Lewiston planners debate raising minimum lot sizes, subdivision splits and ag setbacks; motion to pursue ordinance discussed

Lewiston Planning and Zoning Commissioners discussed changes to residential zoning minimums, subdivision procedures and agricultural setbacks at a meeting on Aug. 6, 2025, during a broader review of the city's General Plan work program.

The commission opened the meeting with routine business and a six‑permit building permit review. Staff reported six permits issued in June and July, including a residential addition, an Oakdale property installing an overhead tunnel for livestock/coups, a residential solar battery installation, a commercial building addition by Kelly Daniels in the business park, a manufactured single‑family home at parcel 330801600 South, and an electrical permit tied to agriculture operations.

The meeting's principal discussion centered on residential zoning. A commissioner raised whether the commission should stop approving new R‑10 rezonings and instead set a higher minimum lot size for future rezonings. Participants discussed procedural options: removing R‑10 from the list of districts referenced in Section 10‑6‑1 of the zoning code so it could not be newly applied, adding a note to the zoning table to indicate R‑10 would not be used in future, or changing the zoning text through an ordinance. Commissioners agreed changing the text would require an ordinance and a public hearing before the city council.

Several commissioners proposed setting a new minimum of 15,000 square feet ("R‑15") for future residential rezonings. Supporters said R‑15 keeps smaller yard needs while allowing room for accessory buildings and driveways; opponents cautioned higher minimums could reduce housing supply, lower housing affordability and reduce revenues from permits and property taxes. Commissioners noted that existing R‑10 and R‑12 lots would remain legal and that removing the ability to create new R‑10 lots would not retroactively alter existing parcel zoning.

Commissioners also discussed preventing scattered or "spot" rezones and keeping new residential zoning contiguous with existing residential areas, language they said already appears in the General Plan. One commissioner recommended collecting notes from the discussion for use when drafting the General Plan so decisions would be based on consolidated recommendations rather than ad hoc meeting comments.

Separately, staff and commissioners raised two related code items for future ordinance work: a streamlined process for simple two‑parcel lot splits (a "lot split" process that avoids the full preliminary/final subdivision plat when only one parcel is split into two) and an increase to front‑yard setbacks in the agricultural zone. Multiple commissioners said the current 30‑foot setback in the ag zone places homes too close to roads such as 1600 West and that future road widening could create conflicts; they proposed studying a larger setback (discussed informally around 50 feet) to apply to new construction only.

On process and next steps, the commission asked staff to compile the recommendations and to follow up on a memorandum of agreement needed from a consultant (Brad) for the General Plan work; commissioners encouraged staff to prompt the consultant and the city attorney to finalize the memorandum. The commission also agreed to keep a list of code topics to address as they prepare the General Plan and to bring the proposed text changes through the public hearing and ordinance process.

Votes at a glance - Minutes (July 2, 2025): Approved by voice vote; chair announced approval. - Motion to move forward on drafting a text amendment/ordinance to restrict future R‑10 rezonings and related code edits: motion made and seconded; no recorded roll‑call or final vote appears in the meeting transcript. The commission continued discussion of specifics and next steps.

The commission closed the meeting after agreeing to compile notes and to place the zoning/minimum lot size, lot‑split procedures and ag setback topics on future agendas for deeper review with the General Plan process.