Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutMinutes_CCSpecialMeeting_08262014CITY OF IONA AMENDED PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council for the City of Iona will conduct a public hearing on August 26, 2014, at 7:15 pm at the Iona Community Center, which is located at 3548 North Main Street, Iona, Idaho. The purpose of the hearing is to consider the annexation and initial zoning of the Nu'R Subdivision, a Bonneville County Subdivision located on 45th East (Crowley Road) between East Lincoln Road and East Iona Road. If such annexation is granted, the proposed zoning of the property will be R-1 and the Comprehensive Plan will be amended with the designation of such area as Residential, as provided in such Plan. The Nu'R Subdivision is more particularly described, as follows: Beginning at the Northwest Corner of Section 12 T2N R38 E.B.M. and running thence N 89'39'35" E along the Section line 421.00 feet; thence S 0'05'05" W 277.44 feet; thence N 88'21'35" E 35.44 feet; thence S 0'05'05" W 1000 feet; thence N 88'21'35" E 187.40 feet; thence S 0'05'05" W 860.00 feet; thence S 88'21'35" W 644.00 feet to a point on the West line of said Section 12, said point being N 0'05'05" E 475.00 feet from the West Quarter Corner of said Section 12; thence N 0'05'05" E along the Section line 2147.00 feet to the point of beginning, containing 25.914 Acres. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that on the 9th day of July, 2014, the Iona Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously recommended that the Nu'R Subdivision be annexed into the City of Iona and that the said property be zoned as R-A (Residential Agricultural). The public is invited to attend and public comment is encouraged. Written comments will be accepted and considered, provided they are delivered no later than three full business days prior to the hearing. Such comments must be physically delivered to the Office of the City Clerk at 3548 North Main Street, Iona, Idaho. Comments may also be emailed to the following email address: iona@cityofiona.org. A copy of the Annexation Plan for the proposed annexation may also be obtained from the City Clerk's office. Any person needing special accommodations to participate in such meetings should contact the City Clerk's Office no later than the day prior to the meeting. The City Clerk's telephone number is 523-5600. DATED this 23`1 day July, 2014. Julie - ammond Cit Clerk Mailed: July 25, 2014 & August 8, 2014 Posted: July 25, 2014 & August 15, 2014 Published: July 27, 2014 & August 10, 2014 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING NU'R SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION PUBLIC HEARING AUGUST 26, 2014 — 7:00 P.M. IONA COMMUNITY CENTER PRESENT: Mayor Brad Andersen, Council President Robyn Walker, Council Member Rob Geray, Council Member Dan Gubler, Council Member Kathy McNamara, Public Works Director Zech Prouse, Police Chief Shannon Basaraba, City Clerk Julie Hammond, and City Attorney Dale W. Storer. ABSENT: Building Inspector Allen Eldridge, and Treasurer Amy Sullivan. VISITORS: Angie Huntsman, Roger Gundert, Lawrence Burke, Vicki Burnham, Dillon Young, Dixie Young, Roby Hansen, Krista Stafford, Nate Rowley, Joyce Scott, Larry Scott, Rob Hawkins, Shellie Edwards, Jack Edwards, Rod Moore, Teresa Moore, Nicole Seda, James Boone, Ina Nordstrom, Jeny Nordstrom, Jim Baster, Dana Andersen, Beau Bunnell, Bonnie Bunnell, Brad Nielsen, Jim Brook, Ian Archibald, Anya Wilson, Cody Nealis, J.W., Debbie Cramer, M.T. McNamara, David M. Taylor, Sherri Gardner, Sandy Geray, Austin Geray, Shad Dunthorn, Sunnie Dunthorn, Sally Price, Jack Depperschmidt, Ryan Walker, Dean Stevens, Deanne Stevens, Clay Kappas, Aubrey Wieber, Vicki Killian, Marilyn Sargent, David Huntsman, Stuart Rubio, Jinger Coombs, Christy Abbott, Mike Coombs, B.J. Driscoll, Craig Hansen, Michael Waters, Jeromy Stafford, Sharla Mann, Alma Stumpp, Trina Stumpp, Doug Tolbert, Greg Hansen, Rodney Bell, Steven Stewart, Traci Mockli, Glen Clark, Dale Nealis, RosAnn Nealis, Jay Johnson, Tom Lugo, Karen Lugo, Wade Gardner, J.D. Byerly, Kami Byerly, Carolyn Depperschmidt, Roger B. Killian, Lori Davies, Jolyn Louk, Troy Cook, K. Baldwin, and Mandie Davies. Mayor Andersen welcomed everyone and Council Member McNamara led with the Pledge of Allegiance. Mayor Andersen called the Special City Council Meeting to order and took a roll call vote: Council President Walker — Yes Council Member Geray — Yes Council Member Gubler — Yes Council Member McNamara — Yes Mayor Andersen expressed his appreciation for citizen interest and information provided during the Planning & Zoning Public Hearing regarding the Nu'r Subdivision Annexation. He stated it is truly democracy in action. Mayor Andersen's written remarks were marked as "Exhibit AM" and admitted into the record. Mayor Andersen further stated that he recognizes that a majority of the Nu'r Subdivision Residents strongly object to the proposed annexation. He had informally visited with each Council Member and he felt there was a general sentiment among the Council Members to deny the Nu'r Subdivision Annexation. For that reason, it was his intent to entertain a motion from Council to that effect, but he would first like to explain some considerations and hear Council's comments that brought us to this point. Mayor Andersen explained urban growth and its effect on cities. He referenced the Idaho Local Land Use Planning Act (Idaho Code § 67-6502(f)) and explained that the public policy therein encouraging urban development within incorporated cities was in -part what drove the Council to consider the 1 rs annexation. He had hoped that the Nu'r Residents would see the benefits that could come from the annexation, but unfortunately that was not the case. Until the Idaho Legislature creates equal taxes for cities and counties, we will continue to have this problem. Mayor Andersen then asked for Council comment. Council President Keyes echoed Mayor Andersen's comments and supported his sentiments. Council Member McNamara wished things had happened differently and expressed her difficulty in making decisions with her head or her heart. Council Member Gubler explained his perception that the matter involved a determination of what was in the best interest of the City versus what was in the best interest of the individual residents. He explained that at the inception of the Nu'r Subdivision, it was platted with the intent to be a part of Iona. Council Member Geray stated he had received a notice on his door indicating it was Iona's objective to continue growth to the North Yellowstone Highway. He wanted to make clear that this was misinformation and that Iona only intended to expand its impact area in an attempt to regulate urban growth within the unincorporated areas of Bonneville County immediately surrounding the City. Council Member Geray read a prepared statement which was marked as "Exhibit AN". He explained that at his workplace they go by Principles of the Program and one of the principles was to "Face Facts Brutally" which he went on to explain to the Nu'r Residents. Bonneville County Zoning RA-1 has similar large animal limitations comparable to the City of Iona's Zoning. Law enforcement; crime currently drops off sharply at 45th East. County law enforcement attributes this to two things; Iona's local law enforcement and the 'A mile width of land between residential developments west of 45th and 45th itself The Green Valley Subdivision will bridge this land which could potentially increase crime within the unincorporated area. The Bonneville County Comprehensive Plan categorizes the Nu'r Subdivision and Green Valley as "Urban Residential" as opposed to the rural lifestyle Nu'r Residents prefer. Nu'r Residents' biggest concern was the rising property taxes that would come from the annexation. Council Member Geray then offered an analogy explaining how taxpayers pay for the use of governmental services. Mayor Andersen entertained a motion. Council Member Gubler moved to deny the Nu'r Subdivision Annexation without further consideration or public testimony. Council President Walker seconded the motion. The Nu'r Subdivision Category B Annexation was denied by roll call vote as follows: Council President Walker — Yes Council Member Gubler — Yes Upon motion being made, seconded, and Council Member Geray — Yes Council Member McNamara - Yes approved, the me ng wa ?G� djourned at 7:37 p.m. 2 MAYOR'S OPENING COMMENTS Nu'R Subdivision Annexation August 26, 2014 I. Introduction A. Express appreciation for citizen interest and attendance at public hearing B. Express appreciation for information provided at the P&Z hearing, as well as written comments provided in advance of tonight's hearing. C. The annexation procedure in which we are currently engaged is truly an example of democracy in action. The annexation statute provides for a public hearing whereby citizens are afforded a venue to voice their concerns and provide information to their elected representatives on the matter. The statute also requires the City to provide certain information regarding the Annexation to the residents affected by the annexation in order to allow them to make an informed decision as to what is in their best interest. D. We have followed such process. Tonight's hearing is the culmination of that process. The process contemplated by the annexation statute is very similar to a courtroom trial. The statute provides for an orderly process for submitting testimony and evidence to the Council and the Council, acting as a whole, functions very much like a trial judge who weighs the testimony and evidence and then makes a decision based upon the record and upon their belief as to what lies in the best interest of the City, as well as the residents affected by the proposed annexation. The statute also provides a means for judicial review the Council's decision if any resident is dissatisfied with such decision. E. The Council respects that process and has made every effort to comply with the statute and to provide the citizens with the information upon which they might be able to determine their position on the matter. II. Summary of Mayor's Assessment of Current Council Sentiment A. Many of you may believe the Council has already made up its mind to annex the Nu'R Subdivision and that the hearing process is an exercise in futility. I assure you that is not the case. B. The Council has spent a great amount of time in examining this issue and in weighing the recommendations received from the Planning and Zoning Commission, considering the citizen comments made at the P&Z hearing and in reviewing the written comments received in advance of this hearing. Nearly Exhibit "AM" f all of you have expressed strong objections to the proposed annexation and I believe the Council would be remiss in summarily dismissing those objections. The Council has the difficult task of determining what is in the best interest of the City while at the same time weighing and giving proper consideration to the strong objections voiced by the residents of the Nu'R Subdivision. This has not been an easy task nor one that the City Council takes lightly. C. I have informally visited with all members of the City Council and based upon these discussions I believe there is a general sentiment at this point to deny the annexation of the Nu'R Subdivision and it is my intent to call for a motion to that effect, rather than proceeding with the hearing. If that motion passes, there will be no further need for the hearing or need to further consider the matte A. 'R-Stubd ision- Before making such motion, I would like to explain some of the considerations that brought us to this point.` /? h�L� 10 l . Urban growth is an inevitable and inescapable fact. Some would take the position that growth is not desirable, and that a "no growth" policy will preserve our way of life. In my judgment, such "no growth" policies are naive and ultimately redound to the detriment of communities who adopt them. Growth does and will inevitably occur — it is only a matter of whether or not the growth occurs inside the City or within the County. If you do not believe that phenomena, all you have to do is take a drive around Bonneville County and see how many County subdivisions have been developed within this County in the past ten years. One can quickly see that if the status quo continues, cities in Bonneville County will soon be surrounded by rural subdivisions over which they have no control and little input into the manner in which such subdivisions are developed. Such type of urban growth, while regulated by rural development standards, can and does impact cities. It affects city roads, city parks and the delivery of fire and emergency services. Conversely, if growth occurs inside city boundaries, it enables cities to provide urban services on a more economical basis, due to the economies of scale that can be realized when urban services serve compact, more densely populated areas. Simply stated, "no growth" policies ultimately cause interior urban decay and diminish property values as time goes by and cities become less and less able to serve the core urban areas. -2- 2. The Idaho Local Land Use Planning Act specifically recognizes that reality. Specifically, the Land Use Planning Act states that one of its purposes is to "encourage urban and urban -type development within incorporated cities." (See Idaho Code § 67-6502(f)) 3. I believe these considerations are what drove the City Council in this case to propose the annexation of the Nu'R Subdivision. Quite clearly, without such annexation, Iona's ability to grow and expand to the west will grind to screeching halt. Urban growth west of Crowley Road will undoubtedly continue, but it will be regulated and controlled entirely by the County. Iona will have little say in the way in which such growth is managed and developed other than a very limited amount of control under its Area of Impact Agreement. 4. These important public policy considerations are what drove the City Council in this case to put the matter before the public for consideration and solicitation of public input. 5. I believe the City Council sincerely hoped the Nu'R Subdivision residents would see the benefits that could come from annexation and wold thus support the annexation. These benefits would include (i) a well -established water system and elimination of future repair and maintenance expenses, (ii) access to City parks and recreation programs at reduced rates, (iii) being part of a community which supports many youth programs, social events and cultural events. IV. Deference to Nu'R Subdivision Residents' Wishes A. That being said, the Nu'R Subdivision residents have spoken loudly and clearly and have emphatically stated their desire not to be annexed. Although the City Council takes issue with many of the malicious characterizations of their motives for annexation, the City Council does respect the democratic process and does not wish to impose its will upon County residents who wish to have no part of the community. The City Council respects and understands the subdivision residents' sentiments and recognizes the large amount of ill - will that would be created should they go forward with this annexation — at least such is my assessment of the Council's perspective at the present time. B. At this point, I would inquire of the Council member if they wish to add to my comments. -3- \A P/1" 465 1 %(✓ Cyt °A;Of‘n5 1"‘ In v C. Based upon the foregoing, I would entertain a motion that the annexation be denied at this time, without moving forward with further testimony or evidence. (Assuming such motion is made and seconded, request the City Clerk to take a roll call vote). GAWPDATAIDW8\2708 City of Iota\ANNEX\2014\Nu'r Addition Annezatimatayors Comments.wpd3m -4- Nu'R Annexation Statement (Council Member Geray) Throughout this process, I have learned some interesting things about human behavior. One of these things is how people, who have friends or neighbors they've known and trusted for years, can suddenly believe that friend or neighbor is out to get them and destroy their way of life. They resort to name calling and equating their friends to Hitler or placing this annexation in the same context as the 1838 Missouri executive order to exterminate or drive out Mormons. I understand the lack of trust people have in government right now. I sometimes have trouble trusting the federal government myself. But we're talking about locally elected officials, who are your friends and neighbors, not some bureaucrat who's isolated in Washington, DC. I work with the Navy's Nuclear Propulsion Program out at the site. Some of my co-workers are part of the Nu'R subdivision. In the program, we have some guiding principles we call the Principles of the Program. One of these principles is to "Face Facts Brutally." My co-workers will be familiar with this phrase. "Face Facts Brutally" means we don't candy coat the issues or pretend the issue is something other than what it really is. I would like to take this opportunity to face some facts brutally. 1. Based on letters received, one of the issues Nu'R residents have with annexation is that you won't be able to do anything you want with your land anymore. FACT: you already can't do anything you want with your land. Per Bonneville County's zoning map, the Nu'R subdivision is zoned as an RA-1 zone. Believe it or not, the county also has ordinances that limit the use of your land. (Read excerpt from Bonneville County ordinance.) Since most lots in the Nu'R subdivision are about 42,000 square feet or less, the most large animals, such as horses or cows, you would be allowed to have is two. Anyone having more than two is violating the current county ordinance. You may have an exception for a non -conforming use, but that would be the same allowance you would have being annexed into the city. 2. Based on letters received, Nu'R residents don't need any additional law enforcement...the county provides you with everything you need. FACT: crime currently drops off sharply at 45th East. We can only speculate why this is the case, but reports from county law enforcement officials attribute it to two things: our local law enforcement and the '/2 mile or so wide strip of land between existing residential developments west of 45t" and 45t" itself. With the ongoing development of that same strip of land, now the Green Valley subdivision, a bridge will be created that has the potential to result in an increase in crime east of 45t". I hope the county can maintain the same level of law enforcement service that the Nu'R residents are reportedly accustomed to. 3. Based on letters received, the Nu'R residents prefer the rural lifestyle associated with not being in the city. FACT: the area of land which includes Green Valley and the corresponding land north of Iona Road is currently zoned by the county as R-1.5 which allows lots as small as 6,000 square feet for a single family residence. That's 0.14 acres. The only thing preventing the lots from actually being that small is the City of Iona Impact Agreement with the county. Whether we like it or not, the area is growing. The county recognizes this because another fact is that the Bonneville County Comprehensive Plan map categorizes the areas of Nu'R and Green Valley as "Urban Residential." Exhibit "AN" Nu'R Annexation Statement (Council Member Gerav) 4. Based on letters received, it appears that the Nu'R residents' number one concern about being annexed is the rise in property taxes and nothing to show for it. I'll concede that, largely because of the almost purely residential nature of Iona, we don't have a lot of sales and other tax base to provide a lot of other services beyond those already presented, primarily water, law enforcement, animal control, parks, and the library. To comment on that concern, let me close with an analogy. There was once a community of residents who decided to get together and have their own water system. The community got along great together and felt that it could work out well so they didn't have to rely on anyone else for their water. Another neighbor adjacent to the community thought it would be okay to tap into the community's water system, figuring they wouldn't really notice or have a problem with it since they weren't paying by the gallon anyway. Time went by and eventually the community did find out about the neighbor using their water system, but they didn't think too much about it. One day the community's water pump broke and it was going to cost about $20,000 to replace it. So the community went to the adjacent neighbor to ask for his share. At this point the adjacent neighbor said, "Why should I help pay to replace the pump, it's not my water system." The community residents were understandably aggravated by this response, but simply stated, "Because you use the water." The Nu'R residents say that many of the Iona City residents are no more in favor of the annexation than the Nu'R residents. To that I say, "They haven't had to foot the bill yet." As the surrounding area continues to grow and some Nu'R and other non -Iona residents invariably end up using at least some of Iona's infrastructure, who's going to pay the bill for the wear and tear? The citizens of Iona, your friends and neighbors? How fair is that?