HomeMy Public PortalAboutMinutes_Planning & Zoning Meeting_10132021PRESENT:
PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING
IONA COMMUNITY CENTER
October 13th, 2021 6:30 P.M.
Chainnan James West, Ray Hart, Member Bill Koester, and Member Jason Cooper.
ABSENT: Member Gary Elliott.
VISITORS: Brian Smaka, Steven Ellsworth, and Josh Williams.
Chainnan West welcomed everyone and led with the Pledge of Allegiance.
Approval of Minutes: Chainnan West entertained a motion. Member Hart moved to approve
the minutes for September 8th, 2021. Member Koester seconded the motion. All are in favor, so the motion carried.
Items o[Business:
Chainnan West asked if there was any public comment. No one stepped forward.
Variance Application -Ellsworth & Associates, PLLC; Harvest Cove; a Variance relating to the length of the road allowed for permanent dead-end streets as stated in§ 10-1-17(B)(4) of the Iona City Code
Steven Ellsworth of Ellsworth & Associates, 253 1st St. Idaho Falls, came to the podium. He
stated that the proposed development is named Harvest Cove. It sits south of Homer States, and
directly east of the proposed plat of Elim Estates. He mentioned that there is an alley, Rainbow
Lane to the east that is not currently connected to the property, and to the south there is a
driveway which turns into Hansen Avenue as it continues east to Olsen. Ellsworth noted that he
doesn't see any feasible way to connect Miles Drive to Hansen. Miles Drive is the street that
Harvest Cove would connect into from Elim Estates.
In order to be able to subdivide the land into sizable and profitable lots the developer and Mr.
Williams, the property owner came up with this cul de sac. The issue is that this makes the cul de
sac longer than the Cit y Code will allow. If they continued with the cul de sac being 400 feet, as
the City Code allows, it would make the easternmost property over 370 feet, just under 2 acres.
That lot would be 223 feet into the Williams property that is only 650 total feet in depth. This
proposal seemed the best use of the land, which is why they have come to the commission with
the variance.
Chainnan West asked ifthere were any questions from the commission.
Member Cooper noted that the land seemed fairly landlocked without this cul de sac .
Chainnan West noted that the developer had mentioned going different directions and inquired
whether they had talked to the adjacent landowners to see if there was any way to connect to Hansen or Rainbow.
Ellsworth noted concerns about connecting to Hansen, as it dead ends into the driveway of Doug
and Sherrie Elliott.
Chainnan West asked the property owner to come up.
Josh Williams, 7243 Skylar road approached the podium. He noted that he has talked to Doug
Elliott, but Doug is currently unsure if he would be willing to sell. Mr. Elliott might be willing to
have the developer stub into his property, but as of right now, He is undecided about what they want to do going forward.
The commission spoke among themselves about what options the developer has. They discussed
whether Rainbow Lane was a viable option, and then asked about the ownership, and whether The City plows Rainbow Lane, and Hansen A venue.
While they were discussing, Chainnan West noted that one of the requirements for a variance is
to prove hardship, and inquired what hardship the Williams have that would make a variance necessary.
Williams noted that without the variance there would be half acre lots and then a giant two-acre
lot in the back. Chainnan West noted that essentially, he would lose a considerable amount of
money. Williams agreed, but stated that he is mainly concerned with the size of that back lot, and
the continuity of the development.
Member Hart inquired about the land to the South of the Elliott's property. It is split into three
parcels, belonging to three different families, the Hay's, the Schweider's and the Denning's. He
noted that it would also have the potential to be landlocked.
Member Koester inquired about the water rights. Mr. Williams clarified that the ditch follows the
property line to the North Side of Elim Estates and his property. It services the North Lots and Gary French. They propose to have it run down between lots one and two in Harvest Cove. This
would allow for any of the homes to be irrigated, and for those who currently use the ditch to
continue to do so.
Member Koster inquired about Mr. Williams other piece of land to the south of the proposed development that connects to Iona Road. Williams said currently the plan is to
keep that land agricultural and in Bonneville County.
The discussion turned to connecting through to Olsen St. again. The main question Josh Williams had about connecting to Hansen is if there's enough room for a road since Hansen bottlenecks between the French's and the Elliott's property. Josh stated that he
would be willing to just stub into Elliott's.
Member Cooper noted that multiple homeowners' pennission would be necessary
Member Hart. The only land that becomes truly landlocked is the Elliott's property,
because they are not currently in the City. Member Cooper stated that a developer would have to buy multiple properties to make
the road connect.
Ellsworth noted that he believed that the stub of Rainbow Road was vacated. Chainnan
West stated that the pattern has been created that the developer stubs out a property, but
the next developer doesn't use the stub, creating issues I ike this in the future. It leaves a bunch of disconnected little pieces of land.
Member Cooper noted that infill development is always tricky. All the good pieces have
already been developed. This current plan makes a lot of sense to him. He doesn't see
how we could do anything differently to improve upon it, unless we can connect it to Olsen.
Chainnan West inquired if the current plan accounts for public safety.
Josh Williams noted that they added a second fire hydrant.
Member Hart remembered that for Elim Estates the City required that they widen the road, and the current developer is continuing the same 70 foot right of way. Chainnan West asked if there are any issues with Public Health. He noted that there will be water and sewer, and that the lots are all half acre or bigger, and add value to the City.
Member Hart motioned to approve the variance. Member Cooper seconded. Chainnan West called for a vote, all are in favor, so the motion was carried.
Preliminary Plat Application -Ellsworth & Associates, PLLC; Harvest Cove; a Subdivision located on the North side of Iona Road to the East side of the Elim
Estates Subdivision Chainnan West asked the developer about the frontage on lots 4, 5, and 6. Ellsworth noted that
they are 85 feet at the 30-foot setback.
Member Cooper asked if there is a need to extend the water to the east to create a loop, for the
•sake of pressure. Brian Smaka noted that from the standpoint of the system, a water model will
be needed to be made to make sure that the requirements are met before he can make any
recommendations
Chainnan West asked if there were any other comments. Brian Smaka noted that aside from the
400 ft. cul de sac, everything else meets the requirements for a preliminary plat.
Member Cooper motioned to approve the preliminary plat application for Harvest Cove
subdivision. Member Hart seconded the motion. All are in favor, so the motion carried.
Ordinance to Amend Iona City Code§§ 11-1-5, 11-11-6 and 11-11-2; specifying requirements for accessory buildings, adding detail on converting dwellings to more units and adjusting various definitions in the Zoning Title of the Iona City
Code (Ord. 272-10-21) Chainnan West stated that he "hates it". Member Cooper agreed. He didn't agree with 11-11-E.
He stated that the City should allow dwellings in accessory buildings in bigger lots. He noted
that if you have I /3 rd of an acre, and Member Cooper added off-street parking, that it should be
allowable. Member Cooper noted that this eliminates the ability to have a mother-in-law apartment; because
of the housing market and COVD-19 more and more people are required to move back in with
family. Chainnan West noted that this prevents people from being able to rent out an auxiliary building
as a dwelling for extra income. He said that maybe the City Council could change it to include a
minimum square footage of the dwelling space. Member Hart stated that the wording seems too limiting.
Chainnan West noted that parking needed to be addressed. He said that we should look at
neighboring communities to get a reference, and he tried but was unable to find any good
infonnation about what the precedence in other communities is. As a community it is open
country, bigger lots. He mentioned putting a limit on the square footage you must have, instead
of forbidding it outright.
Member Cooper noted that if the accessory building meets the other building codes, as long as it
has public safety in mind it should be okay to have a dwelling.
Member Koester asked if the additional dwelling would need to have a separate address. He
noted that the Council just changed the code and payment structure so that a second hook up was
not required for basement apartments. He noted that it could make it more of a burden on the
water system, and the amenities of the City.
Member Hart questioned if this would affect an in-home business.
Chainnan West noted that it wouldn't.
Member Cooper stated that the way the code is written is a bit redundant and had restrictions that
are not a benefit to the City.
Member Koester asked if there would be a privacy issue with the accessory buildings being
allowed to be closer to the property line than a home. He noted that they could have a provision
that stated that they cannot have windows facing the property adjacent to the accessory building ..
Chainnan West noted that there will be extra wear and tear on our City Services.
Member Hart noted that it might all come down to utilities. You'd have to tie in the water
separately, but Member Cooper stated that Iona Bonneville Sewer won't allow more than one
connection per lot.
Member Koester stated that Airbnb could also be an issue. Chairman West noted that the City
could collect a tax from rentals to help cover the wear and tear on the City.
Member Koester noted that water metering would help mitigate the wear and tear.
Chainnan West noted that any extra building that has a dwelling should have to pay an extra
water bill, even if no one is in the dwelling.
Member Hart inquired if it would change the zoning.
Chainnan West believes that it should change the zoning. He stated that the Council could create
a new zone for this.
Member Cooper motioned to reject ordinance number 272-10-21 an ordinance of the City of
Iona, Idaho; amending section 11-1-5 of the Iona city code; adjusting various definitions for
purposes of Title 11 of the Iona city code; amending section 11-11-6 of the Iona city code;
specifying requirements for accessory buildings; amending section 11-11-2 of the Iona city code;
adding detail on converting dwellings to more units; providing methodology; preserving prior
ordinances in each instance; providing for severability; and establishing an effective date. For the
following reasons:
1.This Ordinance limits the ability to have a short-tenn rental.
2.It restricts residents from the ability to earn extra income.
3.As it is written it is an overreach.
4.It creates a hardship on our community .
■
They recommend that it be rewritten to allow dwelling in auxiliary buildings with thefollowing stipulations: 1. Require off-street parking for any and all residents. 2. A fee structure to recover taxes that will be lost from the residents of the auxiliarybuildings. 3.Require a separate monthly water fee for that dwelling in an accessory building.The Commission Members are fine with the language in 11-1-5, and 11-11-2.Chairman West seconded the motion. All are in favor, the motion carried.Chairman West entertained a motion by Member Hart to close the meeting. Member Cooperseconded the motion. All are in favor, the motion carriedMeeting Adjourned: 7:52 --�P&ZAPP�--an---------------�------
A TTEST: lO, µ r---------Ryle�rrens, Assistant Clerk