Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Owner withdraws rezoning request for Rimrock View Estates after resident opposition
Summary
After a public hearing on Aug. 5, 2025, the applicant for a zoning change covering parcels 202-52-001 through 6 formally withdrew the request following repeated resident concerns that multifamily development would harm neighborhood character and property values.
The Snowflake Town Council on Aug. 5, 2025, heard sustained opposition from nearby homeowners to a proposed rezoning for parcels 202-52-001 through 6 in the Rimrock View Estates area, and the applicant withdrew the request before the council voted.
At a public hearing opened by motion of Mark Sheen, residents urged the council to preserve the single-family character of the neighborhood. Resident Linda Rasmussen said the proposal “directly threatens the foundation of what this neighborhood was built upon,” and several other speakers—Jared Eams, Jonni Holland, Gary Burgess, Tom Pippett and Jodie—said they feared multifamily units would lower property values and alter the area’s character.
Councilmember Greg Brimhall recused himself from the discussion because of a family relationship with the property owner; Deputy staff member Brian Richards noted the property owner was present. Kirk Brimhall, representing the owner, described plans to buffer the new development from adjacent heavy-industrial parcels and said the owner would live on-site as part of mortgage requirements. He also said landscaping would be preserved and additional plantings added.
Council members debated whether the location—backed by heavy industrial zoning—was appropriate for any multifamily housing. Mark Sheen said he supports more high-density housing in general, while Cory Johnson said the industrial area behind the lots might be a more suitable place for apartments than this neighborhood.
After the discussion the applicant formally withdrew the rezoning application and the council recorded no vote on Ordinance 2025-08.
The council closed the hearing by motion and the item will not proceed unless the applicant re-files; no further action was taken by the council at the Aug. 5 meeting.