Transcript
SOURCE TRANSCRIPT
This transcript is downloaded from the source you provided but we haven't reviewed it for accuracy. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record. You can also request an AI-transcription of the audio file with the button to the left.
These are YouTube's auto-generated captions, not a human transcript — expect occasional errors, especially with names and technical terms.
[0:02]
Um,
[0:05]
this regular meeting of the planning
commission is
[0:10]
started on April 15th.
We'll do a re a roll call and then jump
[0:19]
into our agenda. Dave, can you start
down there?
[0:23]
» David Merrick, district three. Todd
Queen, District 1. Lance at home,
[0:28]
district two. Lane Bronus, District 2.
>> Kate Darlington, District Three.
[0:33]
» Sean Gardner, planning director.
>> Kelson Hatter, planning tech
[0:38]
code.
[0:41]
» All right. Um,
anyone have any additions to the agenda
[0:46]
they want to make before we get going?
>> We're going to start with public hearing
[0:52]
PLN25-060.
[0:55]
PIT reszone.
Uh, I'll have staff do a presentation.
[1:01]
We can ask questions of the applicant
and then make our decision. Looks like
[1:05]
there's no public here at this point.
Um, should be a fairly straightforward
[1:11]
uh application. And then after that is
decided on, we will jump back into the
[1:19]
work session for the
uh best systems.
[1:26]
Hopefully we don't have too many more of
us. Hopefully we're getting
[1:29]
» This will be our last one. I
>> um
[1:35]
take it away.
>> Thank you.
[1:40]
» As you already prefaced, this is for PLN
25.060
[1:44]
pit reszone. Um quick overview. The
application was for originally for
[1:50]
boundary line adjustment. Uh when we
reviewed the application, we discovered
[1:54]
that the boundary line adjustment when
completed would create multiple zones
[1:59]
from what was present and create
actually what's called split zoning. Uh
[2:04]
due to that fact, we uh did have to do a
reszone. We did the application for
[2:09]
reszone is for two properties that end
up being reszone.
[2:14]
um from res one to A5 was from A20 to
A5.
[2:20]
Um
[2:28]
but as you can see it's uh it's three
parcels in total and basically the
[2:34]
situation is is the family's working on
adjusting everything to get everything
[2:37]
to match up with their property lines
and their infrastructure.
[2:41]
Um, and if we go to the we'll do a quick
oversight.
[2:47]
Um, on the map, as you can see, pretty
large area. The, uh, this is the area to
[2:53]
be effective. And on the next slide,
here's an example of the zoning that I
[2:58]
was talking about. We have res one down
by the highway. We have A20 and also the
[3:04]
upper parcel is an A5. Um, and the
reason this comes into play is if we hit
[3:10]
the next slide, this is the proposed
boundary line adjustment areas. And as
[3:15]
you can see, we end up with a section
that's A20 and A5 and res one and A20.
[3:23]
Um,
based on the configuration of the
[3:28]
boundary line adjustment and the
surrounding properties,
[3:32]
um, it seems to be the most appropriate.
If we go back up, let me go back up one.
[3:37]
When you look at the zoning,
clearly we have A5 bordering the entire
[3:41]
property. Um, so one of the
contingencies is that we don't the
[3:46]
zoning doesn't really have a mass effect
or will effect on surrounding properties
[3:50]
and other areas and this would be more
conforming to what's already there for
[3:55]
zoning. The area that's in the res one
was part of a UG and that got just wiped
[4:02]
out and everything was made res one. And
for those of you familiar with that area
[4:07]
right off the highway to be res one
there is no it could not support the
[4:11]
infrastructure for 1acre lots. There's
just not enough infrastructure. So again
[4:15]
that makes sense that if it was A5 it
would be more conforming to the area.
[4:20]
Um,
>> plus I don't think the town of Peyona
[4:23]
has any intention of going north and
then on the other side of the highway
[4:27]
either
>> with infrastructure.
[4:29]
» So by looking at the overview and
looking at what was proposed, the
[4:33]
logical solution is to move this forward
to a reszone. Um, so the process for
[4:38]
that reszone, we've gone through the
application. Um, the uh public notice
[4:43]
was provided also as per required. We
did a neighborhood meeting. The
[4:47]
neighborhood meeting has been uh
reviewed and everything was done with
[4:52]
the director for the summary. I have no
uh comments from any of the neighbors of
[4:57]
opposition or or uh support. It's got no
communications from any of the
[5:03]
surrounding properties.
And again, the the main the main part of
[5:08]
this that work just makes sense um
before the boundary line can be done,
[5:12]
the reasoning would end up making
everything in A5 and it would flow more
[5:17]
and be more applicable to surrounding
properties.
[5:24]
And basically with all of that put
together and I'll take questions or any
[5:29]
comments that you might have, but as we
mentioned, this is pretty
[5:31]
straightforward. Um, we would recommend
that the planning commission make a
[5:35]
recommendation to board of county
commissioners to approve PLN25-060
[5:41]
pit reszone. Two parcels
um, currently zone 1820. The other one
[5:47]
is res one be switched to an
agricultural 5 acre zoning district.
[5:53]
This would then of course have to amend
the 2024 land use zoning maps indicating
[5:58]
the reszone from A20
uh to A5 and from res one to A5.
[6:05]
Upon review, there are no um negative
impacts on infrastructure surrounding
[6:09]
properties or anything else and
everything meets the criteria of the
[6:13]
land use code for this project. The
applicants are here um and if you have
[6:18]
questions, I'll be happy to take them.
Anyone
[6:30]
have questions on this?
[6:34]
» What is the current water supply for for
the property as it is?
[6:38]
» Um, the only water supplies present are
already for the residences that are
[6:42]
there. Um, I believe
>> well,
[6:45]
» they're wells.
>> Yes, three wells. So,
[6:49]
» and there's
not
[7:00]
anyone else.
[7:09]
I'm just trying to look I was I was
giving a quick look at table uh 2B if
[7:15]
there's any kind of like really
significant differences between A20 and
[7:20]
A5 and res one, you know, for people who
own property around there if they're
[7:25]
expecting something can or can't happen
next to them currently.
[7:30]
Um,
[7:36]
and there's residences on each of these
parcels.
[7:41]
» There is currently
[7:51]
» reszone
[7:54]
land use code requires
group adequate water supply. Does staff
[7:59]
feel like
It met that requirement.
[8:03]
» Yes, it did. I think I have it in here
for which the wells are actually in my
[8:09]
file,
>> but yeah, we're we're we're satisfied
[8:13]
with the water supply.
[8:17]
» Each property has its own look.
>> Yes.
[8:19]
» Yes.
>> I have a survey or map.
[8:22]
» Yeah, we have a big one. We just
couldn't shrink it down enough
[8:25]
» because it indicated the wells, but it's
it it's very detailed and we couldn't
[8:31]
get it to make it where you would be
able to read it.
[8:48]
» You have three residents there already
in three different wells. Yeah,
[8:53]
there's two res on one parcel, one one
middle part.
[9:01]
Oh, I see.
[9:11]
Can I explain
[9:17]
this
about this? Um so this is all family
[9:22]
property
when each one of us has our own um home
[9:29]
electricity and all those tiny things.
So this would be the fire mount canal
[9:34]
be one property
another and then this would be another
[9:40]
and then well
here one here and one here
[9:48]
property already has uh OTS
less on
[9:53]
» everything's been established for
>> oh over 30 years
[9:58]
» go my grandparents and my mom and dad's
property and clubbed it in all four of
[10:02]
our names and we're trying to divide it
so our children don't have to.
[10:08]
» That's right.
>> So yeah, already established driveways.
[10:12]
This one comes in from Stevens Gulch as
well as Prior Mountain
[10:16]
Road. This is
>> kind
[10:26]
of
[10:32]
» no structure
or anything. They're all
[10:39]
changes
[10:45]
all flow work with this alteration bound
and adjustment to get everything on the
[10:50]
right property
that up a little
[10:54]
» as the land use code requires that we
can't have multiple zone. Correct. And
[10:59]
we can have a lot that in
>> correct really what we're trying to
[11:03]
» all we're talking about right now is the
uh because the boundary adjustment
[11:06]
obviously wouldn't come before you. Uh
this is strictly about the reszone
[11:12]
meeting all the rest of the areas around
it and that's practical doesn't cause
[11:15]
any incumbrances on infrastructure
neighboring properties devaluation or
[11:21]
any kind of thing like that. And
obviously when we look at it, it really
[11:24]
makes sense. And also by the response of
no one to support or oppose this reszone
[11:31]
with the neighborhood meetings and the
public notices.
[11:34]
» Great.
>> I move that we recommend to the board of
[11:38]
county commissioners to approve
PLN25-060
[11:43]
reszoning the two parcels.
Um, currently zon
[11:49]
to uh and a res one to a5 zoning.
>> Have a second.
[12:00]
» Commissioner Queen seconds.
Uh, all in favor?
[12:04]
» I.
>> Uh, none opposed. The motion passes to
[12:08]
recommend that PLN25-060
[12:13]
uh is approved by the board of county
commissioners. You'll go before the
[12:17]
board of county commissioners to get uh
hopefully a final approval from them. Um
[12:24]
you'll be notified when that meeting is.
And
[12:28]
with that, we can end the public
hearing.