Planning & Zoning Commission

PLANNING SERVICES NEIGHBORHOOD & COMMUNITY SERVICES 911 NORTH 7 TH AVENUE I P.O Box 4169 POCATELLO, IDAH0 83205-4169 208.234.6184 WEB https://www.pocatello.us PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION (P&Z) AGENDA CLARIFICATION MEETING Wednesday, August 11, 2021 911 N. Seventh Avenue, City Council Chambers 6:00 p.m. Limited in-person attendance is allowed, but due to COVID-19 guidelines, strict social distancing measures are in place. MASKS/FACE COVERINGS ARE REQUIRED. City Hall is accessible to persons with disabilities. Program access accommodations may be provided with three (3) days’ advance notice by contacting Skyler Beebe at sbeebe@pocatello.us; 208.234.6248 or 5815 South 5th Avenue, Pocatello, ID. AGENDA ITEM 1: ROLL CALL AGENDA ITEM 2: Discussion to clarify items on the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting agenda for August 11, 2021. AGENDA ITEM 3: Adjourn AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER I VETERAN'S PREFERENCE  PLANNING SERVICES NEIGHBORHOOD & COMMUNITY SERVICES 911 NORTH 7 TH AVENUE I P.O Box 4169 POCATELLO, IDAH0 83205-4169 208.234.6184 WEB https://www.pocatello.us PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSON (P&Z) AMENDED AGENDA Wednesday, August 11, 2021, 6:30 p.m. 911 N. Seventh Avenue, City Council Chambers Limited in-person attendance is allowed, but due to COVID-19 guidelines, strict social distancing measures are in place. MASKS/FACE COVERINGS ARE REQUIRED. City Hall is accessible to persons with disabilities. Program access accommodations may be provided with three (3) days’ advance notice by contacting Skyler Beebe at sbeebe@pocatello.us; 208.234.6248 or 5815 South 5th Avenue, Pocatello, ID. The Planning & Zoning Commission is a citizen advisory group to the City Council. They are charged with making recommendations concerning land use plans, planning processes and/or on matters of plan implementation. All regular meetings of the P&Z Commission are recorded for record retention and transcription. The following is the official agenda of the Planning & Zoning Commission. Discussion and Commission action will be limited to those items on the agenda. In the event of a hearing, any citizen who wishes to address the Commission shall first be recognized by the Chair, and shall give his/her name for the record. If a citizen wishes to read documentation of any sort to the Commission, he/she shall first seek permission from the Chair. Oral testimony may be restricted to no more than 3 minutes per person. AGENDA ITEM 1: ROLL CALL AND DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST, EX-PARTE COMMUNICATION AND SITE VISIT. Disclose who was talked to, the basic substance of the conversation, and whether the conversation had any influence. Disclose if there is anything personally or professionally that would not allow an impartial or unbiased decision. Disclose if a site visit was done, location(s) of the visit, and what was seen. AGENDA ITEM 2: APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Commission may wish to approve the meeting minutes from the clarification and regular meetings from July 28, 2021. (ACTION ITEM) AGENDA ITEM 3: PUBLIC HEARING – ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Trevor Henderson has submitted an application for a Zone Map Amendment to rezone approximately 2.33 acres of property from Residential Estate (RE) to Residential Medium Density Multi-Family (RMM). The subject property is located at the dead end of W. Hayden Street. (ACTION ITEM) AGENDA ITEM 4: PUBLIC HEARING – ZONE MAP AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT NeighborWorks Pocatello has submitted an application for a Zone Map and Comprehensive Plan Amendment to rezone approximately 3.02 acres of property from Commercial General (CG) to Residential/Commercial/Professional (RCP). The subject property is located at the 2000 block of South 5th Avenue. (ACTION ITEM) AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER I VETERAN'S PREFERENCE  PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSON (PZC) AGENDA 2 Clarification Meeting Minutes for July 28, 2021 at 6:00 p.m. Council Chambers 911 North Seventh Avenue, Pocatello, ID 83201 Chair Chanda called the meeting to order at 6:02 PM. AGENDA ITEM #1: ROLL CALL Present: Cyndi Andersen, Jeremy Marley, Richard Phillips, Taylor Wood and Shin Kue Ryu. Excused: Krystal Chanda. Staff: Carl Anderson, Jim Anglesey, Aceline McCulla and Merril Quayle. AGENDA ITEM #2: DISCUSSION TO CLARIFY ITEMS ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA FOR JULY 28, 2021. The Commission and staff discussed the agenda items. AGENDA ITEM #3: ADJOURN With no further discussion, Vice Chair closed the meeting at 6:12 P.M. Submitted by ___________________________________ Approved on ____________________________ Aceline McCulla, Secretary Page 1 of 1  PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSON (PZC) AGENDA 2 Regular Minutes for July 28, 2021 at 6:30 p.m. City Council Chambers 911 North Seventh Avenue, Pocatello, ID 83201 Vice Chair Ryu opened the meeting at 6:30 PM. Ryu noted that Agenda Item 4 would be heard before Agenda Item 3 this evening. AGENDA ITEM #1: ROLL CALL AND DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST, EX-PARTE COMMUNICATION AND SITE VISIT. Disclose who was talked to, the basic substance of the conversation, and whether the conversation had any influence. Disclose if there is anything personally or professionally that would not allow an impartial or unbiased decision. Disclose if a site visit was done, location(s) of the visit, and what was seen. Cyndi Andersen had nothing to report. Jeremy Marley had nothing to report. Rich Phillips had nothing to report. Shin Kue Ryu made a site visit for agenda item 3 and 4 and had nothing else to report. Taylor Wood made a site visit for agenda item 4 and had nothing else to report. Present: Cyndi Andersen, Jeremy Marley, Richard Phillips, Shin Kue Ryu and Taylor Wood. Excused: Krystal Chanda. Staff: Carl Anderson, Jim Anglesey, Aceline McCulla and Merril Quayle. AGENDA ITEM #2: APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Commission may wish to approve the minutes as written for the clarification and regular meetings of July 14, 2021. It was moved by J. Marley and seconded by R. Phillips to approve the meeting minutes as written from July 14, 2021. Those voting in favor were Andersen, Marley, Phillips, Ryu and Wood. Those voting against were none. Motion passed unanimously. AGENDA ITEM 4: PRELIMINARY PLAT – BONNEVILLE COMMONS NeighborWorks Pocatello, represented by The Land Group, Inc., has submitted an application for a preliminary plat to replat the old Bonneville School site into twenty-two (22) residential lots and four (4) open space lots. The proposed subdivision is located at 320 N. 8th Avenue. Matthew Adams of The Land Group Inc., Eagle, Idaho, representing NeighborWorks Pocatello to replat the old Bonneville School site. They plan on building 26 homes on this site. This is an infill housing project with attractive and affordable houses that working class families could afford. This preliminary plat will be compliant if City Council approves it on August 5, and Adams asked that the P&Z approve this plat, pending Title 16 and Title 17 Ordinance. Jim Anglesey, Long Range Sr. Planner with the City of Pocatello summarized the staff report. Staff finds that the proposal is not compliant with all current applicable standards of City Code 16.20. However, the request for approval may be honored contingent on pending code revisions for Title 17, the Zoning Ordinance, assuming the following conditions are met: 1) All comments contained in the Public Works Memorandum, dated July 6, 2021, shall be adhered to; 2) A Final Plat application shall only be Page 1 of 3 submitted contingent upon proposed amendments for Title 17, the Zoning Ordinance, after adoption by the City Council. In the event the Council decides not to adopt the proposed changes, then a new preliminary plat application may be required; 3) Proposed sizes for single-family and townhome lots may be permitted pending code revisions for Title 17; 4) Infill development standards may be utilized and all development standards for the Original Townsite Overlay (OTO) shall be strictly adhered to; 5) Per pending code amendments, planting strips are required and shall be landscaped, including one shade tree that is one and one-half (1½”) caliper in size or larger for every thirty feet (30’) of frontage. The required width of the planter strip shall be determined by the Director or their designee, and Public Works Engineering staff. Tree species and varieties, in accordance with the planter strip width requirements, shall be chosen from the list of City approved street trees; 6) A building permit may not be issued unless all applicable standards of City Code Section 16.24.100 are adhered to, or a subdivision surety bond and warranty bond is obtained as outlined in City Code 16.24.110, prior to recording; and 7) All other standards or conditions of City Code not herein stated but applicable to land subdivision and residential development shall apply. All comments identified on the submitted plat maps shall be addressed and revised on the final plat. Discussion between Commission members ensued. It was moved by C. Andersen and seconded by J. Marley to recommend that approval may be honored contingent on pending Ordinance amendments for Title 17, the Zoning Ordinance, once approved by City Council for the preliminary plat application from NeighborWorks Pocatello for the Bonneville Commons subdivision with the conditions listed in the staff report, finding the application does meet the standards for approval under Chapter 16.20.050 of Pocatello City Code; if the Title 17 Amendments are not approved, the preliminary plat would need to come back before the P&Z addressing the non-compliance issues. Those voting in favor were Andersen, Marley, Phillips, Ryu and Wood. Motion passed unanimously. AGENDA ITEM #3: PRELIMINARY PLAT – BREEZY COMMONS TOWNHOMES Jonathan Vincent, represented by RMES, has submitted an application for a preliminary plat to develop 7.39 acres (more or less) into 56 lots. The proposed subdivision is located East of Philbin Road and North of Cottage Avenue. Brady Smith of Rocky Mountain Engineering and Surveying, Pocatello stated the Planned Unit Development was approved by the P&Z a month ago and the project is moving forward with the preliminary plat. Smith stated he read, understood and would comply with staff conditions listed in the staff report. Carl Anderson, Senior Planner with the City of Pocatello summarized the staff report. Anderson noted that final approval of the landscaping plan and all other development plans would be subject to approval at the time of submission of building permit application. That means, the location of the storage units, the need for additional trees and the landscape buffer between the light industrial and residential would need to meet the requirements of the current code. Staff finds that the proposal is compliant with all applicable standards of City Code 16.20, assuming the following conditions are met: 1) All comments contained in the Public Works Memorandum, dated July 19, 2021, shall be adhered to; 2) All requirements of the Planned Unit Development Council Decision, record number 22115446, shall be strictly adhered to; 3) A building permit may not be issued unless all applicable standards of City Code Section 16.24.100 are adhered to, or a subdivision surety bond and warranty bond is obtained as outlined in City Code 16.24.110, prior to recording; 4) The landscape plan submitted at the time of building permit shall be compliant with all landscaping requirements of Pocatello Municipal Code; 5) All Common areas shall be covered in their entirety by a public utility easement; 6) The 45’ wide canal right-of- Page 2 of 3 way shall be shown on the final plat; 7) As required as part of the PUD, Breezy Pointe Drive shall be closed during construction; and 8) All other standards or conditions of Municipal Code not herein stated but applicable to land subdivision and residential development shall apply. Discussion between Commission members ensued. It was moved by J. Marley and seconded by C. Andersen to recommend approval of the preliminary plat application from Jonathan Vincent for the Breezy Commons Townhouses Preliminary Plat, finding the application does meet the standards for approval under Chapter 16.20.050 of Pocatello Municipal Code with the recommended conditions in the staff report. Those voting in favor were Andersen, Marley, Phillips, Ryu and Wood. Those voting against were none. Motion passed unanimously. With no other business Vice Chair Ryu closed the meeting at 6:58 PM. Submitted by ___________________________________ Approved on ____________________________ Aceline McCulla, Secretary Page 3 of 3  PLANNING SERVICES NEIGHBORHOOD & COMMUNITY SERVICES 911 NORTH 7 TH AVENUE I P.O Box 4169 POCATELLO, IDAH0 83205-4169 208.234.6184 WEB https://www.pocatello.us PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 11, 2021 STAFF REPORT AGENDA # ___3____ APPLICANT: Trevor Henderson FILE # 21-2242 REQUEST: Zone Map Amendment LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Submitted and reviewed GENERAL LOCATION: W. Hayden Dead End STAFF: Jim Anglesey, Long-Range Senior Planner SUMMARY & CONDITIONS: In consideration of the application and proposed development, staff concludes that the proposed zoning map amendment is not compliant with Pocatello City Code Section 17.02.180. A full analysis is detailed within this staff report in pages 2-4. Should the Commission recommend approval of the subject application, staff recommends the following conditions: 1. The portion of the property in question with a slope greater than 15% shall remain zoned as Residential Estate (RE); 2. The portion of the property in question with a slope less than 15% shall be zoned Residential Medium Density Single- Family (RMS); 3. Any standards/regulations not herein noted but applicable to the proposed development shall be strictly adhered to; and 4. Any activity requiring a separate development or building permit shall comply with applicable regulations. OPTIONAL MOTIONS: 1. Denial of the Application: “Move to recommend denial of the zone map amendment application from Trevor Henderson to rezone the property located at the dead end of W. Hayden St. to be zoned Residential Medium Density Multi-Family (RMM), finding the application does not meet the standards for approval under Chapter 17.02.180 of Pocatello City Code, finding that: [cite findings for denial].” 2. Approval of the Application: “Move to recommend approval of the zone map amendment application from Trevor Henderson to rezone the property located at the dead end of W. Hayden St., finding the application does meet the standards for approval under Chapter 17.02.180 of Pocatello City Code, with the conditions listed in the staff report: [insert any additional conditions of approval].” GENERAL BACKGROUND: Request & Background: Trevor Henderson has submitted a zoning map amendment to rezone the subject property from the existing Residential Estate (RE) to Residential Medium Density Multi-Family (RMM) with the desire to construct three (3) four- plexes (12 units) on the subject property. The subject property is zoned Residential Estate (RE) due to the fact that a majority of the property has a slope of 15% or greater. As evident with other adjacent properties zoned the same way, this zone was established in order to protect the steep foothill from development. In conjunction with the RE zone designation, additional protections within the slope development standards have been established to limit development on steep terrain that is found within and around the subject property. The request to rezone the property from RE to RMM will assign the property a higher density zone than Residential Estate (RE), Residential Low Density (RL) and Residential Medium Density Single-Family (RMS). AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER | VETERAN’S PREFERENCE Physical Characteristics of the Site: The subject property is undeveloped, consisting of native sagebrush/grasses and wild- growth trees and is currently zoned Residential Estate (RE) with a small portion of the property being zoned Residential Medium Density Single-Family (RMS). The subject property is 2.33 acres (more or less) with 1.51 acres (more or less) having a slope of 15% or greater. The subject property also has public utilities under a portion of the property and provides garage access to adjacent properties. Notification: Notice was published in the Idaho State Journal and a sign was posted on the subject property on July 27, 2021. All property owners within three hundred feet (300’) of the external boundaries of the land being considered have been provided notice of the public hearing in order that they may provide comment on the proposed zone map change. Written comment from the public has been received and attached to this report (See Attachment D). Planning & Zoning Commission Action: After notice, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall hold a hearing to consider the request and render a recommendation. The commission shall submit findings of fact and recommendations to the City Council within forty-five (45) days following closure of the public hearing. ATTACHMENTS: A. Application & Supporting Materials B. Aerial View & Current Zoning C. Slopes of 15% or More D. Public Comment CRITERIA FOR REVIEW: The Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council shall review the facts and circumstances of each proposal in terms of the standards listed in the table below: Table 1. Zoning Map Amendment Review Criteria Analysis REVIEW CRITERIA (17.02.170.E): Compliant City Code and Staff Review Yes No N/A Code Section Analysis 17.02.170.E1 How the requested zoning at the location in question would be in the community’s best interest. Applicant Response “What an interesting question. I guess it would depend on what the "community's" position is on In-Fill. Or is there a GREAT need for Housing (apartments and affordable housing) in the City of Pocatello. On a scale of 1 to 10 what IS the need for housing in Pocatello? 11 or 13? Now, it is more critical than ever before to In-Fill and take advantage of existing infrastructure. So, IF the "community's best interest" is to ☐ ☒ ☐ develop In-Fill and more fully utilize EXISTING water, sewer capacity and schools then YES this Zoning Change is in the BEST interest of the community!” Staff Review The applicant’s proposal to amend the zone map from RE to RMM would rezone the property to a higher density and intensity of use than what the surrounding zoning districts would allow. Where the subject property is adjacent to an established RMS zoning district, a proposal to rezone a portion of the property from RE to RMS would better align with the community’s best interest. 17.02.170.E2 How the list of uses permitted by the zoning ordinance would blend with surrounding land uses. Applicant Response “Perhaps the best way to answer this badly worded narrative item is to list the number of multiple family properties EXISTING from 200' to 700' of the property boundaries. ☐ ☒ ☐ Four-plexes: 1) 934 N. Buchanan built 1994 2) 860 N. Buchanan built 1995 3) 928 N. Willow built 1955 4) 516 N. Lincoln built 1940 Trevor Henderson, Rezone, August 11, 2021 Page 2 of 4 City of Pocatello Planning & Development Services  5) 936 W. Wyeth built 1910 Duplexs: 1) 355 N. Lincoln built 1950 2) 938 W. Sublette built 1935 3) 909 N. Buchanan built 1970 4) 921 N. Buchanan built 1970 5) 943 N. Buchanan built 1977 Given the numerous EXISTING multiple family properties very near the subject property; the proposed designation would blend very very well! Except for maybe the new construction would out-shine the existing neighborhood. Might even stir a higher sense of Pride of Ownership among the adjacent properties? That is a great community benefit, yes? Also of interest is the number of multiple family structures there are in the adjoining RMS zoning as opposed to the number of multiple family structures across the river in the RMM zoning, denser zoning. There are more multiple family structures in the RMS zoning near the subject property than in the denser RMM zoning across the river! Please note the split Zoning of the subject property. The peninsula that reaches to Willow is zoned RMS already, not RE.” Staff Review The list of uses permitted by the zoning ordinance for the existing RE zoning district allows for a single-family unit so long as the lot size is 15,000 square feet or greater. RE does not permit duplexes, townhomes or multi-family units. As currently zoned, the subject property would permit one single-family unit on the property. The surrounding RMS zoning district (a small portion of the subject property is zoned RMS as well) allows for a single-family unit so long as the lot size is 5,000 square feet, a duplex at 8,000 square feet and townhomes at 4,000 square feet per unit. RMS does not permit multi-family units. Additionally, RE and RMS are separated by the Residential Low Density (RL) zoning district which does not permit multi-family units. The proposed RMM zoning district allows for a single-family unit so long as the lot size is 5,000 square feet, a duplex at 8,000 square feet and both townhomes and multi- family at 3,630 square feet per unit. With the subject property being 2.33 acres (more or less) the proposed zoning would allow for up to 27 multi-family units at a maximum of 12 units per acre. Given the terrain of the subject property, the applicant is proposing 12 units total. Within the three hundred feet (300’) of the external boundaries of the subject property upon which all affected property owners have been notified, there are a total of 12 properties that are undeveloped and that, due to steep slope, are most likely unbuildable (17%), 2 properties with multi-family units (3%), 1 property with a duplex (1%) and 55 properties with single-family units (79%). Given the fact that multi-family units make up only 3% and that 79% of the surrounding land uses within 300’ of the subject property are single-family units, staff has determined that the proposed zone change and development would not blend with surrounding land uses. 17.02.170.E3 If the subject site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of land uses permitted under the proposed zoning district. Applicant Response “The subject site IS physically suitable for the type and intensity of land uses permitted under the proposed zoning upgrade! This is a great opportunity for the "City" to finally make use of an overlooked piece of land. The best part of this successful change of Zoning is the income to the "City" would go from a total Property Tax of approximately ☐ ☒ ☐ $108 per year to nearly 85-fold increase. How do we see such an Affordable Housing shortage?” Staff Review A majority of the subject property has steep slopes exceeding a 15% grade and would be considered unbuildable. The small portion near the front of the property may be physically suitable for development. The property has an unusual characteristic of not having frontage along a primary right-of-way but instead, the access points for the Trevor Henderson, Rezone, August 11, 2021 Page 3 of 4 City of Pocatello Planning & Development Services  subject property is a secondary right-of-way. Staff has determined that the proposed 12 units may not be suitable for the subject site. 17.02.170.E4 If the uses permitted in the proposed zoning district would be adequately served by public facilities and services such as thoroughfares, police and fire protection, drainage, refuse disposal, water, sewer, and schools, to ensure the public health, safety and general welfare. Applicant Response “The uses permitted in the proposed zoning designation would be adequately served by EXISTING public facilities and services, for example: There is an underutilized, yes that is right- underutilized, 811 sewer line running through the property. There appears to be an issue whether the correct procedures have been followed for the sewer line's installation. An 811 water line, just in front of the property, was recently (within 4 years) replaced that would delivers excess water ☐ ☒ ☐ capability sufficient to deliver water needs to the project. The impact would be minimal. AND the amount of asphalt disturbed is less than 25 feet. This successful Zoning change would increase the return on the Tax Payer's Public Funds which are invested in our infrastructure. Irving Jr. High (walking distance) and Jefferson Elementary schools need the students. See Area Plan for proximity.” Staff Review The subject property has direct access to and could be adequately served by existing public facilities seeing that the subject property is surrounded by an already established neighborhood. The property has an unusual characteristic of not having frontage along a primary right-of-way but instead, the access points for the subject property are secondary right-of-ways. Staff has determined that the proposed 12 units may not be adequately served by surrounding thoroughfares. 17.02.170.E5 If the uses permitted in the zoning district would be compatible in terms of their scale, mass, coverage, density, and intensity with adjacent land uses. Applicant Response “The permitted uses in the Zoning change would be compatible to scale, mass, coverage, density and intensity with adjacent land uses. It would be more than ☐ ☒ ☐ compatible. It is not like the proposed project is a Dairy Farm or a salvage yard. See Written analysis 2 above.” Staff Review Adjacent land uses are primarily single-family uses as discussed. The applicant is proposing to build three four-plexes which is not compatible to adjacent land uses other than being a residential use. See additional staff comment in E2. 17.02.170.E6 Whether the proposed zoning designation is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation. Applicant Response “See Written analysis E. 2 above. The proposed zoning designation is consistent with the Zoning designations nearest to the subject property. The new zoning designation ☒ ☐ ☐ is not any denser than what is across the river.” Staff Review The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation for the subject property is Residential (R). The requested zoning map amendment would not require a change to the Comprehensive Plan with the proposed change from Residential Estate (RE) to Residential Medium Density Multi-family (RMM). Trevor Henderson, Rezone, August 11, 2021 Page 4 of 4 City of Pocatello Planning & Development Services  ATTACHMENT D P&Z MEETING, AUGUST 11, 2021 From: daninewman@juno.com Sent: Wednesday, August 4, 2021 8:27 AM To: Planning Subject: Trevor Henderson zoning app Planning and Development Services 911 N 7th Ave. PO Box 4169 Pocatello, ID 83205‐4169 RE: zoning map amendment submitted by Trevor Henderson for the property located at the end of W Hayden St. To Whom It May Concern, My name is Danielle Newman, and I am the homeowner at 535 N. Lincoln, which is adjacent to and across the alley from the property in question. I have owned this property since 2009. The only access to my garage and parking pad is from the alley that runs parallel to and West of Lincoln Ave. This alley connects Hayden from the North to Wyeth from the South. There seems to be some discrepancy in the application Mr. Henderson has submitted, because the street address noted under the Project Information section names the street address as “tbd – W Hayden dead end”. There is no dead end. This is an alley that has been used for several decades by city crews (garbage, police, etc.), utility companies, homeowners, delivery truck drivers etc. This is a prescriptive easement. The alley needs to continue to be just that, an alley that connects Hayden to Wyeth. The water line is a separate issue, but, near as I can tell, the city put a sewer cap around this bend of Hayden over 100 years ago. Mr. Henderson cites in his application under section E. 4 of his Written analysis that the water line was replaced four years ago. I have no recollection of this occurring. Since that is my main route to exit the alley, I think I would remember. I note this only to make you aware that he is trying to convince you that all the infrastructure is here for a new set of four‐plexes, it just needs the buildings…not true. The statement made in E. 3 of the Written Analysis is totally false. This land has not been overlooked. The property previously designated RE has been done so for a reason. If the adjacent property, that is an alley that has been in use for 100 years, was designated RMS, it was an oversight by the City in the first place. This property ends in a point on Willow. Would you consider blocking that thoroughfare off too? Why did the City allow someone to purchase part of a roadway? Apparently this application is requesting that this parcel of land be re‐designated from its previous zoning as RE/RMS to a proposed zoning of RMM. This is simply preposterous. It is difficult for me to find any useful information on zoning in Pocatello when I search the internet. My understanding, however, is that two separate parcels of land were recently purchased, with two different zoning classifications. The larger 2 acre parcel I believe is designated at RE, and the adjacent parcel that abuts the alley may be designated RMS. The latter classification is speculation based on the existing zoning cited on the application, which is referred to as the ‘peninsula’ in section E2. I cannot find any information on the designation of ‘the peninsula’, and do not know if it is currently zoned RE or RMS. Are you aware of the zoning classification? I also don’t know the exact property lines of the parcels in question, as there is no survey that I am aware of. Is there a current survey? The two‐acre parcel designated RE has been done so for a reason, as it is part of a hillside. I can’t fathom an insurance company in the country that would cover building a structure there. I am not an engineer, but it seems impossible to build a retaining wall high and thick enough to protect a structure from the hillside above. The smaller piece of land is part of a Prescriptive Easement, and has a roadway running through it. It would be a grave mistake to combine these 1 two parcels into one zoning classification. It is not large enough to support the density of RMM classification, and thus, must remain RMS at most, or preferably, RE. For clarification, the definition of a prescriptive easement is: A prescriptive easement is an easement upon another's real property acquired by continued use without permission of the owner for a legally defined period. https://definitions.uslegal.com/p/prescriptive‐easement/ RMS zoning would not allow for 3 four‐plexes to be built on this property. At most, it would allow for a shop, or one single family 1200 sq ft home, with adequate room for setbacks and parking. I am unclear as to why Mr. Henderson would refer to all the other multi‐family properties, which are in violation of current zoning, to be a reason to skirt the law one more time, and place not just one but several multi‐family dwellings in one very small lot. That would increase the density in this neighborhood to unacceptable levels. In addition, blocking our access to the existing alley for ingress and egress is in violation of our Prescriptive Rights. In searching about zoning districts, I ran across this statement: Residential density shall not exceed eight (8) units per net acre, i.e., the maximum density permitted in the RMM zone district. https://www.sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/getBookData.php?chapter_id=39715 According to these zoning designations, it simply would not be feasible to change the zoning of this property. I propose that the zoning designations of this property remain as two separate entities, or combined to reflect an RE designation. The two‐acre parcel should never have any other designation than RE. The smaller plot that abuts the alley could be designated as either RE or RMS, keeping the easement in place. This would potentially allow a small single family home to be built on the site to the west of the alley, and continue to maintain the alley as a thoroughfare as it has been for decades. Please do not overlook the reason why this application for rezoning has been submitted. It is imperative that the City understand what Mr. Henderson is trying to do here. He wants to pull the wool over your eyes and have you concede to allowing the hillside to be re‐zoned as RMS. The hillside is not developable! Then he wants to block off the alley and put as many four‐plexes in there as he can possibly talk you into, based on his new zoning of RMS, even though 80% of the property is not able to be developed, and hence RE, due to its slope! This cannot happen! Have you considered what this would do to the traffic in an already overcrowded neighborhood? There is simply too much traffic in this neighborhood anyway, due to all the illegal or ‘grandfathered in’ four‐plexes already in existence. Wyeth is so congested, that there is never another parking space on the road at night from Lincoln to Buchanan. The South entrance to the alley (and to my garage) is always the last resort when I am heading home, as you have a very tight turn to the right to get into the alley, due to a car being parked right on the corner. If you happen to be unlucky when you go home for lunch, or maybe after work, there could be a worker or tenant parked in the alley at the intersection of it and Wyeth, which makes the alley unpassable, and you will have to turn around and enter it from the Hayden side. It would be impossible to handle the traffic that the Prescriptive Easement, allowing Wyeth to connect to Hayden and Willow, has dissipated and re‐routed. My neighbors to the North have cameras pointed towards the alley, and recorded 66 vehicles using this roadway in a single day. Question: how would the city garbage truck that services the Wyeth four‐plex (that is actually located in the alley, and is not on Wyeth at all) continue to operate? The dumpster is located in the alley right behind my garage and parking pad. Would they back up down the alley to leave? Would they move the dumpster to another location? News flash‐there are no other locations. This neighborhood is maxed out on four‐plexes and vehicles. You can site Mr. Henderson’s application for the locations of all the multi‐family units. The next meeting about this property needs to address the Prescriptive Easement and make sure that its existence in perpetuity is a necessary part of this equation. The easement must remain, which would mean that there is not a lot of room for anything other than a small shop or possibly single family dwelling…THAT’S IT! The alley needs to remain a thoroughfare! Respectfully, Danielle Newman 2 From: Jennifer Spacek To: Planning Subject: W Hayden alley Date: Wednesday, August 4, 2021 1:49:09 PM Hi Jim, I wanted to write to voice my concern about the proposed rezoning and subsequent closing of the alley access of the property at the corner of the alley on W Hayden, near the intersection of Willow. My concerns are both about safety and access for city provided services if the alley access is blocked. The safety concern is that a fire truck would have trouble accessing properties that the alley has allowed, and the same would be true for any large vehicle, including trash collection trucks. When the alley has 2 points of entry and exit, large vehicles can navigate tight spaces. This is not very easy to do if there is only one entrance; a fire truck, especially would have a hard time backing in and out, and could be an extreme safety hazard for the properties it is trying to protect as well as the fire crew. I know this isn't directly related to the exact issue of zoning that you are addressing here, however I cannot support the rezoning request if these issues are not addressed. Thanks, Jen Spacek, 936/938 W Wyeth  PLANNING SERVICES NEIGHBORHOOD & COMMUNITY SERVICES 911 NORTH 7 TH AVENUE I P.O Box 4169 POCATELLO, IDAH0 83205-4169 208.234.6184 WEB https://www.pocatello.us AGENDA ITEM NO. __4_____ POCATELLO PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 11, 2021 STAFF REPORT REQUEST: Rezoning and Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment APPLICANT: NeighborWorks Pocatello REPRESENTATIVE: Krystal Chanda, A&E Engineering, Inc. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SE1/4SW1/4 & SW 1/4SE1/4 of Section 36, T6S, R34E, Boise Meridian CITY STAFF ASSIGNED: Matthew G. Lewis, Senior Planner GENERAL BACKGROUND: Request & Background: Mark Dahlquist, representing NeighborWorks Pocatello has submitted an application requesting to rezone parcel 1, encompassing 0.83 acres (+/-) and parcel 2 (2.19 acres (+/-)) of Pocatello C Store LLC from Commercial General (CG) to Residential-Commercial-Professional (RCP). A record of survey was recorded August 11, 2017 and is included as part of the staff report. The application shows Krystal Chanda of A&E Engineering as the surveying representative. The zoning map amendment application has been initiated pursuant to Municipal Code Section 17.02.180. The proposed zone change also requires a concurrent amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from the current designation of Commercial (C) to Mixed-Use (MU). Physical characteristics of the site: The subject parcels are undeveloped and currently zoned Commercial- General. Both parcels are flat in topography bounded by South 4th & 5th Avenues on the east and west with an unimproved deeded right-of-way bisecting the two parcels. Notification: All property owners within a 300-foot radius of the land to be rezoned and Comprehensive Plan Map amendment were provided notice of the public hearing in order that they may provide comment on the application. Notice was also published in the Idaho State Journal and signs were posted on each subject parcel. Planning & Zoning Commission Action: After notice, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall hold a hearing to consider the request and render a recommendation. The commission shall submit findings of fact and recommendations to the city council within forty five (45) days following closure of the public hearing. POCATELLO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 17.02.180.E CRITERIA FOR REVIEW: The Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council shall review the facts and circumstances of each proposal in terms of the following standards: 1. How the requested zoning at the location in question would be in the community’s best interest; AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER I VETERAN'S PREFERENCE Applicants Response: “The area where the requested rezone is located will be developed into multi-family housing. The current housing shortage, especially for affordable housing, is in the community's best interest. Also, the current area is bare ground with no improvements, the zoning charge will allow development of the land and improvements to it which will increase the tax base in Pocatello”. Staff Analysis: Both parcels are zoned Commercial-General (CG) with a Comprehensive Plan Map designation of “Commercial”. The parcels have been zoned (CG) since at least 1981 remaining vacant over the past 40 years. As noted above the request is to rezone the subject parcels to RCP with a concurrent change to the Comprehensive Plan Map from “Commercial” to “Mixed Use”. Under the current code, residential uses are permitted outright in upper stories provided that, ground floor commercial use is also provided on the property. The Commission recently recommended approval to the City Council to eliminate the wording “upper stories”. Based on the current ordinance section and proposed amendment, the applicant has the opportunity to develop multi-family housing without rezoning the parcels. It should also be noted that if developed with store front commercial then residential development would not be required to maintain a minimum lot square footage thus allowing for increased density. 2. How the list of uses permitted by the zoning ordinance would blend with surrounding land uses; Applicants Response: “The area surrounding the proposed rezone currently is Commercial General (CG), Residential High Density (RH) and Public Land Facility (PLF). The Residential/Commercial/Professional (RCP) zoning district is intended to accommodate a mix of uses with creating a buffer between residential and commercial areas. The rezone (Residential Commercial Professional) will create a nice transition between the current surrounding zoning and uses”. Staff Analysis: Properties extending between Barton Road to Stansbury are zoned Commercial General. There are a mix of land uses including the Village Apartments; Primetime Auctions; a lawn mower sales and repair business; office building and mobile home/RV park. Bengal Creek student housing is located west of the parcels and Mountain View Cemetery is located to the east. The list of uses permitted in the RCP zoning designation and the applicants desire to construct low to moderate housing would not be out of character with existing land uses. 3. If the subject site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of land uses permitted under the proposed zoning district; Applicants Response: “The current site is ideal for the RCP designation. The area has very minimal slopes allowing full build out of each parcel and allowing storm water to be easily retained on site. The parcels can be accessed from both 4th and 5th Avenue as well as a street connecting the two. This project will provide the opportunity for this street to be constructed as currently it is designated right of way with no development. The subject site is ideal for the type and intensity of the land uses permitted under the proposed zoning district”. Staff Analysis: As noted above, Staff finds that the list of uses permitted in the RCP zoning designation and the applicants desire to construct low to moderate housing would not be out of character with existing land uses. NeighborWorks Pocatello– Zone /Comp Plan Map Amendment – August 11, 2021 City of Pocatello Planning & Development Services Page 2 of 5 Municipal Code Section 17.03.300 List of Zoning Districts: Residential/Commercial/Professional District (RCP): The RCP zoning district is intended to accommodate a mix of residential, professional office, and neighborhood commercial uses including business/professional services, convenience retail, personal services, and restaurants, in close proximity to residential areas and major transportation facilities. Residential uses are permitted consistent with the density and requirements of the RH zoning district. Heliports, medical centers, and some utilities are conditionally permitted. Developments in the RCP zoning district may be used to serve as a buffer between residential areas and commercial and/or industrial areas. 4. If the uses permitted in the proposed zoning district would be adequately served by public facilities and services such as thoroughfares, police and fire protection, drainage, refuse disposal, water, sewer, and schools, to ensure the public health, safety and general welfare; Applicants Response: “The proposed parcels of lands will need to be easily served by police and fire protection. There will be access from both 4th and 5th Avenue, as well as construction of a new street that is currently designated right of way but not currently accessible to vehicles. The area has very minimal slopes and retention of increased run off from development will easily be maintained on the property as required by City Code. Refuse disposal will be provided as required by City Code and it will be easily accessible. Water and sewer connections will be easily accessible from both 4th and 5th Avenue and can be made according to City Code. Permitted uses in the RCP zone will have no negative effect on the public health, safety and general welfare. Staff Analysis: All public utilities including but not limited to water, sewer, gas and electric are readily available. Police and fire will have immediate access to the properties if needed. Access to both parcels may be accomplished via South 4th & 5th Avenues. Additionally, there is a deeded right- of-way extending east/west between the two parcels, therefore, development will require the property owner to place curb, gutter, sidewalk adjacent either parcel. Curb, gutter, and sidewalk will also be required on South 4th & 5th Avenues. 5. If the uses permitted in the zoning district would be compatible in terms of their scale, mass, coverage, density, and intensity with adjacent land uses; Applicants Response: “RCP Zoning allows for residential use consistent with RH Zoning. This will tie in nicely with the property to the west. A commercial or professional use would tie in nicely with the property north and south. The scale, mass, coverage, density and intensity of proposed zoning will blend with adjacent land use nicely.” Staff Analysis: The maximum height permitted in the RCP zoning district is 45-feet. The Village Apartments located 900-feet (+/-) south are approximately 35-feet in height as are Bengal Creek Apartments. Multi-unit housing or any other permitted development is anticipated to be compatible in terms of scale, mass, coverage, density, and intensity. Development of the parcels may also result in spurring additional improvements to the area. NeighborWorks Pocatello– Zone /Comp Plan Map Amendment – August 11, 2021 City of Pocatello Planning & Development Services Page 3 of 5  6. Whether the proposed zoning designation is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation. Applicants Response: The proposed zone change will require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map as well. The current Land use designation is Commercial and it will need to be changed to Mixed Use concurrent to the zone change. Staff Analysis: As noted above, the Comprehensive Plan Map designation is currently Commercial (C). The parcels have been zoned Commercial General as far back as 1981, with the lots remaining undeveloped. POCATELLO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 17.02.120.C CRITERIA FOR REVIEW: Proposed amendments to the comprehensive plan shall be reviewed according to the following criteria: 1. To Correct errors in the plan; Applicant’s Response: It does not appear that the current designation is an error. Staff Analysis: The “Commercial” (C) designation does not appear to be an error. 2. To recognize substantial changes in the actual conditions of the area. Applicant’s Response: The Comprehensive Plan change is not to recognize substantial changes in the conditions of the area. The designation change will help blend uses of the surrounding area. The surrounding property to the Southwest is currently designated Mixed Use so this change will match that. Staff Analysis: The subject parcels have been zoned Commercial-General since at least 1981 and have never been developed. Comprehensive Plan Objectives in support of request are as follows: Housing Chapter 12 Goal 1: Encourage development of a wide variety of high-quality housing opportunities that are safe, sanitary, attractive and affordable. Housing Chapter 12 Objective 1.1: Encourage development of housing affordable for households of all income levels throughout the community. Housing Chapter 12 Goal 2: Adopt zoning districts and development regulations that allow for a variety of housing types responsive to the needs within the community. Housing Chapter 12 Policy d. under Objective 2.1: Allow mixed-use medium and high residential densities in areas where infill and redevelopment opportunities are appropriate. Community Design Chapter 13 Objective 2.2: Encourage development that is attractive and compatible and improves the quality of its surrounding environment, including established neighborhoods. NeighborWorks Pocatello– Zone /Comp Plan Map Amendment – August 11, 2021 City of Pocatello Planning & Development Services Page 4 of 5 SUMMARY & CONDITIONS: In consideration of the application and proposed development, staff concludes that housing may be constructed without rezoning the subject parcels. Under the current code, residential uses are permitted outright in upper stories provided that, ground floor commercial use is also provided on the property. Staff also finds that the list of uses permitted in the RCP zoning designation and the applicants desire to construct low to moderate housing would not be out of character with existing land uses. A full analysis is detailed within the staff report in pages 2-4. Should the Commission recommend approval of the subject application, staff recommends the following conditions: 1. The property in question shall be zoned as Residential-Commercial-Professional (RCP); 2. The Comprehensive Plan Map shall be amended to Mixed-Use (MU); 3. Any standards/regulations not herein noted but applicable to the proposed development shall be strictly adhered to; and 4. Any activity requiring a separate development or building permit shall comply with applicable regulations. OPTIONAL MOTIONS: 1. Recommend Approval of the Application: “Motion to recommend approval of the application from NeighborWorks Pocatello, to rezone the subject parcels as described in the application and depicted on the map to Residential- Commercial-Professional (RCP) as well as the Comprehensive Plan Map be amended to Mixed-Use (MU) finding the application does meet the standards for approval under Chapter 17.02.180 of Pocatello Municipal Code, if the following conditions are met: [insert conditions of approval here] 2. Recommend Denial of the Application: “Motion to recommend denial, of the application from NeighborWorks Pocatello, requesting to rezone the subject parcels from Commercial-General to Residential-Commercial- Professional (RCP) as well the Comprehensive Plan Map to Mixed-Use (MU) finding the application does not meet the standards for approval under Chapter 17.02.180 of Pocatello Municipal Code, for the following reasons: [cite findings for denial].” ATTACHMENTS: A. Application B. Narrative C. Map & Site Plan NeighborWorks Pocatello– Zone /Comp Plan Map Amendment – August 11, 2021 City of Pocatello Planning & Development Services Page 5 of 5  Attachment A Application Neighborworks Pocatello Zone/Comp Plan Amendment  Attachment B Narrative Neighborworks Pocatello Zone/Comp Plan Amendment NeighborWorks Pocatello Application for Zone Map and & Comprehensive Plan Amendment Written Analysis 1. Describe how the proposed zoning or Comprehensive Plan map change would be in the community's best interest. The area where the requested rezone is located will be developed into multi-family housing. The current housing shortage, especially for affordable housing, is in the community's best interest. Also, the current area is bare ground with no improvements, the zoning charge will allow development of the land and improvements to it which will increase the tax base in Pocatello. 2. Describe how would the list of permitted by the Zoning Ordinance would blend with surrounding uses. The area surrounding the proposed rezone currently is Commercial General (CG), Residential High Density (RH) and Public Land Facility (PLF). The Residential/Commercial/Professional (RCP) zoning district is intended to accommodate a mix of uses with creating a buffer between residential and commercial areas. The rezone (Residential Commercial Professional) will create a nice transition between the current surrounding zoning and uses. 3. Describe if the subject site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of land uses permitted under the proposed zoning district. The current site is ideal for the RCP designation. The area has very minimal slopes allowing full build out of each parcel and allowing storm water to be easily retained on site. The parcels can be accessed from both 4th and 5th Avenue as well as a street connecting the two. This project will provide the opportunity for this street to be constructed as currently it is designated right of way with no development. The subject site is ideal for the type and intensity of the land uses permitted under the proposed zoning district. 4. Describe if the uses permitted in the proposed zoning district would be adequately served by public facilities and services such as thoroughfares, police and fire protection, drainage, refuse disposal, water sewer and schools to ensure the public health, safety and general welfare. The proposed parcels of lands will need to be easily served by police and fire protection. There will be access from both 4th and 5th Avenue, as well as construction of a new street that is currently designated right of way but not currently accessible to vehicles. The area has very minimal slopes and retention of increased run off from development will easily be maintained on the property as required by City Code. Refuse disposal will be provided as required by City Code and it will be easily accessible. Water and sewer connections will be easily accessible from both 4th and 5th Avenue and can be made according to City Code. Permitted uses in the RCP zone will have no negative effect on the public health, safety and general welfare. 5. Describe if the uses permitted in the proposed zoning district would be compatible in terms of their scale, mass, coverage, density and intensity with adjacent land uses. RCP Zoning allows for residential use consistent with RH Zoning. This will tie in nicely with the property to the west. A commercial or professional use would tie in nicely with the property north and south. The scale, mass, coverage, density and intensity of proposed zoning will blend with adjacent land use nicely. NeighborWorks Pocatello Application for Zone Map and & Comprehensive Plan Amendment Written Analysis 6. Describe whether the proposed zoning designation is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation. The proposed zone change will require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map as well. The current Land use designation is Commercial and it will need to be changed to Mixed Use concurrent to the zone change. 7. If this is a request for a Comprehensive Plan change, is it to correct an error in the Plan? If yes, please describe the error. It does not appear that the current designation is an error. 8. If this is a request for a Comprehensive Plan change, is it to recognize substantial changes in the actual conditions of the area? If yes, please describe the changes. The Comprehensive Plan change is not to recognize substantial changes in the conditions of the area. The designation change will help blend uses of the surrounding area. The surrounding property to the Southwest is currently designated Mixed Use so this change will match that.  Attachment C Map & Site Plan Neighborworks Pocatello Zone/Comp Plan Amendment