Planning commission recommends denial of Zone Change/Development Overlay for 23.5‑acre parcel (Ordinance 25C)

The Perry City Planning Commission voted May 1 to recommend denial of Ordinance 25C, a zone change request and proposed development overlay for about 23.5 acres east of Highway 89. The recommendation will be forwarded to city council for final action; staff indicated council would likely consider the item on May 22.

Staff member Bob summarized the concept plan and context: the site contains several zoning designations — neighborhood commercial, half‑acre residential (RE‑0.5) and an environmentally sensitive (ES) band up the mountainside — and is approximately 23.5 acres. The applicant’s concept showed a mix of single‑family quarter‑acre lots and multifamily units (Bob said the concept indicated roughly 44 single‑family lots and 24 multifamily units). Bob noted that under existing half‑acre zoning the parcel could yield about 28 single‑family lots and already has 12 multifamily units allotted by right; the requested plan would increase multifamily allocation and change lot sizes.

Why it matters: commissioners said the city’s development‑agreement policy requires a demonstrable public benefit in exchange for increased density; several commissioners said the applicant’s initial concept did not identify sufficient public benefit to justify a development overlay. Bob and the applicant discussed infrastructure constraints: notably water. Bob said the property cannot be developed under the requested pattern unless the water main on the east side of the highway is upsized to 3000 South — a distance of roughly three‑quarters of a mile — or a reimbursement arrangement is negotiated for capital costs. He also noted fire‑access limits that could restrict the number of units served by a single access without mitigation.

Public comment: neighbors raised concerns about stormwater routing, irrigation ditches and springs on the property, private 12‑foot roads that could be impacted by new traffic, and preservation of orchards and environmentally sensitive areas. Janine Jensen asked where stormwater would go; Bob described on‑site detention and state retention requirements. Alex Owens, representing the applicant, said he had discussed preserving 2–3 acres of orchards with a local farmer and that the applicant would return with a more developed proposal if the commission wanted to continue the conversation.

Commission action: Commissioner motioned to recommend denial. The motion to recommend denial passed unanimously (Commissioners Kerr, White, Broadhead, Wager and Vaughn voted yes). Bob stated he would forward the commission’s recommendation and that the application will proceed to city council with the commission’s recommendation.