Council approves Anderson Townhomes PUD after hearing; project includes amenities and reduced setbacks
October 09, 2025 | Idaho Falls, Bonneville County, Idaho
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The Idaho Falls City Council approved a planned unit development (PUD) for Anderson Townhomes Division No. 2 following a quasi-judicial hearing and unanimous recommendation from the planning commission.
The developer seeks variances to allow individually platted lots fronting a private street, reduce the rear-yard setback to 10 feet from the standard (and reduce the private-street landscape buffer from 10 feet to 4.5 feet). In exchange the project includes three amenities: a gazebo, a pickleball court and a small dog park, plus additional trees and shrubs to compensate for reduced landscape area.
Why it matters: The site is 2.38 acres and zoned R-3A; the applicant proposes about 15 units per acre (less than the R-3A cap of 35 units per acre) and 71 parking stalls for 35 units. City staff said the applicant provides 26.8% landscaping where 25% is required and is providing more amenities than the PUD ordinance strictly requires for a project under 50 units.
Hearing highlights and conditions: City staff and the applicant explained the development and said the second access to Science Center Drive will be required before certificates of occupancy for the 14th unit. Council members asked about the Science Center Drive approach and whether a deceleration lane or retaining wall would be needed; staff said engineering had reviewed access separation requirements and that a second access point would be required at a defined occupancy threshold. The applicant said backyard areas would be enclosed for privacy and that the planned pickleball court will double as a stormwater retention area during rare, large storm events, with underground storage intended to keep the court dry for typical conditions.
Public comment: The applicant and project representative spoke in favor, noting the product aims at an attainable-for-sale price point for younger families; no opponents testified at the hearing.
The vote: Council approved the PUD and the recent statement of relevant criteria and standards; multiple councilors said they had reservations about PUDs generally but supported this proposal given the site context, existing infrastructure and price point for homes.
Next steps: Staff will finalize the required documents for recording and issue permits in line with the conditions of approval, including the second-access requirement and landscape/amenity commitments.
The developer seeks variances to allow individually platted lots fronting a private street, reduce the rear-yard setback to 10 feet from the standard (and reduce the private-street landscape buffer from 10 feet to 4.5 feet). In exchange the project includes three amenities: a gazebo, a pickleball court and a small dog park, plus additional trees and shrubs to compensate for reduced landscape area.
Why it matters: The site is 2.38 acres and zoned R-3A; the applicant proposes about 15 units per acre (less than the R-3A cap of 35 units per acre) and 71 parking stalls for 35 units. City staff said the applicant provides 26.8% landscaping where 25% is required and is providing more amenities than the PUD ordinance strictly requires for a project under 50 units.
Hearing highlights and conditions: City staff and the applicant explained the development and said the second access to Science Center Drive will be required before certificates of occupancy for the 14th unit. Council members asked about the Science Center Drive approach and whether a deceleration lane or retaining wall would be needed; staff said engineering had reviewed access separation requirements and that a second access point would be required at a defined occupancy threshold. The applicant said backyard areas would be enclosed for privacy and that the planned pickleball court will double as a stormwater retention area during rare, large storm events, with underground storage intended to keep the court dry for typical conditions.
Public comment: The applicant and project representative spoke in favor, noting the product aims at an attainable-for-sale price point for younger families; no opponents testified at the hearing.
The vote: Council approved the PUD and the recent statement of relevant criteria and standards; multiple councilors said they had reservations about PUDs generally but supported this proposal given the site context, existing infrastructure and price point for homes.
Next steps: Staff will finalize the required documents for recording and issue permits in line with the conditions of approval, including the second-access requirement and landscape/amenity commitments.
View full meeting
This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.
View full meeting