Planning Commission

September 3, 2024 7:00 p.m. Planning Department City Annex Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Marsha McDaniel, Bill Scott, Forrest Ihler, Arnold Cantu. MEMBERS ABSENT: Glen Ogden, Dale Storer ALSO PRESENT: Assistant Planning Director Kerry Beutler, David Peterson Planner, Brian Stevens Planner, Jacob Beck, Esq, Assistant City Attorney, and interested citizens. CALL TO ORDER: Ihler called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MINUTES: Scott moved to accept the minutes of August 6, 2024, Cantu seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Public Hearing: 1. PLAT 23-033: PRELIMINARY PLAT for River Hollow at Sage Lakes. Ihler opened the public hearing. Applicant: Nate Clark, Rockwell Homes, 5615 Cotton Tree Lane, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Clark presented a preliminary plat for River Hollow Subdivision to be approved by the Commission. Clark stood for questions. Stevens presented the staff report, a part of the record. Ihler asked if half of a road is annexed into the City, or do they annex the entire road. Stevens indicated that portions are not annexed. Beutler confirmed that all of the right of way has been annexed along 65th, and there is a County island, and they have annexed county right of way, but have not annexed county properties so there is not the full 100’ width for road build out. Ihler asked if the developer is required to widen their side of the road. Stevens stated that the road build out is paid for with impact fees and the City will use the impact fees to build the road when they are ready. Scott asked about Division 1. Stevens indicated that Division 1 is in blue, and that division includes the park. However, the developer can develop in any order. Scott confirmed that the park will be developed with division 1. Support/Opposition: Donald Struckman, 296 Northpointe Drive, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Struckman showed on the map where his home is located. Struckman can see farmland forever from his house currently. Struckman has prepared written comments for the Commission, Beck and staff. Struckman moved in June and loves the City, and his view sees farmland. Struckman stated that the project that is being presented in rural country. There are no parks, schools, public services, shopping centers, etc. it is classic rural America. The project wants to change the whole demeanor to urban. Struckman stated that ¾ of the project is large lots and then the other 112 lots that are high density apartment like condominium style with 25’ width lots. This project is creating two projects, one being high density urban where people are trying to get away from automobiles and have all services they need, and the other portion is suburban. Struckman stated that the report is cursory. Struckman stated that the report does not address the 100 issues that are relevant to whether this is a good idea. It doesn’t address police, school, traffic impact. 65th is a 2-lane country road and will become a high density use street. Struckman is concerned about the safety of the street, especially in winter. Struckman is concerned that the development will happen first and then the public improvements will be filled in. Struckman asked the Commission to suspend the consideration of this application to allow time for a more in-depth analysis of the development to determine if it is in the best interest of those in the area and is it consistent with the plan for the rural area. He sees no reason to go from A1 agriculture to R2. If they build small units here, there will be more. There will be a high-density area 5 miles from any services. Struckman asked the Commission to continue the hearing for a more in-depth analysis and he is willing to help analyze and investigate all of the Planning Commission Minutes September 3, 2024 Page 1 of 5 issues that the Comprehensive Plan calls for. Apartments don’t fit in farm areas, and they don’t know the net effect on the city services, and residents. Struckman stated that his biggest concern is allowing development to go forward without the public services that need to go with it, and you lose all negotiating ability to create commitments. Struckman stated that he watched Orange County get built and it was dreadful, and he doesn’t want that to happen here. Struckman’s written comments are part of the record. Brian Edgerton, 6175 N 5th W, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Edgerton had Ihler read his statement that was provided to the Commission, Beck and staff. This statement is part of the record. Howard Bingham, 7323 Nth 5th W, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Bingham commented during Edgerton’s testimony. Bingham stated that they are dumping traffic onto N 5th W right at dead man’s curve. Bingham indicated that, as people are coming from Jefferson County south, the entrance and exit out of the north end of the property, the cars are flying (65-70 mph) and there is not much time to stop when cars are built up. The area is poor placement for entrance and exit into the development. As people come around the corner, there are trees on his property that block the view until you are right up on it. Bingham feels it is a dangerous area, and there are many bicyclers in large groups coming around that corner. Bingham stated that he seconded Struckman’s comments. Bingham stated that he brings irrigation water down the ditch and Block 8 has a fairly wide area, so there is access to the ditch, and the preliminary plat that has been revised does not show the access along the irrigation ditch. Bingham stated that if they do the development there needs to be access to the irrigation ditch. Bingham stated that right now it shows a 12’ public utility easement and he is not sure what will go in that. He does not want it to block maintenance and access to the ditch. Ihler closed the public hearing. Applicant: Nate Clark, Rockwell Homes, 5615 Cotton Tree Lane, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Clark stated that they did have a neighborhood meeting in December, 2023. The last 9 months they have been doing homework and studying and redoing things. They did a traffic impact study that was required. Clark stated that they have excel/decel lanes, and the City is working to redo the bridge on 65th North and upgrade and widen the road. Those things are in process and being planned. Clark stated that part of the process in developing they have to get approval from road and bridge, police, fire, etc. to make sure that it fits into their plans, and they have been able to move forward and get things approved and there are adequate services for residents. Clark stated that this is a scaled project, and it will be done one division at a time, and it allows the roads and utilities to be built out and catch up. They will do phasing with the project that could take 4-6 years. Clark stated that they will have a City park in the development. Struckman stated that the difficulty they are having is they don’t know what records to request as it is not public. Beck stopped Struckman and indicated that this is like a hearing and the public hearing portion of this has been closed and it would be pertinent to have Struckman reach out to City staff to answer further questions. Stuckman asked if he could contact the Commissioners directly. Beck indicated that they cannot be contacted. Ihler indicated that there is a final plat that has to be approved and that will go to City Council. Cantu asked if the studies have been done that Struckman is concerned about. Stevens stated that the traffic study has been completed, the Comprehensive Plan has been completed and this preliminary plan meets the Comprehensive Plan. Stevens stated that City cannot dictate how development goes if it meets the requirements. Stevens stated that this plat meets everything that they are in charge of. Ihler asked if the Commission gets to look at the traffic study. Stevens stated that the traffic study is considered by the City Engineer and BMPO and the County Engineer looks at the study as well. The City uses BMPO to establish the intersections and spacing and appropriate build out. Stevens stated that it is a 300–400- page document. Ihler asked if the public could have access to the traffic study. Stevens stated that there is a public request form. BMPO has documentation on their website, and the Comprehensive Plan is on the website. Beutler stated that any document that comes through the office is available for the public upon request. Planning Commission Minutes September 3, 2024 Page 2 of 5 Ihler asked if the preliminary plat was built out with the traffic study being taken into consideration. Stevens stated that the traffic study has been taken into consideration. Stevens stated that the road layout has been decided by the County and the City looks at the roads that connect when they build out and ensure they are to the BMPO standard. Ihler asked about the entrance on the curve and the danger to people coming south to 5th West. Ihler stated that is a tight curve and asked if that was taken into consideration. Can they move that entrance down to a straighter area? Stevens stated he was not involved in the suggestion for that connection and entrance. Based on the Fire load they have to have secondary access. They have several homes and there are 2 curves coming together and there is not a great place to put an intersection. Stevens stated that as the City grows to the north it could be different, with slower speeds, and police patrol. Beutler stated that the curve is the annexation boundary and the access to 5th West was done prior to the parcel coming into the City and in order to have circulation they have to have access to 5th West. Cantu stated that his biggest concern is traffic, and these big projects have traffic congestion. Cantu stated that his concern is alleviated with the traffic study. Scott stated that he does appreciate the comments and agrees that traffic is a problem and the growth that is happening no one is happy with. Scott stated that he has rode a bicycle on that road and it is hazardous, however that is beyond the prevue of the planning commission. The Comprehensive Plan has been written and they follow it. Scott stated that the Planning Commission’s role is to ensure things conform to the Comprehensive Plan and meet standards that have been set. Scott stated that traffic will always be a concern, and it is a growth process that has to be adjusted to. Scott feels it is a good development and meets the Comprehensive Plan. The roads are getting crowded, and people need to slow down and that is the responsibility of everyone. McDaniel stated that traffic is a concern that is heard often and that is outside of the Commission’s prevue. She encouraged everyone to engage with the officials that do handle traffic. When traffic is coming is often not from the new neighborhood and the issues are larger than the individual development. Everyone wants safe roads. The development does meet the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan. Ihler stated that with neighborhoods like this on the edge of town, they see the issues repeatedly and they are valid. They are capturing a moment in time when they are going from rural to suburban/urban and that transition takes time, and you cannot build the roads perfectly and make it happen very fast. Ihler stated that this area is in a weird transition and time will create build out. Ihler stated that the concern about City services and schools, grocery stores, etc. The free market creates those things when residential development happens. Ihler stated that there are developers in the area that are looking to develop more commercial. Bringing the commercial, schools, roads etc., is not financially responsible without the tax base. Ihler stated that there is a need for higher density in some areas such as R2 to create more diverse density to bring in a higher amount of tax dollars to help pay for City services that people want. Ihler is concerned about the irrigation ditch, but the City does make sure they reach out to all stake holders, and they will ensure access. Ihler indicated that Bingham could reach out to the City regarding water. McDaniel moved to approve the Preliminary Plat for River Hollow at Sage Lakes, Scott seconded the motion. Ihler called for roll call vote: Cantu, yes; Ihler, yes; Scott, yes; McDaniel, yes. The motion passed unanimously. Scott moved to approve the Reasoned Statement of Relevant Criteria and Standards for River Hollow, Cantu seconded the motion. Ihler called for roll call vote: Cantu, yes; Ihler, yes; Scott, yes; McDaniel, yes. The motion passed unanimously. 2. ANNX 24-008: ANNEXATION AND INITIAL ZONING OF I&M. Ihler opened the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes September 3, 2024 Page 3 of 5 Applicant: Stockton Barry, 1335 Enterprise Street, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Barry represents EZ Exteriors, and they are looking to develop land off of 15th West for a future location for their company doing roofing and siding as well as a multi-use sports complex. Ihler asked if the skinny piece is attached to a piece already attached to the property in the City to give access. Barry stated that Knife River owns the road and is willing to give right of way. Scott asked if the purpose is to provide access to the property to the north that is already annexed. Peterson presented the staff report, a part of the record. Scott clarified that the property to the north has been annexed. Peterson stated that it has been annexed. Scott stated that the primary purpose of the annexation is to get access to S 15th W. Peterson agreed that 15th West connects to Yellowstone and then down to 65th. Scott stated that off of Yellowstone and Professional Way is a dangerous area and will that property exit to Yellowstone. Peterson stated that the two ways are onto Yellowstone and 65th South or Professional Way. Scott is concerned with getting out of that area safely. Peterson indicated that a lot of that is County and there is an infrastructure issue if there is going to be a lot on the road, but infrastructure doesn’t come before the annexation and development. McDaniel asked why the request doesn’t go to the end of the road. Peterson stated that it will be answered during the preliminary plat to give frontage to the Knife River Property and the property is owned and controlled by Knife River. Beutler added that it looks like a public street, but it is not a public street and only an access to the gravel pit and the next agenda item will discuss becoming a public road. They are doing sufficient right of way to accommodate the necessary right of way. No one appeared in Support/Opposition. Ihler closed the public hearing. Ihler feels it is straight forward. Cantu moved to recommend to the Mayor and City Council approval of the Annexation of .494 acres of the SW ¼ of Section 36, T 1 N R 37 E, with an initial zoning of I &M. McDaniel seconded the motion. Ihler called for roll call vote: Cantu, yes; Ihler, yes; Scott, yes; McDaniel, yes. The motion passed unanimously. 3. PLAT 24:034: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR EZ Exteriors Division No. 1. Ihler opened the public hearing. Applicant: Stockton Barry, 1335 Enterprise Street, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Barry stated they are looking to develop this area and stated that a lot of technical questions can be answered by engineers. Peterson presented the staff report, a part of the record. Support/Opposition: Ihler closed the public hearing. McDaniel has no concerns. Scott feels it is a great thing to have more facilities like this and is excited to see this go forward. Scott moved to approve the Preliminary Plat for EZ Exteriors Division NO. 1. McDaniel seconded the motion. Ihler called for roll call vote: Cantu, yes; Ihler, yes; Scott, yes; McDaniel, yes. The motion passed unanimously. Cantu moved to approve the Reasoned Statement of Relevant Criteria and Standards, McDaniel seconded the motion. Ihler called for roll call vote: Cantu, yes; Ihler, yes; Scott, yes; McDaniel, yes. The motion passed unanimously. Planning Commission Minutes September 3, 2024 Page 4 of 5 Business: 4. PLT 24-031: FINAL PLAT FOR Ivywood Division No. 7. Applicant: No one appeared. Peterson presented the staff report, a part of the record. Scott asked if DaVinci Drive has anything built there yet. Peterson stated that DaVinci is in Division 13 and 12th west is in Division 14. Division 5 will bring Montezuma to 15th W and 12th W and DaVinci will come down from Montezuma before it connects to the existing streets. Scott asked if there is a reason these are being piece meal. Peterson stated that 12th West and DaVinci were originally considered in this division, but the applicant is not the only property owner, and the other owner was not ready to move forward with the expansion of the roads, so they talked with the City Engineer to extend Montezuma to connect to 15th W while they figure out the extension of roads they do not have control over. Ihler stated that Division 5 is going to City Council soon, so they could develop that and that would give another connection in the area from 15th West to 5th W. Peterson stated that they cannot approve Division7 until the road is completed and accepted by Public Works. Scott clarified that Division 5 will be the 1st to be developed. Peterson stated that all the public improvements have to be put in before Division 6 or Division 7 can go through. Ihler stated that Division 5 is the connecting piece. Scott moved to recommend to the Mayor and City Council approval of the Final Plat for Ivywood Division No. 7. McDaniel seconded the motion. Ihler called for roll call vote: Cantu, yes; Ihler, yes; Scott, yes; McDaniel, yes. Motion passed unanimously. Beutler stated that October is a tame agenda and not too busy and November is election month so the meeting will be moved to the 2nd Tuesday in November the 12th. Adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully Submitted Beckie Thompson, Recorder Planning Commission Minutes September 3, 2024 Page 5 of 5