNOUNCEMENTS. AND THEN WE WILL START DOWN ON THAT END OF THE DAIS. TODAY WE HAD OUR PRESS CONFERENCE ANNOUNCING OUR NEW LOCATION FOR THE 4TH OF JULY FIREWORKS. WE HAD THE COUNTY WITH US. ALL OF OUR DEPARTMENTS WERE THERE. IT WAS IT WAS AN EXCITING MOMENT. COUNCIL OR I WANTED TO CALL COUNCIL MEMBER, BUT COMMISSIONER WALKER WAS THERE AND HE TALKED ABOUT A BATTLE OF THE BANDS. AND OF COURSE, I IMMEDIATELY THOUGHT TO THE WOMAN TO MY LEFT AND WHAT THAT MIGHT BE IF IF COUNCIL MEMBER DALE BEEKMAN TOOK UP THE BATTLE OF THE BANDS AGAINST COUNCIL, THE CITY, THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. I ONCE BEAT MAYOR FORMER MAYOR COLETTI IN A. IN A LIP SYNCING BATTLE, AND IT IS ONE OF MY CROWNING [01:15:05] ACHIEVEMENTS. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE CHALLENGE ACCEPTED BECAUSE WHAT I HEAR. SO THAT IT WAS A GREAT ANNOUNCEMENT. I AM EXCITED FOR THIS LOCATION. I'M EXCITED AS WE PREPARE FOR THIS. WITHIN 20 MINUTES WE HAD A VENDOR CALL AND SAY, HOW DO I SIGN UP TO BE A VENDOR AT THE FIREWORKS? SO WE'RE EXCITED TO BE BRINGING IT BACK TO THE HEART OF DOWNTOWN. PEOPLE WILL FIND THEIR WAY DOWN AND THEN WE WILL GIVE THEM A GOOD EXIT ROUTE. ONE OTHER THING, COUNCILORS, IS THAT, WELL, TWO THINGS ACTUALLY, OUTLOOK WAS DOWN TODAY FROM ABOUT 1030 THIS MORNING. I THINK IT'S GOING TO CAUSE A LITTLE BIT MORE CONFUSION THAN WE THINK. OH, MAIL WAS OUT. I KNOW I SENT OUT SEVERAL EMAILS, I HAVE NO IDEA WHETHER THEY WERE RECEIVED. AND IN THE MEANTIME, THEN I MIGHT HAVE HAD A FOLLOW UP CONVERSATION. IT'S LIKE, WELL, WHY DID YOU SEND ME THIS EMAIL AGAIN? RIGHT? I THOUGHT WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT IT. SO JUST BE PATIENT. IF THINGS OF THE CITY ARE MAYBE A LITTLE CONFUSING TOMORROW, IT'S LIKE, YOU KNOW, THERE MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT OF CIRCLING BACK AROUND AND, AND MAKING SURE THAT PEOPLE ARE ON THE SAME PAGE. IT WAS QUITE HECTIC. I WISH I COULD HAVE SENT OUT AN ANNOUNCEMENT THAT EVERYBODY COULD HAVE GONE HOME, BUT IT DIDN'T HAPPEN. SO THAT IS ONE. AND THEN FINALLY, AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE WILL BE CONSIDERING NEXT WEEK, WE DO HAVE THESE BACK TO BACK COUNCIL WEEKS. NEXT WEEK IS BOTH A WORK SESSION ON MONDAY, A UTILITY BOARD MEETING ON WEDNESDAY, AND THEN WE HAVE ANOTHER COUNCIL MEETING ON THURSDAY. RIGHT NOW WE ONLY HAVE TWO, POSSIBLY THREE ITEMS ON THAT MEETING. TWO OF THEM ARE CONSENT. AND AND THE OTHER ONES ARE ACTUALLY UTILITY ACTION ITEMS. SO WE, WE AS AS WE WORK THROUGH THAT, BECAUSE OUTLOOK WAS DOWN TODAY, WE, I DOUBLE CHECKED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE REALLY DON'T HAVE THINGS THAT PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO GET THROUGH. WE WILL LET SOME OF THE SMOKE CLEAR TOMORROW FROM THE OUTLOOK BEING DOWN. BUT THERE IS, YOU KNOW, AS WE THINK ABOUT IT, THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER COUNCIL CANCELING THURSDAY AND PUBLISHING OUR UTILITY MEETING AND THEN ALLOWING PUBLIC COMMENT ON THOSE ACTION ITEMS ON WEDNESDAY, JUST TO AVOID HAVING TO CALL IN A QUORUM AND ALL OF OUR DEPARTMENTS FOR A QUICK CONSENT AND ROLL CALL. SO WE WOULD CONSIDER HAVING PUBLIC COMMENT AT OUR. IT IS ACTUALLY LIVE STREAMED. OUR UTILITY MEETING WILL BE LIVE STREAMED SO WE COULD ASK FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AT THAT TIME. IT IS JUST JUST TO PUT IT ON YOUR RADAR AND MORE INFORMATION WILL FOLLOW. SO IF WE CAN START DOWN HERE AT THE. WITH COUNCIL MEMBER RADFORD TO GIVE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS. JUST HAPPY VETERANS DAY YESTERDAY AND THANK YOU FOR PEOPLE'S SERVICE. AND THEN SPEAKING OF SERVICE, THANK YOU, MR. OGDEN. FOR FIVE YEARS ON THE PLANNING ZONE. THAT'S GOD'S WORK. SO. WELL, SINCE WE MIGHT NOT HAVE A MEETING ON THE 19TH, I'LL MAKE A STATEMENT ABOUT THE SYMPHONY COMING UP BECAUSE IT'S A GUEST CONDUCTOR. AND HE DELIBERATELY CHOSE A MEXICAN DANCE PIECE TO OPEN WITH. THAT WAS HIS CHOICE. SHOULD BE VERY INTERESTING. THERE'S ALSO THE BIRD THING, WHICH IS GOING TO BE INTERESTING MUSICAL BIRD CALLS, BUT AT THE FRONTIER CENTER. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER LEE, I KNOW YOU'RE STILL IN THE AUDIENCE. ANYTHING BEFORE WE ARE ADJOURNED. HAPPY THANKSGIVING. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. OK * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.