BCRCC Meeting Report
Meeting attended: ___City Council Meeting for 14 March 2024; 7:30 p.m.
Reporter: ___F3 Date: __14 March 2024
Items discussed/ What stood out to you?
The agenda was as follows:
1.0 Call to Order
2.0 Pledge of Allegiance
3.0 Consent of Agenda
4.0 Public Comment: None this evening.
5.0 Consent Mayor Agenda (all of the following items in this section were approved with no comment or discussion as a group):
5.1 Municipal Services; Third Quarter Impact Fee Report; Bid for pumps and motors for Well 13 project; Bid for Transfer Switch equipment for Well 13 Project; Approval of Change Order for Fuel Dispenser Replacement and Upgrade.
5.2 Public Works; Bid award for Seal Coats for 2024; Bid award for Pancheri Bridge Rehabilitation
5.3 Idaho Falls Power; Upper Plant Right Dike Rip Rap Bid Sheet
5.4 City Attorney; Amendment to Downtown Parking MOU between IF Development Corp. and IF City
5.5 Office of the City Clerk; Minutes from City Council meetings.
6.0 Regular Agenda:
6.1 Airport: Approval of taxiway pavement maintenance for 2024. Crack seal, seal coat for taxiways A, B, and C. Part of this funding will also go to the Airport Improvement efforts. Cost is $650,00.00. Approved with no discussion.
6.2 Municipal Services;
Addition to Parks and Recreation fleet, one Groundmaster mower. The city finds itself mowing and trimming and caring for several canal banks in the city. Cost is $146,063.33 and was approved with no discussion.
Specialty Vehicle Up-Fitting for the Police Dept. Install new operating equipment in vehicles. Cost is $1.5 million and was approved. The only discussion was that it was necessary to support our Police Force in the city. A local company, Data Wireless Systems, will do the work. Discussion centered
on doing what is needed to support our Police force, which considering the atmosphere around the country recently, was very good to hear.
6.3 Public Works:
Proposed Ordinance Revision for the City Sewers. Changes being made in response to comments by Idaho DEQ. Passed unanimously with no discussion. No costs identified.
Amendment to Consultation Agreement with Keller Associates for Rails to Trails Project. This is for turning the old railway track systems in the city no longer being used into walking paths. The areas mentioned are by the City Library and the Power Building . Passed unanimously with no discussion. No costs identified.
6.4 Community Development Services:
Legislative Public Hearing for annexing 1.791 acres in the Southeast ¼ of Section 6, Township 1 North, Range 38 East. Parcel is at the corner of 65th South and 5th East. Requested by the City as zoned P, Public Zone. Passed unanimously with no discussion. No discussion as a to why this was being done. P and Z approved.
Legislative Public hearing, annexation of 28.408 acres in Northwest ¼ Section 4, Township 1 North, Range 38 East. Parcel is east of 15th East and 49th South. P and Z approved the annexation with initial zoning of R2 and R3A. Discussion as follows:
- Debate over R1 or R2 was most appropriate. Comments by neighbors wanted R1 as the area is surrounded by R1, and better served by R1. R1 more appropriate as area has horses and cattle nearby and reduces traffic and will not adversely affect power. Final vote was for R2.
- The R3A area was cut back and made smaller, as it is a high density, to appease property holders.
- Opinion of Councilors was that the reduced R3A area and R2 area adds variety, and fits into the Comprehensive Plan.
Final vote approved unanimously as R2 and R3A. Passed with the reduction of the area of R3A.
Quasi Judicial Public Hearing;
Re-zone from L&M, Industrial and Manufacturing, Limited Commercial, to LM and Heavy Commercial of 3.44 acres of Lots 10 and 11, Block 1, McNiel Business Park Division 4, as well as 1.465 acres of the South 1/2 of the East, ¼ of the Northeast, ¼ of the Southeast, ¼ of Section 25, Township 2 North, Range 37 East. This request comes form the owner, Mr. Rolle Walker, where the current U-Pick Pumpkin Patch and Park are currently located. The ground currently has two different zoning codes, and Mr. Walker would like the entire area zoned as the same designation, LM, Light Manufacturing and Heavy Industrial. This will enhance his ability to use the property, and perhaps in the future put in more features.
There was extended discussion, and input from local homeowners. Please note:
- There was also discussion at the P & Z meeting; this passed in that meeting on a 4 to 3 vote.
- Approval by the Council would allow, under the new zoning, the owner, Mr. Rolle Walker, to build more features and attractions on the property, which the local homeowners did not want. They are very concerned about more traffic in the area, annoying lighting into the night hours, more noise, and more and more crowds. Would also allow for year-round operations. The residents were also concerned about the zoning that would allow heavy commercial, and were against that.
- The council noted that the re-zoning is in line and consistent with the Comprehensive plan.
- The biggest concern expressed by the residents, Council Freeman and Council Frances, and others at the meeting was that the parking is completely inadequate now, during the fall season when the park is open. As noted above, possible expansion would make that problem even worse. Rollandet is not configured for parking on both sides during the season, and in fact in some areas through that section is regulated as no parking, which the residents maintain is ignored. Parking is available across the street in an area currently undeveloped by the Zoo, but the Zoo leadership has made it plain that that could change. There is also parking behind the Red Barn lot to the west, on McLain St., which can be used. This is the road that Burns Bros Concrete is on, and walking there may be hazardous also. The owner of Burns Bros. stood during the public comment period and supported the owner. All were concerned that someone walking on that section of Rollandet when the park is open will be seriously hurt by traffic.
- The change was ultimately approved, because the zoning change has nothing to do with the parking situation.
- Hopefully the owner will be sensitive to the parking issues, and all will find ways to minimize risk to pedestrians and homeowners.
Dynamics of the Committee/ counsel/ board? (disagreements, division, etc.?)
Freeman and Frances voted no. Council Radford spoke in favor of the Red Barn Park as a good place for community members to gather, and a fun feature, for the local citizens, and a good activity for families in the fall.
Action items? (i.e. upcoming events, votes, things we need to be aware of?)
Again, as I have noted previously, we need someone to attend and have input to (during public comment periods) the Planning and Zoning meetings, and review their guiding documents, particularly the Comprehensive Plan that I hear repeated reference to in these meetings, and appears to have a great deal of influence on zoning, growth issues, development, etc. Or, who does this plan belong to? Which agency?
Additional notes:
The Mayor, Mayor Casper was absent, in Washington D.C., with Councilwoman Burtenshaw. Councilwoman Ziel-Dingman chaired the meeting on this night.