Providence planning commission recommends denying Timberbrook Homes rezoning to R-16

The Providence Planning Commission voted 4-1 on July 9 to recommend that the Providence City Council deny Timberbrook Homes’ request to rezone Parcel 020960048 (near 314 West 100 South) from agricultural to R-16.

The vote came after more than an hour of public testimony and a staff presentation on the city’s general plan and zoning standards. The commission’s action is a recommendation; the final decision rests with the City Council.

The rezoning request would change the parcel from agricultural to R-16, a zone with a typical minimum lot size of about 6,000 square feet and a 60-foot lot width. Scarlett, a city planner who presented the staff report, said the general plan approved in 2020 anticipated densities “in the range of R‑16” in the broader area but explained the differences between the zones: R‑16 permits smaller lot widths (60 feet) and higher net-acre densities (about 5.5 units per net acre), while the adjacent R‑1‑10 and R‑1‑12 zones have larger minimum lot areas and wider lot widths.

Why it mattered: Neighbors said the principal harm would not be density alone but connectivity and traffic. Doug (a neighborhood spokesperson) told the commission his neighbors were “very concerned as a neighborhood” and said they had not received timely notification about the application. Multiple residents asked the commission to avoid creating a new through street that would run past a small neighborhood walking park, arguing a through street would increase speed and nonresident cut‑through traffic near the park and school. Several speakers proposed alternatives such as cul‑de‑sacs, gated emergency access, or a pedestrian path to preserve walking access to the park.

Developer and affordability arguments: Jaden Smith, who spoke for the property owner and developer Dallin Tolman, said the parcel is intended as a transition zone between existing multifamily to the north and larger single‑family lots to the east. Smith said the proposed lot layout, as currently designed, would produce lots that are roughly 10,000 square feet because of the road alignment, even if the property is zoned R‑16. Smith also said the project aims for “attainable price points” and estimated finished single‑family homes in the development would sell around $400,000 and typical floor plans would run roughly 1,500–1,700 square feet.

Staff context and state requirements: Scarlett told the commission staff evaluates rezones against the city’s general plan and several master plans (transportation, parks, water/wastewater). She also warned that the state requires cities to report progress on “moderate income housing” objectives and that failing to meet required elements can affect grant eligibility and trigger penalties; staff said some parts of the general plan and state guidance encourage zones that accommodate greater housing density.

Process and next steps: The planning commission’s role is to hold the public hearing and recommend action to the City Council. Scarlett and other staff explained that details such as street layout, cul‑de‑sac versus through street, final lot configuration and many infrastructure issues are addressed during the later preliminary plat and subdivision review phases; a change to the general plan would be required to alter the city’s adopted transportation map that currently shows the road extending across the parcel.

Vote and options: The commission recommended denial by a 4‑1 vote. Commissioners who spoke during the roll call registered support for the motion to recommend denial; commissioners noted that a development agreement or different lot configuration could address neighborhood concerns while preserving some housing capacity. The City Council may accept, reject or modify the commission’s recommendation. Staff said a developer could pursue a development agreement or submit a different zoning/plat proposal in subsequent applications.

Closing note: Residents were urged to follow the council agenda and attend the Council meeting on the rezoning; staff said the council’s decision will be the next and final local legislative action on this application.