Ms. Kruger reviewed the history behind the AOI updates for all three cities and specifically the City of Victor, which has not updated their AOI agreement since 2007. A new state statute was approved this year requiring all cities to update their AOI plans with new guidelines for boundaries. She commented on the hearings that have been held so far to get to the proposed map and agreement. She explained the parcels being removed from the existing Victor AOI will be rezoned with current County zoning that will match adjacent parcel zoning.
She noted the County has not received any public comment on the draft proposal and that the BoCC will be reviewing the draft at the October 28 meeting.
The audience was invited to ask questions about the process and their specific parcels. Ms. Krueger answered questions with the audience and encouraged them to state their concerns in the public comment portion of the hearing.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Mr. Michael Fortier, representing Teton Reserve HOA, commented they wanted to be sure that there would be no effect on their current zoning.
Ms. Marie Zolezzi, 25 Targhee Trail, asked about the area that is being removed from the AOI and what the impacts are on those areas, both positive and negative.
Mr. Arnold Woolstenhulme, 1505 W Hwy 31, was concerned that his new zoning would be RN-35 and he wanted to strongly object.
Mr. Kendall Jolley, 9290 Old Jackson Highway, stated he was across from city services and industrial zoning and was concerned that the new zoning should be as close to the zoning in the city so they will be annexed in the future.
Mr. Josh Thulin, owner of property contiguous to the changes, was concerned that there were no public work sessions to discuss the changes with the parcel owners. He stated he was not notified of the hearing and was concerned that his neighbors should have been noticed so they can get involved.
Mr. Halsey Hewson, Hwy 33 and 9500 S, commented he is adjacent to the city boundary line and was concerned that his school is allowed now in his current zoning but would not be in the new zoning and wanted to know how much time he would have before the zoning changes.
Ms. Janine Jolley, owner of 9 parcels adjacent to the city in the existing AOI that comprise approx. 50 acres, talked about adjacent existing zoning in the city and felt the change to RN-35 was unacceptable. She also noted they all have City of Victor water connected to their properties. She stated they were opposed because of the financial loss to her family that was part of settling the valley.
Ms. Sharon Woolstenhulme, 1505 W Hwy 31, distributed to the Commission a larger map of the proposed zone changes. She pointed out the numerous subdivisions that were existing with 2.5 acre lots and did not believe changing zoning to RN-35 made any sense. She wanted to see her property be zoned RN-5 to be more consistent with the adjacent properties.
COMMISSION DELIBERATION:
Mr. Kaufman commented there have been several valuable comments and was concerned with the impact on some of the adjacent properties. He would like to be sure that the AOI discussion be brought up every five years to review the current growth patterns. and felt the City of Victor should take a much closer look at the proposed boundaries before moving forward. He did note the signs that have been posted along the highway for several weeks and that there were notices sent out, but thought maybe the notices should be more closely evaluated.
Mr. Kohut commented that the RN-20 foothills zone is being applied to some areas that are not on a hillside and was concerned with that designation.
Mr. Kaufman was concerned that there were more people that need to be allowed to provide input on their new proposed designation and suggested it might be better to send it back to City of Victor for another look.
Mr. Watters was wondering why some parcels that are already hooked to city services are being removed from the AOI when they would make likely annexation possibilities.
Mr. Penfold commented that he has heard several discussions with the City Council of Victor regarding the potential zoning and felt they had put a lot of thought into the process. He did not feel, as a recommending body, they were prepared to propose changes to the City of Victor's proposal for zoning.
Mr. Watters suggested making a recommendation that any property that has city services should stay in the AOI and that the areas along Hwy 31 that are adjacent to parcels that have already been developed with 2.5 acre lots could easily be reduced to RN-5. He also suggested looking at the Foothills zoned parcels that are not in the foothills.
Mr. Kaufman agreed that any parcel that has city connections should stay in the AOI.
Mr. Kohut commented they have enough areas that they think should be looked at again so possibly a continue motion would be appropriate.
Ms. Kim Kolner, Victor Planning Administrator, joined the conversation and reviewed the criteria for the basis of their new AOI line and stated the other parcels were zoned based on adjacent County zoning. She also pointed out the BoCC can recommend approval of the map as proposed without the P&Z recommendation for approval. She noted that the zoning in the new AOI will be zoned AR-20 and did not feel that zoning areas adjacent to the new AOI boundaries to RN-5 would be appropriate. They were trying to keep higher densities because they do not know exactly how the valley and City of Victor will grow in the future.
Mr. Kaufman asked why properties with city services were not part of the AOI. Ms. Kolner said they did not know if those would ever be annexed even though they have services.
Mr. Watters wanted to know what the recommendation by the P&Z would accomplish He suggested moving it forward with recommendations for adjustments based on public comment.
Mr. Weber also suggested allowing time for more public comments from the people who may not be aware of their property being rezoned so they have a chance to speak.
Mr. Penfold asked if they had public hearings on the proposed change. Ms. Kolner commented they had several work sessions and allowed public comment during those meetings but this is the first hearing that was a public hearing and was noticed. She commented there were at least 4 work sessions with the County and at least 8 work sessions with the City of Victor P&Z and City Council.