Providence council pauses Timberbrook rezone after wide neighborhood debate

Providence City Council on July 16 voted unanimously to table consideration of Ordinance 05-2025, the Timberbrook rezone request, and give the applicant time to return to the city after being out of the country.

The item drew more than an hour of public comment and council discussion. The applicant, Jaden Smith, who identified himself as representing Timberbrook Homes and the landowner, argued the R-1-6 (R-16) zone fits the city's general plan and would allow 10,000-square-foot single-family lots as a transition from nearby higher-density parcels. "The general plan has a through street. . . R-16 has always been planned for this area," Smith said.

Opponents at the meeting focused less on density and more on whether the development would create a through street from the existing dead-end 325 West. Doug Snow, who said he lives on 325 West, told the council he supports new homes but asked the city and developer to find a way to preserve his street's quiet character by converting the connection to a cul-de-sac or providing a walkway to the adjacent park. "My only issue is, can we make that not a through street?" Snow said.

Resident Nate Worthen urged council members to follow their usual matrix for rezones: compatibility with the general plan, planning commission recommendation and fit with surrounding uses. "This request does not" meet those criteria, Worthen said, noting the planning commission recommended rejection.

Mark Thompson, who said he and his wife donated Meadow Ridge Park to the city, spoke in favor of the higher-density zone, saying gradual transitions in lot sizes better meet the city's housing goals and that R-16 could help provide more-affordable options. Eric John, representing the Gustavisons (the sellers), asked council to consider the direct impact on property owners if the council forced a lower-density outcome, saying the difference of a few lots was material to the seller's proceeds.

Council members publicly wrestled with competing concerns: landowner rights and the possibility of future, denser buildout if R-16 were granted; neighbor concerns about street access, traffic and parking on narrower-frontage lots; and historical proposals in the general plan. Councilmember Brent Speth said he is a past proponent of R-16 in other areas but worried that granting R-16 now might be like "signing a blank check" that would permit smaller lots or a private lane later if market conditions changed.

Staff planning director Ryan (Scarlett) reminded the council that the transportation master plan shows a lateral/through street and that decisions about whether the street is a cul-de-sac would come later at the preliminary plat stage before the planning commission. He also confirmed the council could accept, reject or modify a requested zone as this is a discretionary decision.

After discussion, Councilmember (motion maker) moved to table the rezone until the applicant, who is currently out of the country, is available to return and discuss alternative options. The motion passed unanimously. No final zoning change was approved.

The council and staff outlined next steps: the applicant may amend the application (to R-18 or another zone), request a code amendment (for frontage/lot-width standards) or proceed later with a preliminary plat that would show whether the street is a through connection or a cul-de-sac. Planning staff said a change to the transportation master plan could be proposed before a preliminary plat if residents or the council wished to pursue that route. Council members also encouraged the applicant to return with financial/pacing details if seeking a compromise zone.

Votes at the meeting on the Timberbrook rezone were procedural: the council tabled the item (no zoning adopted). The planning commission had recommended rejection when the matter came before it.

The rezone drew broad neighborhood engagement, including multiple speakers who referenced the Meadow Ridge Park, the city's general plan, and the planning commission hearing the prior week. Council members asked staff to confirm the master-plan mapping and indicated the issue could return after the applicant meets with the city and possibly redraws the application.

Ending: The Timberbrook item will return to the council after the applicant is back in the country and after any amendments or supplemental materials are submitted. Meanwhile, residents who oppose a through street were encouraged to pursue a transportation-plan amendment with the planning commission if they want to change the master-plan depiction before a plat is approved.